HiAndTight

The very fact that the other side had Wilson is an argument for making it an 8 point game. Now you're kicking off to Seattle with 2 minutes, 1 TO and you can play aggressive on defense in a wet, rainy game. And I don't know how you score a TD down 8 with 4 minutes left to go in the 3rd quarter and NOT try to tie it up. I'd argue trying a QB draw with Cousins was a terrible decision, but the choice to go for it seemed like a no-brainer. I do at least understand the logic in going for it on 4th and 1, but if they'd have kicked it down 2...that would have been baffling to me.

Thouht I'd make one of with the Packers off to a 4-0 start, a SB looking very possible and the trade deadline coming up. The Packers will have 10 picks in the upcoming draft. 3 4th's and 2 6th round picks for the losses of Martinez, Bulaga and Kyler Fackrell. 1,2,3,4,4,4,5,6,6,7. If ever there was a time to take some of those picks to pick up veterans to plug in at DE and possibly MLB'er or WR'er...I'd think now would be the time after having done little to address pressing needs in the past draft. Now that Damon Harrison has chosen to sign with Seattle(though per GM John Schnieder it sounds like he is not close to being in game shape)...the Packers still have a hole on the DL. Margus Hunt, a 6'8 300LB DE was just waived by the Saints. He has a history of being a really solid DL and would seem to be worth a look and would likely come cheap. And I threw this idea into another thread, but it got swallowed up a bit, but with the Jets not competitive, I'd love to see what it'd take to try and trade for Quinnen Williams, the #3 overall pick just 2 years ago. He's playing for the worst franchise in the NFL, so questions about how effort level may be explained by that. He's a potential All Pro DE next to Kenny Clark and he's cheap. A little more of a disruptive player than a space eater who can occupy multiple blockers, but at 6'3 305, he's explosive and could completely change the look of the Packers front 7. Given that he'd only cost about 1.4 million against the Packers cap over the next 3 years and what an elite talent he is, IF the Jets were willing to make that trade, I'd offer this years 1st and a 4th. To be able to get DE with his enormous upside and meager cap hit...I think that'd be worth it from the packers POV. Not sure if the Jets would be willing or not, but as pathetic as they look, it'd be worth asking. Henry Anderson, a 6'6 300 DE who's a very good playing the run or even Steve McCendon are far more likely options and cheaper. I'd think we could get one of them for a mid to late round pick. Neither would likely demand more than a 5th round pick at most. Other long shots, JJ Watt's been mentioned in some trade rumors...though I doubt the franchise would trade him at this point without anyone really running the team and him being Captain America in Houston(and he'd be expensive, though likely worth it). On the other side of the ball, DeVante Parker has been rumored to be available(and one article had the Packers trading a 2nd for him). He's certainly a dynamic #2 that fits what the Packers are looking for. A 6'3 220 WR'er who put up 1200 yards receiving last year for the Fins Watt's almost certainly not going anywhere after he finally got O'Brien fired in Houston, Williams would cost a 1st round pick and then some(though WE'D only have to pay about 650K each of the next 2 years for him). Parker may be a BIT more realistic, but I'd think the Dolphins would want someone there to catch passes when Tua finally takes over. So I'm hoping for a Henry Anderson type addition. Pretty much anyone who can come in and displace Lancaster and be an upgrade over Lowry at this point. Obviously the salary cap is a huge concern, but this team looks to clearly be the class of the NFC, but if they're going to get Rodgers his 2nd Ring, they need to shore up at least the Run D. Shelby Harris, a upcoming FA and former Homestead standout is another guy on a floundering team who could be worth a late round pick. The deadline's just over 2 weeks away. Any ideas? The Football team from Washington has two elite DT's and a guy in Tim Settle who would fit in perfectly in GB(Though the 'Bama guys would likely be costly).

Or if only Alex Smith had fallen instead of Rodgers... That's a chicken or egg argument too, though. Some believe that had Smith spent 3 years in the Packer system that he may have wound up being the star rather than being immediately forced into action. If Rodgers had been immediately starting in San Francisco he may not have ended up having the success he did. Coaches...system...receivers...all different. Just speculating, obviously. Maybe Rodgers does lead San Francisco to multiple Super Bowls. We'll never know. I've certainly wondered. Mike McCarthy isn't real well regarded now, but he was when he was developing Rodgers and had his "QB School" with Tom Clement. Sitting behind Favre... I think Smith would have a little more shine and Rodgers very well may have looked like a bust. As it was Rodgers went on IR twice in his first 3 seasons IIRC. A broken foot in '06 after the Pats and I thought there was another injury...one that was likely pretty minor, but as he was the backup, he was put on IR after the breakout Cowboys game. I could be wrong on that one. I just remember a lot of "China Doll" references when Packers Nation was split after the Favre retirement. Whatever happens with Rodgers and Love...I hope it's cleaner than the last "breakup" in GB was.

Again, in a notoriously weak draft class... And he was seen as "as consensus top 2 pick?" By who? There was a LITTLE question about which QB was gonna go first, though even that is a bit overplayed as Smith was always the favorite, but I sure don't recall anyone saying "Smith and Rodgers are definitely 1-2." He was never a consensus top 2 pick. Two Free Agent Running Backs after this season and an offense that is predicated in large part off how impactful your running game is. We've played 4 games and Jamaal Williams has been pretty damn good. There's nothing to indicate Dillon is a "developmental" player. So...the word WAS...that's not important here? He WAS starting, ie, he was the STARTER and he was playing well. Particularly blocking well(See the Alan Lazard play where he took two guys out of the play). That was week 1, he got hurt and he's done for the year now. It's not a stretch to say he was starting, that's objectively true. Also don't believe it's a stretch to say he was playing well. It's just NOT a "tertiary" position in the Packers offense.

Not at all. The Packers actually match up very well with them. Teams who don't have good centers tend to get abused by Clark(Which he did last year vs Seattle). And the Rams, for all the criticism they were taking last year for trading for Ramsey and some of the other moves they made, they look really good. But Seattle's just the more immediate threat to HFA and the Vikings aren't really a threat to anything. Though I do enjoy seeing them lose in the worst way possible. All you can do is root for what appears to be the most likely now. So many things are going to change between now and the end of the year(assuming there is one). Th 49'ers went from being the big threat that everyone thought the Packers should be building to beat(myself included) to getting blown off the field vs Miami in week 5...and by the end of the year, they may be the most dangerous team in the playoffs again. They will get healthier.

Only one team gets the bye this year. 7 playoff teams.

Analytics says they made the right call based on the percentage of converting a 4th and short alone...not that I agree with analytics at that stage of the game I get the analytics, but you have a chance to go up 8...

Why the hell would the Vikings go for it instead of making it an 8 point game?

I meant to say All-Star. Just on auto-pilot a that point.

Yeah, I can't find ANYONE who doesn't say they were a fan of the Rodgers pick NOW or the Favre trade back when it happened...but that doesn't change that we got D's and F's for our grades in the 2005 draft and the headlines when we traded for Favre were blistering. I believe you were a fan of it, but VERY few were. I think people also understated the huge questions about Rodgers. His arm strength, he was a "system" QB, a Tedford QB. It was thought to be an extremely weak draft class. As for Dillon...he's a rookie behind two established players who are rookies after this year. No live action...so I can't really see why after 4 games you don't see the same future for him. And again...you're saying we didn't get much of a return from our 3rd round pick...a guy who was starting and playing well before he got injured in his rookie season. This feels like confirmation bias to me. No pre-season...not surprising that our rookies wouldn't be having a huge impact. And the two guys who were given a chance, Degura and Martin suffered injuries.

What COULD have happened to change your mind though? Is there anything that can until we see what Love does as a starter? Also...people should probably keep in mind how people went nuts when we acquired Rodgers and Favre. Favre, the 33rd pick in the previous draft was traded for the 19th pick(despite being the 3rd string QB and throwing 2 picks in 4 passes). People were calling for Wolfs head right out of the gate. And then Favre, a year younger than Rodgers and the most durable at the position in NFL history is drafted after a year the Packers went 10-6 and didn't have a lot of weapons. And contrary to the narrative, he was not threatening retirement at that time. That came primarily over the next three years. So if you were upset about it...you're gonna be upset about it until we see Love play like with Favre and Rodgers before him.

Yeah, I thought that as well, but I'm not so sure any longer. He IS the GM that hired Matt LaFleur...and if Love doesn't pan out but the Packers are competing for SB's the next several years, I don't think people are going to care. But really...I wish people would stop with the "Love hasn't even been active." This was never a secret. He was never expected to contribute in year one or even year 3 by most people. As for who I was hoping for...I was kinda hoping we'd take Love, but I knew what a issue that'd create(yet it was even worse), but I'd seen Ruggs going in the 20's in multiple mocks and liked him obviously and Shenault Jr. I also really liked that Raekwon Davis as a 2nd rounder, but he was gone anyway.

And we also saw Yelich who only took off once he came to the Brewers. Jeremy Jeffress...I remember him looking pretty good here as well. We drafted him...and he's thrown ~305 of his 424 innings as a Brewers where he's been better collectively than everywhere else. Jesus Aguilar-WE'RE the team that plucked him from the scrap heap and turned him into an OF'er. In fact...most of the players you mention broke out when playing for the Brewers...and the Brewers have done a better job of finding other teams players and having success than other teams have had picking up our discarded players. Sure, guys like Shaw who we non-tendered(again, AFTER he broke out here for a couple years)...I don't understand how you're using these players as examples of the Brewers not being able to develop talent. Maybe the case is more the Brewers can't afford to acquire elite talent at numerous positions so they have to take risks. Often times those players have had some measure of success, then regressed toward the players they actually are and gotten expensive and the Brewers have had to let them go.

Chiefs and Bears added to the list. Coach for KC and a Practice Squad guy for the Bears...but who knows who they've dealt with.

Midds played 48 in an elimination game this year. A OT game, but I see your point, he likes to rest his guys more than they may need, but that's far from my biggest issue with him. The Bucks will not win a title with Giannis taking the ball the majority of the time and being asked to drive and then kick or score. There are too many good, athletic big guys who can defend that there will always be a team that can stop us in the playoffs when you actually scheme and game plan. If we have another superstar...maybe it could work, but we don't. That's the issue I've got with Bud...and I don't think he's going to change it.

I don't follow fantasy football that closely, but that seems like a pretty nice addition. He looks like he's gonna be an elite TE for a while.

Through four games the Packers are 12th in the league in yards/game allowed, 18th in passing yards allowed, 9th in rushing yards allowed, and 18th in points/game allowed. For reference, the difference between the Packers being 18th in points/game allowed and 8th in points/game allowed is a field goal per game (3 ppg). Also for reference, the Packers lead the league in points per game scored. If they averaged a field goal less per game, they would be 2nd in the league in scoring. If they averaged a touchdown per game less in scoring, they would be tied for third in the league in scoring. The hurry-up offense is tough to stop. And like last year, their defense is propped up because teams fall behind and run the ball very little (the best defense is a good offense). Atlanta was very MM-esque in abandoning the run very, very early even as the game was quasi-close. We are built to stop the pass, this is clear and the most important aspect of defense. If our run defense was simply average in rush/attempt (where we are 23rd and look much worse given the teams we've played), I'd feel 110% better because it only takes one team like 49ers, Titans, Ravens, or Chiefs to just run the ball down our throats and nullify our offense. Agreed. Those are mis-leading stats. Detroit just ran it right down our throats. I would think with this team looking as good as it looks, the Packers would be self aware enough to see that they're pretty bad against a good running team and go out and make a trade. I've seen Quinnen Williams may get traded. Wonder what you'd have to give up assuming that's true? He'd be a near perfect fit for the Packers as a 3 tech...he's explosive and very-very good vs the run. I think I'd be willing to deal a 1st rounder at this point for a 3 down DL who's just 22 years old. And it seems like the Jets will trade anyone on their roster.

Harrison signed with Seattle yesterday. To the practice squad. Obviously they have some plan in mind and I suspect they didn't want to have to release Anthony Rush(6'4 350)...and he'd have been the most likely to go, but that move just doesn't make sense to me. I guess the Packers just didn't make a serious offer or he thinks Seattle's a better team. I think the Packers are better with or without Harrison and he'd make a bigger impact in GB, but...whatever. We can still sign him, but it seems obvious we're not going to. Still...I'll hold out hope that whenever he works himself back in shape and Seattle has to make a roster move, they dump one of their big DT's and then we can pick them up and plug them into our DL.

Yeah...I guess I don't really rate them that high. The Buccs are so talented, they could gel and get a lot better. The 1st year in that system is really hard for QB's. I think it was Peyton Manning who said Brady would struggle and throw some picks his first year as they rely so much on timing and taking shots downfield. I think Bruce Arians is a really good offensive coach, but I'm definitely not scared of the Buccs. And the only thing that worries me about the Bears is Mack and or Hicks 'Anthony Barring' Arod.

Yeah...I just re-watched it. It was even worse the second time. That looks like it has to be broke. Hopefully it's a clean break for him. That is a 6'4 350 pound monster. I don't like to see that. I like to see pulled hammy's the week before we've got to play a guy...not that.

That incomplete pass before their field goal may end up costing them the game. Yeah, I don't know what Nagy was thinking there. I'm glad he's the Bears head coach. The guy has gone 22-10 with Trubisky as their starting QB...AND he got Trubisky to a Pro-Bowl as a 2nd year QB. I think he's a really good coach with really poor talent on offense(but that was a pretty questionable call).

That incomplete pass before their field goal may end up costing them the game. It could...The Buccs had an awful series trying to put the game away. And just saw the 4th down incompletion. This might be a good win for the Packers. I think the Buccs are a bigger threat to be the top seed. Nick Foles is going to choke a few games away.

I missed most of the game, but Tampa's OL does not look good. And Tampa losing a guy like Vita Vea? That's a massive blow and that appears to be a significant injury. I'd be pretty surprised if that's not a broken bone or something tore. That's like us losing Clark for the year. That could make a huge difference next week for the Packers as Tampa's run D looked pretty stout from what I've seen.

Was that the uncapped year? That sounds right, now that you mention it. As I recall, the Cowboys and one other team (Washington?) were later fined by the NFL for going hog wild and violating the spirit of the uncapped year. Basically, an uncapped 2021 season would give teams some flexibility in dealing with the current uncertainty, but I don’t think they would be permitted to load up on free agents using bloated 1-year contracts or extending players with front-loaded deals. I have to believe that teams have some idea what the NFL is going to do with regard to the Cap. Looking at some of the recent contract extensions that have been signed, the fact that the Packers are offering Bahk reportedly around 18 million AND negotiating with Jones...I suppose they could just be planning to create as much cap space as possible, but I think it's more likely the NFL will come up with some way to give teams some breathing room. Something has to give. The Saints were 78 million over the 175 million dollar cap number BEFORE they extended Kamara. Obviously they were in trouble to begin with, but that's pretty excessive. And while other owners may be looking to recoup some money from their losses this year...a publicly owned team that has 400+ million reserve fund for emergencies that Murphy said they may not even have to use this year? I'd really hope if things keep going like they are, the Packers would do everything they could do end the Rodgers era with a big boom. A couple of SB runs...that could even open up the debate about the Goat(Rodgers vs Brady/Montana). Of course the cart is miles ahead of the horse here...

Man...that's harsh and I'm really glad I don't have to make that decision. You're penalizing guys for working out together. And I get ALL the other implications it has, but I think if I had my way, I'd give them a pass on this one and warn a team that if they violate the protocols going forward, they'll be subject to FF's and or losing picks and the obvious fine. I get the rationale for saying "screw it, make them forfeit," but there was no penalty in place and you're kinda penalizing the Chiefs, Ravens, Steelers...all the teams who the Bills may be competing for HFA AND they'd basically get a bye week heading into the Steelers game. So the Steelers get burned twice. But you're certainly not alone in your thinking.