HiAndTight

I'm about 95 pct certain that as soon as the Brewers give up on Kirby, he's gonna end up in St. Louis and become an ace there. It's good to hear it's just a rib injury and he was otherwise(presumably) ready or able to pitch however. Means he can take the off-season to build up some arm strength and maybe he has a Rasmussen type season next year for us.

Yes, of course. 1 year at 20 million? I think he's proven he's easily worth that. I'd expect him to get 20 million per over 4 years with a vesting option or something along those lines. With all the FA pitching on the market and how bad the position market looks, I don't see him signing for just one year again.

Really? No way he pitches a second inning if he gets through the 8th without giving up any runs? He was almost certainly coming back out for the 9th if he gets through the heart of the order there.

I agree. As long as certain colleges can pay their players more than less regarded colleges it will never be fair. No, you need a Governing body to step in. Not the NCAA, but you can't just allow states to hurry up and pass this legislation. Ohio's pushing it through for 2020. You think OSU gets better recruits now? Wait until they're allowed to pay players. This really could be the end of most college athletics save for a handful of programs. It may end up being an elite group of teams like Texas A$M, Texas, USC, 'Bama, NeBraska, basically the wealthiest schools.

There might. But at this point every other team in baseball is following those leagues...so anyone you'd be bringing over would likely be a real under the radar type guy who you probably wouldn't feel comfortable counting on. Funny how a year chances. Last year we were looking at having 3 young fireballers in the rotation. Now most people believe Perlata is a long reliever(who can handle higher leverage outings) and have no feel for what Burnes could provide. This is why I'm trying to get one somewhat reliable starter and then one or two bounce back type candidates(who've actually produced at the big league level).

I'd like to see them at least make an offer on Cole. I would love Strasburg, but I just don't trust him. I'd guess he'd opt out...but I'd also guess the Nats just work something out with him where they just add another year at 25 million and bring him right back. The fact that he does have 3 pitches that can be dominant in addition to his fastball would be reason to hope that he'd age well, ala Greinke, but I want to see the Brewers either try to go and try to get the best pitcher, the workhorse ace or I'd like to see them make some low risk signings. Maybe Odorrizi if he could be had for 4/50 or Hamels if you can get him for 2 years at 28 million or so. I don't know what the pitching market is going to look like though. It seems like teams have pulled way back since the Price/Greinke/Scherzer deals.

Anyone think the fact that we threw three lefties in relief and then two who rely heavily on that fastball up might have made things a bit tougher on Hader? Didn't dawn on me until my old man texted me during the game. He doesn't follow the game all that closely, but in the past, we've been able to mix it up a bit. Knebel, Hader, Jeffress. You're not getting a similar looks the final four innings. Obviously they have different deliveries and movement, but still...both lefties, both throwing in the upper 90's up in the zone. Just throwing that out there as to why Hader might have struggled this past time out. I mean, the broken bat single and then Grisham overrunning that play/the ball kicking back on him both contributed to it. But if you don't throw Pom out there for 2 innings...I don't know if they are able to adjust to Hader that quickly.

It was particularly bad because Wilson knows he's going to get that call if Matthews touches him....so he can wait until the final moment to release the ball. I wonder what the hell Steve Young and Troy Aikman are thinking right now. Does anyone remember the shots they took that ended their respective careers? They were just getting lit up like Sean Taylor hit that Punter in the Pro-Bowl repeatedly. Now Matthews comes in, he pulls up as much as he can and he pulls his head back to make ABSOLUTELY certain that he doesn't possibly make any incidental contact to the helmet and.....still the yellow flag gets thrown. I guess it's better than seeing a guy like Steve Young's career ending prematurely, but...wow. You might as well make those reviewable as well.

They have to try something in GB. I watched the Seattle game and just felt jealous. They have so much more of a HFA because of how crazy their crowd is. Their defense can basically count on 15-20 offense related penalty yards for false starts or delay of games because whenever they have any momentum, they just go nuts. With the Packers....not so much. But you're right. It's not like because people just don't know when a big play is coming up. Like I've said before, it's because we've got an older fan base.

I do not agree with either of these statements. It decided who was going to the Super Bowl. Or at least played a large role in helping the Rams. And the outcry was enormous. I honestly can't remember more of an outcry over a missed call in the NFL. And I don't think it's like challenging a play at 1st at all. One is subjective, one is objective. If your foot touches the base before the ball hits your glove, your safe. Otherwise, you're out. But the NFL does always get it wrong. The only solution I can see is having a CFB like replay system for "egregious calls." Add that to turnovers and scoring plays, let the booth handle those. Let the coaches challenge what they've been challenging. The rule apparently wasn't intended for the Dalvin Cook OPI or the DPI on MVS this past week. There's an old saying, the US gets it right after they exhaust every other option? Kinda looks like that's been the NFL's MO the past few years. But you're right, there is a penalty on pretty much every play and when you look at how the Refs call it in real time, they're pretty damn impressive. What makes what's going on now so frustrating is they get a change to go back and watch it again and they're still getting it wrong.

It's-a-broken-jaw.

Hamels made over $20M last year and I doubt Stearns wants any part of that type money. Yeah... hard pass. Rather have Gio for two years, $10 million TOTAL. Plus there's Suter, I'd be more inclined to go with Cam Roegner, coming off an injury-marred season than Cole Hamels. What exactly is the Brewers goals here? To hope to catch lightening in a bottle again next Sept after floundering around .500 or so again? Maybe Counsell will be able to pull it off a 3rd straight year. I'd rather not count on it though. Counting on Cam Roegner is just about the worst case scenario. He's 26 and he's done nothing at the AA level or above and now you'd rather roll with him than with Cole Hamels even in a hypothetical discussion? I get saying that about Burnes. He's got dominant stuff. I even get it with Suter. He's been a decent starter for us. Supak is pushing it for me, but Roegner? The Brewers have an MVP caliber player, a couple reliable bats and what should be a very good BP next year. We can't afford to "count," on a non-prospect like Cam Roegner. We're not rebuilding. We're trying to win. I respect that you have an affinity for older minor league players who don't have great tools, but produce well, but he hasn't even done that at a high level. And I don't even know what to say about Ryan Braun at 3rd base. We're talking about a guy who was absolutely miserable there 13 years ago. Do you somehow believe with age and chronic back, leg and wrist issues, he's mastered the craft? There are some concessions the Brewers have to make. There always are. Maybe they have to hope Shaw can bounce back next year. Maybe they have to hope that Peralta can become a starter. Maybe they have to go with Pina at catcher instead of Grandal. Playing Ryan Braun at 3rd is not one of them. Especially now if we're proposing going with pitchers who don't have the ability to get swing and misses. It's the absolute worst of both worlds.

Hamels made over $20M last year and I doubt Stearns wants any part of that type money. Just because he was on the last year of a deal he signed in 2012 does NOT mean he's going to get 20 million at 36 years old. The Rangers had to send the Cubs money to deal Hamels and they didn't get a whole lot back. Since when do we look back at what a player made to guess what he may cost in free agency? I'm not understanding this logic at all. Does anyone think that Arrieta gets 20 million next year? Or Porcello gets 20+ million? There are more good FA pitchers this year than there's been in a while. If the Brewers can't get a TOR arm, they can look at someone like Odorizzi and a low risk signing. I don't know if Pineada is eligible to sign before his suspension is up, but I wouldn't mind seeing the Brewers try to grab him on a low risk deal. He'd likely miss the first two months, so by then you'd know what Burnes and some of the other starters look like.

I can't ever remember a trade that seemed as dumb at the time, but then seemed even dumber within a year. I do actually feel bad for Pirates fans for that one.

Definitely. It'll be interesting to see what is combine numbers look like. He appears to be good enough in coverage that he could play LB'er in any system.

Weren't the Packers just #2 in the power rankings before their loss to the Eagles? It's not like the Packers are a team that gets ignored much. But this game would say more about Dallas than the Packers. Dallas would have beaten 3 bad teams, lost to a Saints team without Brees and then lost at home..whereas the Packers would still have 2 good wins and then two losses to two of the top 4-5 teams in the NFC.

I don't get the OL concern. The Packers have one of the best in the NFL. WR\TE depth, I can see that. They're raw there. Run defense, they've been bad there. Even CB, they've got Alexander, a guy who's been injured a ton and then a 38 year old CB as their top 3. But OL? There one of the top 4-5 units in the league there. Especially now with Jenkins taking over for Taylor. The OL and QB is really the strength of the team. And yes, I'm excited about this team. But it's more in a they're back on track type of excitement than they're ready right now. You don't beat the Vikings, Bears and Bronco's by being a mirage to start the season. You just can't fake it that much in the NFL. But they're still looking at one of the toughest first half schedules(first 9 games to be exact) as I can ever remember. And I'm not asking everyone to see the Packers the same way I am, though I think they should maybe have a little perspective. They're 4 games into a whole new offensive system and they're 3-1 and they're young. Did people really expect the offense without any pre-season to come out and be the 89 49'ers? Did they expect a complete 16 game 2001 Ravens like defense when it's been a sieve the last several years?

The doubt STARTS to creep in a little bit? Did you read last weeks game vs Philly? Our team is awful! Rodgers is only 16th in the league in one of the most wildly mis-leading stats(4th quarter comebacks) we can't stop anyone...I don't know, a litany of other things as well. The Cowboys are pretty loaded when healthy. I think Dak's vastly overrated, but they've got a vastly improved defense, Byron Jones has taken off, LVE is a Urlacher type LB'er and Jaylon Smith has been good for them. I just want to see what Pettine does to try and fix the run D. We've got a good enough DL that we shouldn't be getting gashed like that. It looked more like the DL was trying to get up-field instead of eat up blockers for the backers and safety's to come in. If they make changes and still can't slow down the run game a bit, maybe go out and sign Mike Pennel. Bring that monster of a human being back to Green Bay. Throw him out there with Clark and Lowry on running downs. Wouldn't cost you much and he was a really good run defender with the Jets. Especially if you plan on moving Clark around on the line. Fine, play Clark at the 5. Plug Pennel in as a guy to just occupy the center and the guard and keep them off our LB'ers.

One thing that has become more obvious about the Packers defense is they're starting to push it a bit with Clark. Yeah, he's a stud, but they're lining him up outside as a 5 technique at times, he's trying to get upfield instead of occupying blockers. That can really take you out of a play and even if you pick the right lane, you're not covering guys up for the LB'ers. And the Packers do not have physical LB'ers. So I agree, that can get better. The secondary is far-far better. Savage looks like a great pick and does not seem to be tentative at all. I'd still like to see the Packers be one of the teams in on Peterson when he comes back from suspension. King can't really be counted on. But still, sooo much better than when you had Dix and then nobody else in the secondary. Gunter as your #1 CB? That was just terrible.

Actually you weren't stating either of those things. You were much closer to saying, "nuh-uh." And the EAGLES had no ability to stop our passing game... Sorry. I should have been Clearer. No, it was my fault. I thought he was saying that the Packers deserved to win and you just said "no they didn't."

It's like a dozen other rule changes in the past few years. What's a catch, the roughing the passer rule, the tuck rules. Teams and coaches will get a better feel for it and figure it out. Maybe they'll have to change the wording to say it has to be egregious. But Goodell just saying, "yeah, it was a bad call," and then firing good refs who blew a call would have solved absolutely nothing. Disagree. Other rule changes haven’t expanded the role of replay. It’s a problem under 2 minutes - it’s a completely subjective decision whether a replay official should instruct the ref to review a potential PI call (at that point, the ref has to make another subjective on the potential penalty itself.) I referenced Goodell and the officials involved because it took the commissioner 10 days to acknowledge any error. He and the league were roasted in the media during the Super Bowl leadup and it led to the Competition Committee making an emotionally-driven rule change that will be rife with unintended consequences that will impact outcomes of games. Well...the Saints are still suing. To what end, I have no idea, but they're suing. I don't think Goodell coming out and saying they blew the call a day later or a month later would have really mattered. But, they had to have some recourse for such an egregious call. And I'd say that the stupid catch rule has expanded the role of replay. Remember the Calvin Johnson catch that was overturned and ruled a non-catch on what would have been a game winner, or the Dez Bryant catch they said wasn't a catch? Those changed the rules and replay drastically. And of course there was the whole litany of bad roughing calls that are still changing the outcome of the game. The Bears won a game this year they shouldn't have largely on an outrageous roughing penalty. But how much is it going to impact the outcome of games anymore than the bad PI calls now? It seems like they're only overturning the really egregious calls....but I don't know, it's not working out well so far. But like I was saying with the roughing penalties, the catch rules, they go back and refine it and they work on it, and hopefully it gets better. They need to find a way to make it more consistent though. If the goal is to overturn simple PI's, then they should have over-turned the last pick. The CB got there early. But it seems as though the Refs are taking it upon themselves to interpret the rules a bit differently. To only overturn the really bad ones. Otherwise the Packers should have had a 1st down in Eagles territory earlier in the game.

Actually you weren't stating either of those things. You were much closer to saying, "nuh-uh." And the EAGLES had no ability to stop our passing game...

It's like a dozen other rule changes in the past few years. What's a catch, the roughing the passer rule, the tuck rules. Teams and coaches will get a better feel for it and figure it out. Maybe they'll have to change the wording to say it has to be egregious. But Goodell just saying, "yeah, it was a bad call," and then firing good refs who blew a call would have solved absolutely nothing.

Maybe, but I took that to suggest he didn't agree when he said they really didn't deserve to win it. I guess he may have been referring to Philly when he said they...but again, just using context from the game thread. But either way....they lost. Graham needs to make that play in the endzone. They have to put the ball in the endzone when they get inside the 15. And we need Adams to come back strong and we REALLY need King to stay healthy along with Bulaga. Now we're facing a really good all around team with quite a few guys banged up. But at least the offense got going.

3-1 in a vacuum isn't disappointing, but both that rushing offense and defense look legitimately bad. It did. The Eagles are probably one of the top 3-4 OL's in the game. Of course Dallas is on that level next week. And the Eagles have probably the best all around interior linemen not named Donald or Watt. The Packers went up and down the field on this team. The defense played badly against a great OL. The offense played great against a beatup secondary. It's just the NFL. The Eagles were one of the top 3 favorites in the NFC to go to the SB though behind only NO and LAR. So....we'll keep getting better.