HiAndTight

I'm not sure where you're getting this from. From two different members of the Athletic Department, one a member of the coaching staff, one who works with Alvarez. Or there was just the obvious reading between the lines, UW's refusal to re-admit him until his lawyer started to put more pressure on them. For instance the 9 straight tweets he sent outlining how wrong he felt UW was for not allowing Cephus back into school.

I think his stats were partially inflated because he didn't really get much of a leash to do anything drastic. He was limited heavily to short passes in most cases. His deep passes were mostly jump balls and his medium game wasn't very good either. He simply did not have the talent to make plays consistently. He wasn't consistent because he wasn't that good. Of course, last year specifically, I thought their WRs sucked pretty bad and getting open was some fictional concept. So Horinibrook, not being Aaron Rodgers, didn't complete to many big passes. Looking at last year Hornibrook had ONE good game against a relevant opponent...Iowa. Which is shocking because I was at that game and he put together one heck of a drive at the end. His one shining moment last year, thanks Alex. The teams Hornibrook beat last year had an average record of 4-8. He was a joke against what ended up a 1-11 Rutgers team. Though looking back I will give Coan credit. He was pretty darn decent in his starts and they were against relevant teams. Maybe they will have confidence in Coan to start the season and give him freedom to have an identity. Yeah, but you're forgetting that Hornibrook has the best winning pct of any QB at UW ever. He played in a lot more than one game. That leesh you're talking about was pretty long vs Miami in the bowl the year before....which made people optimistic he'd turned the corner and would be a better passer. But looking at his first two years, he did have some nice games and he made some great throws. Last year he was consistently bad, the first two years, he was actually pretty good at times. That's mostly what I meant by him being inconsistent.

Well....it's a good thing for him he had a lawyer that was interested and committed in his case. Because without that lawyer, he's probably not finishing college(and he probably ends up pleading guilty to something in a plea deal). What's the saying, "better to be rich and guilty than poor and innocent." No clue what his background is, but it sounds like even with this lawyer who gave him a chance in court, the school was going to deny his request to allow him back in before he(the lawyer) kept forcing the issue. As for the odds he did enough to actually be expelled? I haven't got a clue. I'm too ignorant about this case to really know and eve those informed enough are just the ones involved. But I know UW doesn't want controversy. So the odds he did enough to warrant expulsion and the odds that UW would have rather let the expulsion stand and not let someone accused of something like he was back on campus, thereby denying the request for admission...two very different standards most likely. For SOME people in some cases, it's better to be seen by others to be doing the "right thing," than to actually do the right thing. And again, I'm not Cephus advocate, don't really know enough, but I'll bet there are at least some protests on that campus. Might only be a very small group. It's called the vocal minority for a reason.

He appears to have a strong enough arm to play the position and IIRC, he ran for like 3,000 yards in HS? So he can complete 60 pct of his passes, limit the turnovers and pick up some yards with his feet, he should be a better QB than Hornibrook was last year for the Badgers. Hornibrook's overall stats don't even look bad, it was just the ridiculous level of inconsistency from him that stymied this team. There were a couple of games vs top 10 teams that we were in the whole time, he could just not make anything happen(that 14-7 loss to Michigan for example). I'm excited about this team this year. And obviously there's ample reason to be excited about them moving forward.

Not shocking at all. After he was found not guilty there was little basis for being expelled. If they would have kept it intact Cephus would have went after the university hard and it would have been an ugly situation for the university. What wasn't fully clear is if he planned to actually go to Wisconsin and play football...or go elsewhere. We will see how that goes, but I would expect a return to the football team. The burden of proof at trial vs the Universities ethics code/board is drastically different(obviously, doubt I'm telling you anything you don't know). It was his lawyer's long comments on these matters that basically forced UW to allow him back into school IMO as they came so soon after his comments.

Agree that they'll keep at least 6 at WR. I don't think they can afford to cut Lewis. Tonyan HAS made enormous strides, but he's still a guy who was playing QB not long ago, then WR'er, then TE last year and this year. You have Lewis on the team because he's almost like an extra tackle with his blocking. The one thing Graham, Tonyan, Sternberger all have in common is none of them are very good blockers. Definitely not compared with Lewis. And if the Packers really want to use a lof of 21 personnel, you gotta keep 4 TE's I'd think. I agree with everything else though. I think they could and put Shepard on the ST's and then offer him the equivalent of an active 54 man salary if someone wants to sign him as they've done in years past... as you said. I'd be pretty shocked if St. Brown would find himself off the roster. It seems like he just hasn't gotten many balls the first two games...despite getting open at least a few of the times I've seen. I'm guessing the tape will answer a lot more questions for the coaches. Lazard has done pretty much everything he can to play himself onto the team and I'd be disappointed to see them give up on EQ so fast. He's just too big, too athletic. But based on the roster we've agreed upon, they don't really have a kick returner and they have...what, Tramon to return punts? We COULD have a laughably large WR'er core though. The type that Getlemen dreamed of when he was in Carolina and specifically stated he wanted large WR'ers to play with Newton(while also stating that he didn't value the CB position very highly). Adams-6'1 215 Allison-6'3 ~210 Kumerow 6'4 215(Did not realize he's already 27. Does not give him a very big window, but doesn't matter, clearly earned not just a spot, but a lot of reps). MVS-6'4 205 St. Brown 6'5 215 Lazard- 6'5 230 That's an enormous WR'er core! Even the "little guy," Davis is listed at 6'1 188, but reportedly put on 10-15 this off-season. Then throw in 6'7 Graham...and Rodgers should get used to throwing the ball up a bit more this year on 3rd down.

I think both Davis and Moore are goners. Perhaps they try to sneak Moore onto the practice squad, but I imagine another team will see those measurables and 4th round pedigree and claim him. Davis is completely useless. If you cannot even come close to staying healthy, you have no value. They seem pretty enamored with Darrius Shepard. I could see them hanging onto him as the 5-6th WR and kick/punt returner. Whoever wins the 3rd string RB job could also return kicks, and perhaps a reserve CB on punts? Moore is definitely gone. Even in Training Camp, I've never seen anything from him that was impressive until last week and that was when he got down field on ST's and kinda blocked a guy on a Running Play. Davis is a guy you're being a bit unfair IMO. Useless? He had a hamstring issue last year. He came back from it and then injured it again. He probably came back too soon and they brought him back off IR using the one "designated to return," slot they get. He played in all 16 games his second year and was a healthy scratch early in his rookie year as best as I can remember. So to this point, he's been hurt last year with one injury that's cost him playing time. "Useless," is overstepping the mark. Especially if he's as improved as the Packers are suggesting. Though, it's impossible to know how much "the Packers really like this kid," from Harlan and Lofton is legit and how much is them asking about a guy in the prep and them saying "He's looked good all camp." He seems to be pretty clearly the best return man we've got. He's had some really nice returns for the Packers(helped them salvage that Bengals OT game when he had that last 65-yard return the week he won special teams player of the week) Obviously, he hasn't caught many balls. I don't know how much of that is him not being open the times he's played on offense and how much of it is him not having attained BFF-blood pact status with Rodgers. I thought he looked pretty good this year, but he'll have to do something these next two weeks or the Packers are going to go with the younger guy. The three RB's seem pretty clearly set as Jones/Jamal Williams and Dexter Williams. And Jones is the only servicable return man in that group and they're not likely to take their top back and use him on returns. I guess Carson has looked like he could be that 3rd man given the mental mistakes Dexter Williams has made, but I really doubt it. Shepard could win the job, but I think Davis is at least as likely. He needs to finish strong and has a couple of good games.

This could be a game changer. And if he misses a couple weeks, it will be good for someone else to get a bunch of experience before moving to a backup role. This could be, but I think it could be almost as important to get Summers and Bolton on the field earlier. I'm guessing we won't see Burks until week 3-4 as this seems like an injury that'll take a while to completely heal, but it could provide a nice boost and some fresh legs when the rookies are starting to get a little beat up(if it does in fact take that long).

Watch him do what? He's not beating Kizer out. If the Packers think that Boyle's a better fit for this offense than Kizer, sure, Wilkins may be here and Kizer may be gone, but it's almost definitely not going to be because Wilkins even comes close to beating Kizer out. You guys need to look a bit deeper here on Kizer. He's younger than Wilkins just for the record. Not that big of a deal, but the point is he's still just 23 years old. He was a very good College QB(came out after playing just two years and was). Had some big moments like nearly beating Clemson in '15 on a TD with 7 that would have likely made it a tie game if not for a missed PAT. He was drafted in the 2nd round, projected as a 1st/2nd round pick and compared to Steve McNair because of a cannon for an arm and some athletic ability. Of COURSE coaches are going to get excited about that. The knocks on him coming out were that he relied too much on his natural ability, his strong arm and that he needed to develop a feel for the game and several reports even said he should sit for a while. Instead, at 21 he's thrown into the starting lineup for the Browns...the team that nearly had back to back winless seasons. One of-if not THE worst rosters in NFL history. And he predictably struggled. The worst thing you can do with a young QB who's got a lot of talent but is not NFL ready is to throw him in right away, especially on a bad team. It's the reason a lot of QB's flameout, guys like David Carr..a guy who was probably better than his brother, yet he was sacked 140-150 times in two years with an expansion team and never recovered. I'm not sure how anyone can have formed a strong opinion on either of the legitimate QB options at this point. Both made some nice throws. Both actually made some dangerous throws for their WR'ers. Boyle has a strong arm, yet to see a lot of touch, but he does look like he can throw the ball pretty well. But solid, decent, meh, they both looked like young QB's with some talent playing with and against guys who are unlikely to play much in actual NFL games. Quibbling over "decent" for a quy who went 8-11 for...what, 110 yards and 1 TD. What do you call that? That's not decent? This has nothing to do with Kizer. Hundley came in and had a really nice pre-season in his 1st or 2nd year in GB, then struggled and missed pre-season games the last couple years and then the Packers DID trade him for a draft pick. But Hundley was not ranked nearly as high as a prospect coming out of college as Kizer was. You could just as easily play devils advocate and say, "remember when everyone was so excited about Joe Callahan and was upset when the Saints claimed him?" That's got nothing to do with Boyle...other than they were both white QB's who were undrafted and little was expected from but for some reason became crowd favorites in GB. I don't think it means all that much to anyone other than the guys who have the coaches tape and can accurately access his reads and his decision making. But...Boyle went 3-5 for 40 yards and 2 TD's, one of the two was on a drive of 6 plays, 3 yards. I don't think they make a lost of roster decisions based on emotional ties. Though...if they did, the GM who traded for Kizer a year ago is still the Packers GM. I don't particularly care who they go with at backup QB as the Packers are in trouble either way, but it feels as though it's getting lost that the guy people are writing off as the "bust" in Kizer is actually over a year younger, more physically talented and played at a FBS school while Boyle is older, played at Eastern Kentucky and just feels like this years "UDFA fan favorite."

Nobody said "replaceable," he said "more replaceable." As in easier to replace. At least that's how I took it. And when you have someone in your organization who's put up back to back ~4.4 WAR seasons before struggling this year, it's not accurate to say there's no one in the organization who could take over. I always thought Shaw and Aguilar would turn it around and I still believe that. It's certainly not a given, but there's plenty of reason to believe his 2019 season is an aberration. Perhaps the wrist injury was worse than we thought. Whatever. He's still her and relatively cheap.

I used to do this....but at a certain point is started to feel like when I was a kid and my Grandparents had all these old movies on tapes. And not the normal tapes, those smaller ones I believe. I don't know, it's so cheap to stream, but it's also pretty cheap to buy a DVD. Whatever makes you happy.

Fair points. However, when a young girl goes into a fire holding 3 old fossils and she comes out the Mother of 3 young Dragons, you need to suspend your disbelief a bit to begin with. Also...could account for the lack of body hair. It was burned off. And maybe those were the grooming habits back in the day, they just didn't happen to make it into the literature.

**Stranger Things Spoiler Alert** In some ways I like season 3 more, but in other ways I thought it was the worst of the 3 seasons. I just can't get past the whole Russian base under the mall thing, just came off as a James Bond spoof or something. Also, as someone who "came of age" in the 80s, they tried WAY too hard to hit us over the head with 80s clothes, products, music, etc. I'm just dissapointed because they could have gone a lot of interesting ways in season 3, and the Russian thing just didn't work. Also, the whole Mind Flayer and Upside Down were always mysterious and scary. Turning it into basically just another monster chasing them around was a mistake. 1/3 Wonder Years, 1/3 Bond, 1/3 Alien = Meh. Incredible ending though, literally had tears in my eyes. I don't recall the ending...but I was never a big fan of Stranger Things. I watched it because I pretty much always have my computer on streaming something, even if most of my attention is focused elsewhere. Only when I can't take my eyes of my computer do I upgrade it to "must watch on real TV" status. But I get why people loved the 1st two seasons. I'm usually very easy to please. I don't have high standards for TV. It just has to entertain me. Stranger Things barely did that and I found the Russian base just too ridiculous. Like they can pay off some small-town Mayer and build this enormous base with Russian Soldiers during the midst of the cold war. Anyway, in my boredom I watched two shows I never would have checked out. "Fleabag," and Marvelous Mr. Masiel." I thought both were hilarious. Sorry if I'm late and others posted these, but I just watched them recently and thought both were hilarious. I also was forced to watch Veronica Mars and was told, "seriously, you'll love it, she is so funny." So, didn't know who she was, but that was a pretty clever show and entertaining in a...-if you're going to be held hostage by a GF/Wife, it's not the worst thing you could watch-type show.

No Luke, it's not going to be interesting when Khris comes back into camp and says he's "in the best shape of his life." That's just background noise for athletes. I'm 100 pct curious, which arm do you look at in this video taken across the court? Because the one he's dribbling with doesn't look any different in this video that's shot from about 50 feet away. And that IS how you claim to be able to really see the nuances that the rest of us amateur's are unable to see, right? But here's the most important part. Here's the #1 thing that you're just completely missing. Nobody else cares. Nobody else wants to spend time going over and over and over pictures of these athletes trying to ascertain if they're at 12.5 pct body fat at the moment or if they're at 13 pct body fat based on how one picture makes them look and how you were right about Michael Redd in 2005. The whole conversation is just a bizarre obsession and you take these generic comments, best I've ever felt, the best shape of my life, I spent the off-season working on my diet, I've cut out red meat and dairy, etc....etc...etc.. that every athlete makes and you use them as the backbone of an argument you're pretty much having with yourself at this point.

I really chalk this up to little more than trolling at this point. The absolute absurdity that you can tell what pct a player body fat is from having really good eyesight or whatever other reasons are just beyond ridiculous. But it's becoming a strange obsession at this point.

And how is Grisham comparable to Jake Marisnick? He wasn't a 1st round pick, was never as highly regarded as Grisham was, never had the type of year Grisham had and was never a considered a top draft pick. Two things. Can we stop with these random straw man arguments like, "what about all the people that wanted player X signed and now look," and then can we just pump the brakes on telling other people to "Lets just pump the brakes." Everyone understands these are hypothetical discussions and nobody on here is actually in charge of anything, right? So you're telling other people to pump the brakes on their hypothetical questions/opinions? It's one thing if you're notoriously over the top in predicting aces and future MVP's... Anyway, absolutely sign Grisham if he'd be willing to take the deal that I think T Plush suggested. A team-friendly deal like that could be insanely team-friendly and at worst....slightly overpaying for a typical 4th OF'er. Hiura, I'd guess the Brewers would be interested and it'd be up to him to sign. I'd love to see him locked up for 8 years.

Yes, he went back to an interlocking golf grip that he used in high school. He also made a significant change to his stance. He had a much more open stance. Anyway, I'd definitely do Hiura. He's the exact type of player you extend. Buyout 2 years of free agency(I'd guess they'd need to be guaranteed and not options) and you have a very good hitter locked in for the next 8 years. Grisham, he's just not that clear cut of a guy yet. Not for a corner OF'er. A big difference between a second baseman who was considered the best pure hitter in the draft and is now performing at a very high level in the Big Leagues vs a toolsy prep prospect who put it all together this year.

I really thought Keke looked good in his first game. My opinion of J'mon Moore has not changed. I don't know how you keep Moore with all the depth and potential they've shown at WR'er. Lazard and Shepard now? Oops, you made a bad pick with your 4th round pick. But you picked good WR'ers in the 5th and 6th, so just move on from that mistake.

Bahahaha, I wish he'd take it. It would be almost as hilarious as the Jay Cutler extension... The 40 million was apparently disputed, but regardless it does sound like he wants to be paid 35 million a year. So....yeah, good luck with that Cowboys fans. It's tough enough to win with an elite QB making 35 million a year. Now pay it to a guy who's probably somewhere between 10-15 in the NFL at QB and you're going to have a hard time. Especially when you have Zeke coming up and Cooper coming up. Cooper is going to get 18 million a year or so if he plays at all like last year and I don't know how the Cowboys can NOT pay Zeke when he's the focal point of their offense and still just 24 years old. And how much worse is Dak going to be without Zeke behind him? I'm not a big fan of Stephen A Smith, but he's not wrong about the Cowboys. They're an accident waiting to happen.

This has been one of the frustrating things about Rodgers. When he's injured or when he's forced to do this because of the score, THAT is when the offense is at it's best. When he passes up that 5-6 yard completion-the type that Brady makes his living on-and instead tries to scramble and go for a big play, that's not only when he's more susceptible to injury, but it just takes the offense out of its rhythm. I believe McCarthy wanted the same thing, I just think things got stale there. Same with running the ball. I think MM wanted to run it more, Rodgers just audibled out. But your example of the Bears game is great, the games he played with a bad ankle/calf like the playoff game vs the Cowboys for instance, another game in which he was getting the ball out. This is how you make it through 16 games and how you can extend your career. Of course he's had a great deal of success with the extended play, but I think he'll have more if he can incorporate the quick hitters into the game that much more.

From what I read he can transfer and play right away. I am not exactly sure why and I also read he still has two years of eligibility. Also from a pure football standpoint I think Wisconsin would actually be the most logical. He likely has a ton of friends on the football team and I would guess a lot would welcome him back with a ton of support. Likely the best team he will get on and they have one heck of a QB prospect to end his last two years. Mind you he knows the offense and would arguably the top guy. From a non football standpoint I think it is overblown. He was found not guilty and that campus is massive. It isn't like a small town where you should probably move out because you can't avoid the problem (the accuser girls for instance). Regardless of where he goes he is probably wise to not partake in alcoholic events and get with random girls. So I don't see how a new school really helps him. It is hard to say if he wants to stay at Wisconsin or not. He will get readmitted so they clean up his record etc...but he can just dart after that if he wants. From what I have seen nothing has really been said in that aspect. I have seen misleading headlines saying he "wants to come back", but that is reporting he is seeking readmission. Which, as we know, he has to do to go anywhere else anyway. I don't really agree with this. It is kinda like a small town and it's a student base that's very...opinionated for lack of a better word and it's not going to matter what the verdict is for a lot of people, it's going to be "he got away with it." Facts won't matter to a lot of people, he's guilty. I actually think of it very much like a small town. But just reading the comment about him being close to his coaches and his father being murdered, these are things I had totally forgotten about, he was coming up with some of the guys when that happened. So that could have created a particularly close bond. I don't know how he's viewed on campus, so it's impossible to have a real strong opinion one way or the other. But it's really a bad time to have those accusations next to your name on a campus-like UW-regardless of the verdict.

Paul Chryst issued a statement saying that Cephus would be "welcomed back to the team." He first has to be re-admitted to the University and then apparently he'd be eligible to play. I'm not going to even start to discuss anything else about the situation but to reiterate, if I were him, I think I'd probably want a fresh start somewhere if a Football career is my top priority. It'd just feel awkward to come back to a school that kicked me out and the lingering questions. Of course my best friends today are guys I met with and former teammates of mine in college.

I hadn't noticed the Mets had won 9 of their last 10 and 5 in a row.

That's a REALLY good question. College-age students aren't going to stop having meaningless random "encounters." How do you protect yourself? Obviously, if someone is too drunk to walk you need to extricate yourself from that situation, but if your inhibitions are just dampened and you wake up with regret the next day, that's pretty hard to completely protect against. Maybe an actual form with actual written consent is the best way to do it. I remember it sounding silly when I first heard it, but now with younger college-age girls I know saying that rape is when you DON'T get verbal consent, not simply when you hear no, it's become a bit more blurry.