BrewerFan

Yeah...again, they can still only take the ONE executive. They can't just throw endless piles of cash at the Brewers executives and take them all. There are rules, this has been explained to you.

So what? Lets say this is true. What difference does it make? Are doing the "he said he was stepping back because he wanted to spend time with family and now he's taking another job and so he was lying?" The "spend time with family," is the most vague and irrelevant statement Coaches or GMs make when they step away. Even athletes at times. Who cares what the mechanism was for him to spend it with his family, a forced year off or a year he chose to take off? And he DID choose to take it off. He could have gotten paid 5.5 MILLION(not insignificant) to be an advisor for the Brewers this year and he turned it down. So fine. Attanasio just didn't let him. He has a principled view on giving young executives their first opportunity and then not allow them to leave their contracts early when a big market comes along. He also pays them commensurate with other very highly paid executives. I don't get how this furthers any conversation though.

That seems fair. I remember a compilation of McCarthy and all his brilliant play calls(this was in rebuttal to the argument that he'd become vanilla and carried by Rodgers). And it really kinda surprised me. There were plays with Cobbs and Adams in the backfield with one running an angle route and one running a wheel route and then Nelson and whomever else on the outside. That one stands out, but there were a lot of more specific examples. This was when he got the job with the Cowboys. I don't think this is an indictment on Rodgers personally...his results speak for themselves, but I think it shows that MLF is a more capable play caller and McCarthy probably caught a bit too much heat for us.

It is wild that Musgrave is in that group given how good those guys played. I don't think we saw a fraction of what Musgrave is capable of(other than getting open and beating coverage) and he still thinks Musgrave is a guy who's got "it." I think he dealt with a lot of nerves and he's going to get MUCH better. I think those two plays where they had a shot on a TD if he keeps his feet...I think they'll convert those type of plays in the future! Reed was the best from what I could see yesterday, but I wasn't really spending time specifically watching his blocking save for a few plays. So that's...wildly encouraging. So close to 3 catches, 2 TDs and over 100 yards.

Well...he can take ONE. And it's not going to be Arnold, we know that already. So...worst case, ONE. One player. I do not agree with this. The Mets are in a good position right now as they decided to sell off at the deadline. They have a very good farm system, they're young, still have a nice core and his "not good at spending money," is the product of what? Cain and I guess Yelich? Cain signed for a similar deal as Marte did and that hardly puts a dent into the Mets finances. Yelich wasn't a great signing, but he was coming off 2 back to back MVP caliber seasons and I don't think you can blame him for that. Beyond those two he went after Yu Darvish hard and reportedly offered a contract that at least was comparable to the Cubs, he just had very little interest in coming here. That's proven to be a good deal. Small market "errors," and Cohen market errors are two wildly different things. The Mets have probably spent more on 10 players last 2 years than the Brewers have ever paid a player in a single year(or close to it). And now he's not going to have to be sifting through Free Agency dumpster diving hoping he can come up with a little pile of copper, he's going to be able to shop wherever he wants. He can add the Brewers entire payroll in free agency this year PLUS probably Ohtani and still be fine and within their payroll. I think it will be very similar to Friedman in the Dodgers. I DON'T know that it'll be enough to beat the Braves in the short term as they've just built such a massive stable of horses who are locked up for their entire primes and given themselves room to just focus on pitching(primarily).

Dude...EVERYBODY saw this coming. That was NEVER the issue. You had these bizarre and ridiculous ideas that he was in communication with the Mets and that he was sabotaging the Brewers front office and that he COULDN'T BE TRUSTED. The Mets asked 3 times for permission to speak to him. It was the worst kept secret in sports that he was likely to end up there. You don't get to do a "told you so," for THAT, when you predicted so much more beyond that, that was just objectively ridiculous. You couldn't count on him to act in the Brewers best interest because he wanted to go to New York...and as I pointed out then, if he was REALLY just doing whatever it took to get to the Mets, then he wouldn't have traded Hader, he'd have traded our best young prospects to give us a chance to get to the NLCS so he could have left a year earlier. I'll also add, you made the inference MANY times that the Brewers don't pay their front office well(despite numerous reports to the contrary) and yet they offered Stearns 5.5M to just stick around and be a part time consultant to the Brewers...rather than just effectively taking the year off. That's a pretty healthy figure for a guy they're NOT paying to be GM or POBO or director of anything, just to be a consultant.

He's definitely an old 27(he'll be 28 in a month). And he's generally played his best ball in November/December. But he's also dominated Whitehair and guys like Bradburry in early season matchups in the past. But I think that's accurate. Even if he doesn't make the big splash plays, he's certainly got value and is a very important member of this defense. I don't want my posts to suggest I think otherwise. But it's more of a dependable veteran leader who has really good instincts and now the top 3-5 IDL that he was ranked for much of his career. I'm just still hoping for more from him as a penetrator, or someone who can collapse the pocket. Maybe those days are gone, maybe he'll again have a late season resurgence. I'm pretty convinced that it's due to him playing out of position, but I'd be thrilled to be proven wrong.

It's possible he's just fallen off, but last year was the first year he didn't play NT. There was a stretch of games under Pettine...I don't recall if it was 2019 or 2020 where they experimented with him at the DE. They thought it'd free him up more to be more of a penetrator, but it was the worst FB he played. Then he came back and finished the year on a tear and then they didn't move him until last year because they had Slaton and again they thought this was best for Clark. MAYBE it's the case that he's just fallen off, but it's kinda hard to know without seeing him getting snaps over the Center. He's definitely not a Wyatt type of athlete. He doesn't have that type of 1st step, BUT he's so good with his hands and he has a good first step, combined with the Center obviously being the easiest position as they've got to snap the ball and then come up, that he just made Centers look bad. It allowed him to beat Double teams at times, and just wreck plays. Slaton does his job fine. He's a two gap DL who doesn't get moved, but that's all you're having Clark doing right now anyway. I don't think Barry is going to bother to even try and move Clark back and I think it's GREATLY eroding his value. But, sure, if we've got others who are playing well and the front is getting the job done, we don't need that version of Clark. I'd just say that Bears OL was bad except for Wright. So I hope they can keep that up. Moving forward though, you really might as well move on from Clark(in '24 or '25) if you're going to use him this way, OR if you've decided his play has dropped off, as you can find other guys who can do what he does and they will not come with a ~28M cap hit.

I don't think you can blame this one on the turf at all. I know they're going to(and if that leads to all grass, then good). But Rodgers ankle was under him, it wasn't stuck because of the field, it was stuck because of the weight coming down on him.

It's really not though. The Jets are NOT in a position like the Packers, Saints or Buccs were in. They haven't restructured deals in a way that pushes all this money out to the future years. They don't have players like Bakh or Clark counting 70M against the cap. Their 2024 cap, like I just said in a reply to Jopal, they could do that with just a couple players, Quinnen Wiliams, Mosley and Franklin-Myers, either restructure or cut(not Williams obviously) and create a ton of cap space. And they still wouldn't be in as deep as those three teams. This is a complete and total disaster for the Jets in the short-term, no question about that, but long term? It's really not that bad. Just 5 moves I made and they have 40 men on the roster and they can get ~60M under the cap next year(from ~18M). And that's without void years or doing any of that like the Packers had to. If Rodgers DOES decide to come back...they're probably in a better position next year with a chance to really focus on their OL, their 1st round pick and all that, but their cap is in fine shape.

He definitely has an out. He can definitely say...like you said, "I'm 40, I wanted to play for the Jets for 3 years, but I tore my Achilles, I'm gonna be 41 the year I come back, it's a grueling rehab, I need to walk away." But the key is would HE feel like a chump or like he's still got something to prove? I think so. He clearly did this year. I don't think getting injured after 4 snaps changes that. I also truly he was absolutely planning on coming back to GB the whole time. Then he goes into the darkness, the Packers float the idea of trading him, the Jets are interested, that gets out, he hears about it and then he announces he WANTS to play for the NYJ, plays it off like he wanted out of GB...which doesn't make sense in my opinion, but whatever. So now I would definitely lean toward him in his own mind really needing to prove something to the Packers and the league. But that Jets team REALLY needs to go all in like the Chiefs on that OL. A year from now, they could draft a LT, trade for one, or sign one. I don't see a FA who's worth it, but Bakh could be had by then if he looks like he did this past week all year. Maybe you get your 1st that way. Bakh+2nd for the NYJ 1st? They have more than enough salary cap room to really do anything they want. It doesn't really look like it on the surface, but if they want to go all in, they could create ~40M in cap room and really afford any player they want. Just brutal for him and the Jets fanbase.

Right...there was never meant to be any type of insult. I was talking about my experience. We did put 25% down and owed well into the 6 figures for it and interest rates were much lower than what I could have gotten through just about any investment. If we'd have put 70% down, that'd completely change the equation.

Carson Wentz is really the only plausible veteran I can see who has...even the CHANCE to come back and have success. He hasn't been good, but he hasn't been as bad as people would lead you to believe. I think without looking it's like 38 TDs and 14 picks(Something like that) the last two years. He's only 30-31. Winston maybe? The problem is they're both so turnover prone. Also, if Rodgers is done, the Jets have a 66M dollar dead cap hit next year from Rodgers(he'll be on the roster either way, just pointing out even with the 'paycut' how much the Jets still have invested in him financially. 2025 it's a 51M cap hit vs a 49M dead cap.

I'm so split on this. I've torn an ACL, I've done a lot of stuff...and rehabbing for the NFL is SO much different and you're pushing all of it earlier than I would have(and I was 21). But from what I've heard, rehabbing from an Achilles is just magnitudes more difficult than an ACL(I can imagine a real, significant back injury would be the worst rehab you could deal with, but I'm lucky to not know). So on the one hand, 40, the worst possible rehab you could go through outside of a significant back injury.. On the other hand, if Aaron Rodgers gonna go through ALL this buildup with the New York Jets and now just walk away? I can't answer that. I know he wants to stick it to the Packers, to prove them wrong. I don't know how much pain he's willing to take to do that...but it wouldn't surprise me to see him go through it and come back from it...OR get a couple months in and ask, "why the hell am I putting myself through this at my age with my legacy."

You just highlighted the part saying he'd have to "sell back" his ownership share. He bought a very small % from the 53% that the Davis families own. Davis buys it back and he can play. I don't think THAT is what's going to stop him from playing if he wanted to.

He could, but how hard would that be? Transfer them back to Davis with an agreement that he gets them back or some other deal. I don't know how that'd work, but I don't think THAT is what would stop him. I think it's the fact that their OL is not good.

Yes. But also, for ALL the massive amount of 'it' talked about the Packers FO this WHOLE offseason and how they were poorly run, and all the fans who were pissed...this kinda validates their decision to go with the 24 year old QB over the 39 year old QB who was consistently waffling about how long he wanted to play. I do think he'll come back from this(at least rehab and try and make it back next year)...but they moved up in the 1st round(and lost what I think was going to be Broderick Jones) and gave up two 2nds. So yeah, we're definitely hurt by it. Not nearly as bad as the Jets or Bears, two fan bases that...at least in the Twitter bubble just relentlessly ran their mouths since the trade was first brought up.

Joe Burrow got 275M and 220M GTD. He had a nice weekend!

Yeah, I'm guessing he was kidding as there's obviously a huge correlation between the Packers and Rodgers. This impacts the Packers in SOOO many ways, both quantifiable and in ways you can't quantify.

This is a good rule. I completely missed this part the first time because...it really is tough to read such a long rant without paragraphs. It's not being some grammar nazi either, it's just...not easy to read. I have no clue how he appears "desperate," because he DIDN'T overthrow his best starter and best reliever(I suppose you could argue Burnes isn't the best starter. I wouldn't, but some have expressed they'd prefer Woody in a game 1 or 7).

No. -He didn't "throw away history," because he didn't have his ace go ~125 pitches in a 0-0 game that STILL wouldn't have been over. -He didn't throw away history because they didn't try a squeeze play. -He didn't throw away history because he didn't have his closer try and go 2 innings. MAYBE you do some of these things if it's the post-season. But with a 4 game lead on Sept 10th, this is foolish IMO. Also, I don't think he refused to bunt. I think it was more him counting on Monasterio to put the ball in play and NOT hit into a DP. I'd guess the odds were higher of scoring there that way as opposed to a squeeze(or it sounds like you're calling for a safety squeeze).

The Colts are asking for your first born+ 3 picks. They don't seem serious about trading Taylor. But that would be an incredible backfield.

His hitting has, but he had a throw from the OF that came in at 94 MPH earlier this year. And it's entirely possible I'm fixating on his throwing arm more than necessary(it's looked real bad the last couple months) and making a jump to his back, I don't know. As for the NTC, yes, he has that. He's also 10/5 by now, so even without it he could block any trade. So it'd have to be somewhere he wanted to go and the most obvious places would be out West. And again, I said this in another thread, but I don't believe players demand No Trade Clauses just because they want to stay somewhere, but so they can control where they go and have some leverage. Perhaps it'd be picking up his option year. I don't know. When I first suggested it, he was still ascending and playing if not his best Baseball, close to it. But places like perhaps...LAA, LAD, SD, SF, AZ, Col, Seattle, etc...maybe he'd have interest. Maybe he does really want to finish his career in Milwaukee and it's completely a moot point. I don't know.

Agree on pretty much everything. I think Musgraves will be fine, but he did not look good tracking the ball. I think it's just a little rust. If we remember he played just 2 games last year. Reed looks awesome. I love the way he goes and attacks the ball, how comfortable he looks. With Fields...I really don't know if he's the problem as he's just never been able to sit back there and go through his reads. We saw even Rodgers struggle, dropping his eyes and bailing out a bit earlier than he needed to when his OL was struggling. Love and Fields are in just polar opposite situations and yesterday made that contrast so stark. That's as generous as I can be with Fields. That I think he's capable, he's just in a terrible situation. If anyone remembers his performance vs the Bears as a rookie, or more accurately the Bears playcalling and OL struggles. Fields was just abused that game. That's part of the risk of playing a young QB behind an OL that's poorly constructed and running plays that take time to develop. I think it hurts their growth and creates bad habits. I don't see Fields outgrowing those the way the Bears are currently constructed. Now it looks like they're going to have 2 very high picks in an outstanding draft. I think the contrast makes the Packers look that much smarter for drafting and developing a QB and then making damn sure they've got an OL around him. The Packers were even playing with 6 OL yesterday with Walker getting snaps. They were that determined to make sure Love had time to throw the ball. Also, so awesome to see Bakh jumping over the pile and getting up to the 2nd level on run plays or there was one where he was beaten early and the thing that's made him great is his ability and balance to recover and he was blocking while kinda bending backward and he provided Love just that extra maybe .3 seconds to get the ball out without being hit. There's certainly some schadenfreude directed towards the Bears fans over Fields performance, but I honestly still can't tell after 2 years and a game if it's Fields or if it's just the talent around him. And that is about the biggest indictment on the Bears you could give. They STILL haven't been able to build around him. Roschon Johnson, Moore, Kmet, Mooney and Wright are great places to start and I was a huge fan of Johnson coming out and hated the Bears got him, but the rest of that OL is absolute trash.

I'll just reiterate what I said in the other thread. I think he's playing out of place. He's better playing NT. Playing DE is negating the physical advantages he has over Centers. I think if you just flipped him and Slaton, he would play much better. As it stands, he's only occupying blockers at DE. At NT, he was abusing Centers with his first step and getting into the backfield. I think the reputation was well earned, he's just not living up to it in the role he currently plays. On the TD run where it looked like he was on skates, that was a clear false start on Wright. He had a clear half of a step before the ball was snapped. I don't think there's any chance that Wright is going to get inside of Clark without that. I went back and replayed it a few times(I can't find the clip, but it's so clear). But I agree, he's pretty much just "meh," at this point. He's eating up blockers and he's not generally getting moved(Darnell Wright does look like a HR pick for the Bears) at the moment, but he's not the player he once was.