BrewerFan

They have a ton of room to improve. I still think they're playing Vanilla, boring defenses because they've played elite backs and running QBs and they are limited at LB. Eric Wilson was a really good LB for Minnesota for a year or two. Then he fell off a cliff and more like a ST ace and good backup for us, but I'm looking forward to going back and seeing what he did overall. I'm also not arguing about Quay. I am with you, he makes plays. The play where our DT got blown up(I think it was Brooks, not sure) and Quay comes to fill and Barkley gives him that jab step and everyone replays that all week as some indictment against Quay...Barkley really is Barry-Sanders-esque(when healthy) and 235. That's a play you want quay to make...but very good LBers make that play. That hole was 5 yards wide. I think Hafley will utilize him better as the year goes on, but when he's playing the middle in pass coverage, he is REALLY good. Also good at pursuit. And they rallied to the Football so well yesterday. I knew they would. That was something they didn't do vs Philly and...that's one of the area's the same is easy. Effort. Cooper won't have a Quay type impact, but remember his rookie year? Didn't play much early, then 4 weeks in, kinda took over? I suspect that'll happen here as well.

Ok...of course not, it's not an absolute, but I think it's a pretty fair argument. If the Bears take Aaron Rodgers, they probably win 10 division titles or...whatever. Even if SF had just made the trade a few years ago, I think they've got 2-3 SBs. You have an MVP season, Trent, Deebo, Ayiuk, CMac, the same team...and you give up what you gave up for Micah. The point is just because lost with the Packers when the 49ers were a more physical and just tougher team than GB, I don't think that disproves the statement Rodgers made about they'll be more sorry they didn't pick him than we will. They've invested so much into the QB position to basically get a solid starter and surrounded that guy with talent for 15 years now. From Harbaugh to the '19-'23 seasons. The strongest argument against it is just...Aaron Rodgers may have been a bust in SF. Not to go back to this dead horse, but he looked awful early in GB and we had the coaching, namely Clements, who revamped everything and made him a great QB. But take the version of Aaron Rodgers we've seen, throw him on SF and they'd have a Chefs-like run if not a NE type run. Especially in the Shanahan era. I still think he's gotten insufferable, but I'm just talking about his on-field play. Surely we can see it's likely they win at least a couple if we'd have traded him when he initially requested a trade after his 3rd MVP season. The Rams-not as good as SF, they won one when Stafford came to LA.

I'm looking forward to playing a less mobile QB. That's two weeks in a row Hafley has prioritized rushing lands and kinda holding onto the reigns of the DL. I get that...but let Quay or Coopr spy and let the DL loose. Not sure he explicitly stated it for the Colts, but he did for the Eagles. And that makes sense, even moreso vs the Colts with Richardson's size and speed, But I still think this pass rush is going to be really good when they're allowed to just get up-field. Also, doesn't appear Colby Wooden is going to play as large of a role in the defense this yea with this front. And finally, looking forward to Cooper and Morgan to step into the lineup full-time. Cooper can just do things that the others can't. Quay looks really good vs the pass though. Twice in two games, he's getting 20 yard drops and taking away the deep middle and helping to create turnovers.

Yeah, WAY too premature. They're obviously good teams. The Packers were controlling the 49ers game. They were hardly overwhelmed physically. Eagles are at least as physical as the Lions and probably the 49ers. The "injury" bug is too big. It's too vague. Is McCaffery, Hufanga, two really good players, is that the injury bug? Every team will be missing starters. They're already missing Greenlaw all year.

The 49ers have 4-5 SB wins over the last ~20 years...if they draft Rodgers AND he develops into just 80% of the QB he was with GB.

I don't mind the boot, IF your QB is going to eat it if he's under pressure or doesn't have a wide-open WR. Either easy completion of...make them use the last TO. Luckily...it didn't matter.

No...but you don't have to. Love could be back next week...if not, I'd bet it'd be the week after. I'd probably hold him out one more week, even if he's 50/50 as I don't wanna see our IOL going against Simmons and company, but already one more win than some predicted.

I'll entertain this when he hits 10 in a season... But Mitchell barely hits 30 HRs since HS is NOT relevant and "doesn't matter," but Jesse Winker, of the .~580 OPS and ONE HR(a year after a season that's worse than the one Hoskins is having this year) getting 2M makes what point? That being worse than Hoskins both in his career and the previous two seasons and he was still worth 2M GTD? LOL...what the hell are we even arguing about here? I don't think Mitchell will be a 30/30 guy and I don't think it's a bad thing if Hoskins opts in given his career as a hitter. I think it helps to hit the ball in the air, I think striking out ~33% of the time while hitting a FB ~21% of the time with a 3.8 LA isn't exactly conducive to hitting 30 HRs. He also doesn't have to hit 30 HRs to be a productive player. He just needs to stay healthy, hopefully keep beating out IF hits, maintain his ~.388 BABIP and steal some bases. But I'd be THRILLED if he turns into an MVP candidate(Which is what his defense playing all season, hitting 30 HRs and stealing 30 bases would be).

Mitchell has...~35 HRs in his entire post-high school life. He's going to be 27 next year. He hits the ball on the ground as much as almost anyone in MLB... Yeah, he big and strong...and he hits the ball on the ground and has shown absolutely no signs of being anything close to a 30/30 type hitter. Raw Power is great. How far you can hit a baseball makes for very interesting Batting Practice. When you hit the ball in the games is a lot more relevant. Ernesto Martinez absolutely has the "raw power" to hit 30 HR in a season. Garrett Mitchell's value comes from a near 400 BABIP by hitting the ball on the ground, working the count and playing great defense. Expecting him, especially with his injury concerns to go 30/30 is....not something I think it realistic. Do you? Or are you just telling me he's strong? 18 million player option. 4 million buyout. This really doesn't need to be complicated. We're talking about his 2025 salary. .825 career OPS. The POINT...the fans who are wishing/hoping he'd opt out,, they'd likely regret it come '25. that's it. Especially as we're unlikely to add someone who'll match his production in '25 for 14M.

I don't know the prior is true. If you're going off baseball savant, that's comparing apples to oranges. Ortiz top throws, he plants or gets a crow-hop. Turang's top throws are he's coming over, covering second and at best planting and throwing. So I don't know if Ortiz has the stronger arm. I think if Turang were playing third and could get into throws, he'd be at...83.7 vs 80.6 or whatever it is. I know I looked at a couple guys like Nico Hoerner and he's got 9-10 more MPH on his throws at SS than at 2B. It's just the nature of the throws. Turagn's are usually in the hole, falling away, jumping to his feet and having to flip his hips. So I don't think his arm is stronger just because of Baseball savant. They were both SS, they both have the same grade on their arm...and I prefer Turang there as I think he's got much better hands, but he has been so good at 2B, they may want to leave him there. Plus, they may find a 3B which makes it simpler. But if I was Turang, I'd...advocate for myself. As for the Bats...with respect, what difference does it make? They're both going to be in the starting lineup, we agree there. So now it's about who's replacing who. A 2B replacing Turang or a 3B replacing Ortiz. If you can get a power hitting 3B, great. Yeah, I think AZ is probably going to trade Suarez if anything. Lawler is ready...I guess they'd probably have him play 3B for a year or maybe the first few. If Hoskins is gone, that'd be well work. If not, I'm not sure they'll add another player at 15M. I don't think we'll be competitive on Santander. I think he gets 5/100 from Baltimore (at least that's the rumor, I wouldn't pay a 29 year old power hitter were I them, but he's a big glue guy according to the fan sites). Suarez is the best option. But I also don't actually think you need to "replace," Willy's production. I think you can do that as a team. I think Black over Bauers, a full year from Chourio and hopefully Yelich, I think you'll get more from Frelick, Turang...maybe Mitchell or...I mean, who knows at this point. We lost Bunres, Woody and Williams for half the year and this staff has gotten better. And it helps elsewhere as well. The Nats with Harper or pretty much any team. I'd love to add either D-backs corner IFers for a year or two, but I like this team either way. I hope I'm wrong on Mitchell as well. He's so talented, Maybe it's just one adjustment and those FBs down the middle will become doubles and HRs.

I can see Frelick being a .300 hitter, but 30/30 for Mitchell? He's not a power hitter. He's got...I think 35 HRs in all of College the Minors and now MLB. And he doesn't have many more stolen bases. If he's going to hit more than 10-15, he's going to have to be able to handle a 94MPH fastball dead read. He swings and misses at those a LOT(relatively speaking). I guess 30 SBs is reasonable...if he can stay healthy, but if you gave me two choices, 1-Mitchell is playing 140 games and going 15/30 or he's hitting .200 and striking out 30% of the time next year...I'd put money on the later before the prior. I hope he's good, I just don't have much faith. He's got the build and athletic ability however, I just don't see it. Hope I'm wrong. His career OPS coming into this year was .845 over a pretty good sample size. His career worst was just under .800 and a career-worst and an OPS+ of 125 But if he "just" improves .24 points, .38 points and .48 points respectively and just improves his OPS by ~90 points, I'll be thrilled he chose to stay for 14M in '25. His .206/.292/.402 and 694 OPS is clearly the outlier year in his career thus far. His BABIP being ~60 points lower than his last season likely isn't helpful either, but...he's a good hitter. Zips projects close to what you have...but I'd be thrilled to get him back next year. I think he's going to be back after missing all of '23 and ready to get one more big contract at 32 going into 33. Zips has him at ~240/.340/.450 and ~790 next year I'll go .245/.345/.475 with ~30 and 100 next and back to his .900 career OPS vs left-handed pitching. I just think this is a team that's really maturing, losing Adames, but Chourio will be an MVP caliber player, Yellich...maybe he hits similar to this year? .310/.380/.500 over 135 games(this is a back injury he's dealt with his whole career, and those who've had it said they experienced instant relief and the guy is SO talented. Contreras is a legit middle-of-the-order thread. Turang I'm irrationally high on, I've called him a slightly poor man's Turner since Aball, I'm thinking .270/360/400. That's Turang/Chourio/Yelich/Contreras/Rhys, then I've got Frelick, .300/.330/.400, Ortiz-.260/.340/.440/ Black-1B, let him work on a position all year. .265/.330/400, should be able to field the position well given his athletic ability and then Perkins or Mitchell, both of whom I think will be similar to what they are this year. That lineup would be elite if Turang is who I think he is, Hoskins returns to just the worst year of his career pre-Milwaukee and Yelich is healthy and 80% of himself from this year and of course, the guy I think we all agree on, Chourio just blowing up next year. I think .300/.360/.540 and 40/40 is possible. Just extrapolate his last 66 games and it's a full season of ~320/.375/565 with 32 HRs/112 RBs, 30 SBs, and the kid is 20. I might be underselling what he does, but put TWO MVP caliber hitters in the middle of the order with Contreras and I think so much of the pressures falls off the shoulders of Hoskins, he can be the #3/4 hitter on the team and they're going to be happy he's back, offer him the QO in '25 and get a pick in '26. Just my opinion of how it'll play out. pressure This could be a GREAT lineup vs RHP Turang(SS), Chourio(LF), Yelich(DH), Contreras(C), Black(1B), Hoskins(DH), Mitchell/Perkins(CF), Ortiz(3B), 2B(Ahmed Rosario, maybe Brandon Lowe if he's cheap, Collins, Monasterio...maybe Cooper Pratt, they'll find someone to play 3B or 2B and arrange the SS accordingly But even at Zips number, that's still well worth the 14M. Who else are you adding that's likely to give you more for that offensive? Maybe a Perkins type who'll post a better WAR, but we've got pretty much everything but corner IF...so unless we can pick up a guy like Suarez to play 3B(which I'd happily take, but suspect he'd cost more than 14M) or trade for a guy like Lowe and move Turang to SS)... The offense is going to be a mix of the '92 Brewers and the '08 Brewers. Speed and power, but I don't even think that's going to be the strength of the team. I think THAT will be the staff. Williams, Megill, Uribe, Hudson, Mears, Koenig, Yoho Peralta, Rea, Myers, Woodruff, Ashby, Hall, Miley I think back(cheap, I think he'll get 20 starts), Patrick HAS to get a shot, Gasser, Henderson, Misirowski, Carlos Rodriguez, and in another year, who knows who else. I love this team right NOW...they're peaking at the right time, Ashby, and Hall, In look unhittable, you have a a great pen, especially if Hudson is back, they're hitting, and playing small ball, so this might be the year...but this '25 team feels like the '11 Packers. 2010, they were supposed to be good. 2011, they were REALLY supposed to be(and were) great in the regular season. Let's just hope it plays out differently! (Sorry, as many know, if Brevity is the Soul of wit, my wit is soulless).

I'm fully expecting Rhys to have a .800 OPS and near 30 HRs next year. I'll guess .240/.330/.480 30/90 He'll hit 5th or 6th with Chourio, Yelly, Contreras and I hope Turang ahead of him as the leadoff hitter, but he needs to be consistent offensively. I'd actually be really surprised if Hoskins couldn't get 14M next year. For him to choose FA, he has to make at least that. He gets 4 either way. I think it's worth it to the Brewers to pay him 14M next year...not that it's up to them, but...he's a good hitter. You'll have a better-supporting case next year. Chourio all year, Yelly, no Adames, that sucks, but on balance, I'll take it. As for Williams...I don't know, I think you could find a team...say Philly doesn't win it, maybe they give you a couple of guys. This time last year I was looking at Rangers prospects for the same reason but they won. The Braves are another team, the Yankees...they have a bit of a Clay Holmes problem and they love stacking the pen(he may also be a FA). It's hard for me to envision Williams as a 20AAV closer, but...I'm not sure why. Everything tells you he is.

I don't see why the Yankees are giving up a decent pitcher, a guy with a sub-4 FIP and ERA for a guy who's a poor defender(which is a big issue for them) and someone we don't want. I say we just run it back with Hoskins. He's been good enough that he's not a huge albatross(though...we obviously wouldn't pay for this level of production) but he's a good enough hitter and it's one more year. So it's not like he's Jackie Bradley Jr. Just hold onto him for another year, OR...you trade him and maybe you package a Peguero, but for two mid level prospects. I don't think you're getting a #3/4 starting pitcher back.

He wasn't a true running QB, but he could have been. It's hard to get an accurate weight on a guy as they list Favre at 220 and he was at 245=250 for much of his career, but I remember Rice and Walsh both talking about Young, how he came into camp, he thought the job would be his, I think it was after a Montana injury(maybe '89). He was 240, ran a 4.41 40 and was just a monster. They talked about moving him earlier in his career to FS because he was such a good athlete. But no, as an actual QB, he could run and he did have some historic runs, but he was...well, like Rodgers. He's run when he had to. When he did it, he'd try and make guys miss or run more like a RB, but he clearly a pocket passer first and foremost. Young is one of the most underrated players in my opinion. He's a top 10 all-time QB. He and Elway. They'll keep moving down lists because people didn't watch them play and the eras were so different, his 3 year run from 92-94 was amazing. Hands down the best QB in the NFL. No question, 2X MVP, runner-up in between the 2 MVPs with his teammate Jerry Rice splitting the vote and Emmitt Smith STILL barely edging him out...and if you look at the numbers through today's lens, they were good. They weren't as good as Love's season last year when he struggled so badly the first half. Anyway, not a Steve Young appreciation thread, a dead...ugly Packers week 1 game thread...

I worded that poorly. not "strange" that you'd use Young, SF obviously made the WCO that Walsh came up with in Cincy when Ken Anderson hurt his shoulder and lost a lot of arm strength, and then...it was just a perfect fit with Montana, a great QB, but not a guy with a big arm...though they opened up a bit more for Young because...he did have a big arm. I get what you're saying. Ball out, on time. I just don't think you have to go back that far. We've seen the Packers build those types of game plans around Aaron Rodgers very recently... The ball has to come out very quickly if you're going to play a hobbled Love, I think we've seen a pretty good game plan under MLT.

Sure...or just the same ones they used when Rodgers had a banged-up knee or calf. Though...strange you'd use Young. I know Walsh ran the WCO, but he was a tank and one of the most mobile QBs ever. Montana by that point had a few back surgeries and was near the end...but Young? He was a guy they wanted to move to safety he was such a great athlete.

Nelson had a much worse injury. I understand what you're saying, but pitchers are coming back more regularly from this type of shoulder injury. Nelson's was a reconstructive surgery. We were led to believe it was a simpler procedure, but it was not. I'm going to count on him to come back because 1-what else can I do, and 2-Woodruff is a horse and it'll be roughly a year and a half. He MAY not be back week 1, but I think he'll get there over the course of that year. Also, to be honest, I don't get the argument "you shouldn't count on it." We're fans. It's not like we're building the team...so if people are optimistic about Woody coming back, it's not at the expense of procuring depth as a fallback plan. But ultimately, I trust this team with pitchers. I don't think anyone has said it's a "foregone conclusion," I think that's you putting your twist on it, but I do think the Brewers spending *17.5M on Woodruff tells you MORE about the Brewers opinion of his injury than anything else. For a team that's in the ~120M range for salary, for them to spend 17.5M for one year of a pitcher, they've likely done a cost-benefit analysis. And I still don't see the Frankie Montas correlation. That's what you can expect to get for 15M? Montas got 16M, but...sure. I don't care about the contract Montas signed with the Reds. You can throw out a dozen FA contracts and come up with a dozen different levels of performance. It's not a given. It sure wasn't a given Williams would come back from fractures in his spine, it's not a given Yelich will come back his back surgery....there aren't any given's in life. It's not a given that ANY of the players will stay healthy. In fact, it's a given they won't. The people talking about the staff are talking about the CUMULATIVE value of ALL the talent, including those coming off injury.

I don't know...if there's any position you're able to play with a knee it'd be QB. Rodgers did it. Love is pretty good at getting the ball out. The risk of further injury is pretty minor. It's certainly not ideal, but MLF isn't even ruling Love out for this week(I don't think he plays this week though).

Yeah, it's a little depressing. When you said 2018 I thought that sounds about right...until I remembered that was the year Gute took over and I had to look it up. I'm selling my tickets. I've got a group chat, someone takes them every time, never had to go online or anything. I just can't make it...I've been told I'm unavailable that day to watch a 15-month-old (told, not asked...but it's alright)...my BIL is from Texas, so I'll watch with him and...make sure he knows what's what and we don't head down a very unfortunate road where...he becomes a Cowboys fan.

LOL...as I say to most people...yeah, we probably agree on most things...but there's not much to say then! On Jacobs, I might be unfair there. I should move on from Aaron Jones, BUT...I do think he was so good in short yardage and near the endzone, those failed conversations stand out. Not that they were plays a normal RB picks up a 1st or a TD on, but it's really where Jones, IMO, shined. ON Jaire, I think it was two fold. One, he can play man, he doesn't need to play press all the time. It does you no good to try and get up on AJ Brown with a guy like Jaire. Let him play off and stay in Man as Brown was...tossing him around off the LOS and Ja was chasing at times. He was also slipping. If that game was in GB or Det, any good turf, the DBs would get a very poor grade, but I'm grading on a curve. We were gassed. I was most surprised by the snap counts. Slaton, he looked a little thinner and more agile than last year...which makes sense, not only is it a FA year, but a scheme change, but he played really well early(I think he jumped on the 4th down though) and then he was getting moved just way too easily. He played I thought roughly half the snaps. Clark played 74%. But they played him far too many snaps. 0 snaps for Colby Wooden for whatever reason. No reason to not rotate more, but didn't get off the field when they really needed to. Gary/Clark/Slaton/Smith Enagbare/Wyatt/Brooks/LVN Wooden...anywhere in there! That's where the game was lost though. OL vs DL. I hope that'll change as they play themselves into shape.

2018 was hard to watch, but not because of an injury. Rodgers was hurt in 2017 and Brett Hundley went 3-6 while he was out. 3-4 actually and had won two in a row(albeit vs two bad teams), then IIRC, Rodgers came back, we got blown out by the Panthers and Rodgers sat the last game as we were eliminated and Huntley lost the next two and went 3-6 that year. 2013 is when we had Tolzien, Seneca Wallace and then Matt Flynn was put on waivers and we claimed him. He wasn't the same with the shoulder injury, but he could put enough on it to keep us in it. Rodgers came back week 17 vs Chicago, throw to Cobb with the assist from Kuhn on Peppers, got us in as NFCN Champs. 8-7-1. Tolzien would move the ball up and down the field. Came in for Wallace, had nearly 300 yards, threw for 300 yards in his next start, but just threw a lot of picks when we got in the red zone.

I saw some pretty big positives. I thought aspects of the defense improved. The scheme, the play calling...everything but the DL(which I'll touch on and it's understandable why they didn't). The tackling was bad, it's always bad early, they need to play some during pre-season, but that's a given. But the positives, the DBs were pretty good, they were in position at least. Even on that dropped pick 6, they were competitive when they could stay on their feet. A lot of slipping by both teams, but Stokes looked really good, really healthy. Really bad call on the Ja holding that extended that last drive. Nixon, again drops an EASY pick 6(at least he read it). So definitely grading on a curve when I say the DBs looked good, but is there a team with a more talented 11 personnel than Philly? I guess SF with CMac, Kittle, Deebo, Ayiuk and whoever is their #3...but Philly is right there when healthy. Barkley, Goedert, AJ Brown, DeVonta Smith, Jahan Dotson, then you have that OL...that really puts your D in a tough position. Do you play 3 LBs knowing they can run with that huge OL, Hurts and Barkley or do you play Nickel with all that speed and an elite pass-catching back? This is why you play Cooper more(I get it, he was injured, bringing him along slowly, but I think he'll force their hand like Clay did his rookie year). Cooper flashed a few times. He was coming on a big blitz on 3rd down in the 3rd Quarter and slipped, but we had that side overloaded, but since he didn't get home, they hit Smith for a big ~30-yard gain when he shook Nixon. DL just wore down. Looked like that DL we were hoping to see early and the the Eagles just wore them down. Bullard looked really good. McKinney looked good. Quay has a miss where Barkley hits him with a really sick jab step in the hole, but whoever the DT was(I forgot) was absolutely washed out of the play by Mekhi Becton, so that's a tough matchup for Quay, but outside of that, he played...solid. Not great, but solid. Set up the first pick by carrying the TE all the way down the seem. Having two LBers who can do that is huge. Hurts had to try and force the ball in there and McKinney made him pay. Another tweak they have to make is to put Valentine in as the #3 CB. We're REALLY lucky to have Stokes back and so far, looking like he's back to where he was as a rookie...I think. He's such a smooth athlete and was step-for-step with Smith on a few plays, just staying in phase, looked a bit better getting his head around. After two lost years, he's one of the X factors. I hope he makes the decision to re-sign, Franchise or Transition a hard one. ***I thought Jordan Morgan looked good in pass pro and he was one of the 3 guys I had them taking in the 1st rd, but...with hindsight being 20-20, I wish we'd have moved up for Mitchell. That guy is a stud. He reminds me of Ramsey. Physical, fast, cocky in the best way. I think he'll be a DPOY candidate. Anyway, regarding scheme, pretty vanilla, but a few nice wrinkles. In addition to the Cooper blitz, there were a couple others...the CB blitz by Nixon where we got home, forced an errant throw, and another where he threw the ball and they didn't call a grounding(IIRC that was a 2nd level blitz). We were smart rushing Hurts. The negatives were obvious. Poor tackling, they were NOT rallying(I guarantee that will change week 2). The DL was solid early but got wore down when Philly had so many snaps. I understand Gary and Smith/LVN playing to a draw vs that OT combo, it's elite. But you need more from KC/Wyatt/Brooks/Wooden. I'd have to look at the snaps, but you need to rotate more or...something. You're facing Jordan Mailata(6'9 365), Landon Dickerson (6'6 332), Cam Jurgens(6'3 303), Mekhi Becton(6'7 370😉) and then Lane Johnson (6'6 330)...a 235 LB RB back who when healthy is one of the most talented backs in the last decade or so and Jalen Hurts, one of the most physical runners. So we wore down, but we were getting stops and playing really physical vs the run. We'll have another test vs what should be a pretty good line in Indy, but not on the same level. I think in ~10 weeks we'll look at Philly as one of the best teams in the league, a dynamic offense, so long as Barkley is healthy, one of the best run games in the league up there with the Ravens. Especially if Barkley and Becton stay healthy. That's a OL that moves the LOS. We NEED Edge Cooper to step up and have a big rookie year, but going back and watching the game again....I saw enough positives I still believe the Defense will be a top 5-10 defense...and it will create turnovers. So still an ugly game, and not getting it twisted, if I had to hand out grades, I'd give the secondary a C in coverage. It'd be D if this was at home or Philly, but the turf created problems. DL-C- Again, just wore out. LB-D without Cooper, B with him. Tackling-DL was again, good early, but the back 7 was bad. Didn't rally, gave up early. If Hafley is any type of coach, that'll be a noticeable improvement in week 2. One play Quay pulls up thinking Bullard has the tackle and we give up another 8-9 yards. Offense, I'm not going to go too much into it, already a long post. QB/WR/TE they were all out of sync. Dropped balls, Love missed easy throws we know he makes(Watson in the EZ was a big miss). RB-Not impressed with Jacobs, very impressed with Wilson. OL-Need Morgan to win the Job. Wicks was the most disappointing of the group. Watson is a man beater, not a complete WR. And that's fine, he doesn't need to be with the supplemental pieces, but the Eagles played the Fangio Defense(probably because their DC is Vic Fangio) so they kept things in front. We averaged 7.1 Yards a play, but didn't make the plays we were making last year to keep drives going. Should have been up 14-0 early and I think that changes the outlook of teh game, but poor play calling. You're on the 2, 2 1/2 yard line and you run at Jordan Davis and that front? Let Love do his thing there. Offense...defense put them in position with two big plays in plus territory and we scored 3 and 0 respectively. But still like the scheme and personnel. Next week, we NEED to stay on the field more and keep the Colts to ~60 plays, not the 78 the Eagles ran. Give Jacobs/Wilson a chance to establish the run, I'd imagine we'd have some different designed runs for Willis. Some RPOs with easy reads. Maybe Kraft/Musgraves releasing in the flat with Watson coming behind. If he starts, I'll guess Willis has a line in the 12-25 170 yards, 10 carries just to keep the chains moving, 70 yards, Wilson and Jacobs each get 10+ carries and there's going to be a couple of shots at a big play and Willis is going to have to hit it. The Colts will just keep coming up, crowding the LOS. Willis just needs to use his legs and then the other thing he's good at, throwing the deep ball and limit the turnovers. If he hits just one big play for a TD, I think they win it ugly. 23-13, something like that. **I'm also counting on the FG unit to perform...which is another leap of faith...one I'm less confident in, but I'm not changing my outlook on this team after that ONE ugly game vs IMO, the 2nd most talented team in the NFC and most talented East of Santa Clara(excluding GB, we'll have to see exactly where we stack up). 1-1 heading into week 3 and Jordan Love returns! 11-6 still well within reach!

Both? It's the same thing. It's the degree of the knee injury. I don't get why that is a good or bad thing? It seems like you're inferring Love is soft or something.

Dude...Tyson Bagent won two games for the Bears. Mediocre backups can win games... We'd need our D to play great, run the ball and he'd need to make some plays with his legs. I don't think it's crazy to think he could beat the Colts or Titans. He's also got a great deep ball. So...meh, that could help since you know they'd be crowding the box. You'd have to win ugly, but Willis is an amazing athlete...maybe that's enough. He's not going to pick apart defenses, but he may not need to. They cut Clifford and traded for Willis. If there was damming indictments, it was at that point. I'd be looking at Huntley from the Ravens personally. He's on the PS...but he's very similar to Willis.

This really isn't a bad injury. He wears a brace, his mobility will be limited...again, Aaron Jones, same injury, 2-3 weeks and that's for a RB who has to cut. The only thing that scares me is DeForrest Buckner, but we faced the best DL we'll face until...maybe SF? I don't know, who's got a better DL than Philly? I also don't think Love will play this week, but I think he'll be back sooner than later. I don't think they should play a 60% Love...but a 80% Love? I don't know. Love is similar to Rodgers. When Rodgers played with injuries, he'd get the ball out quickly, he'd be throwing on rhythm, things he wasn't doing last week. Might be good for him. 9 days off. I'm not betting on it though.