adambr2

What's the answer, though? Is it in the job description of the guy making $10/hr running the register at Kwik Trip to get in confrontations with the selfish jerks looking for a fight? Non-compliance will be high as long as law enforcement continues to ignore enforcement of the mandate. Nope, you're absolutely right, it's not on the employees, it's on the individual. I feel terrible for any retail employees who already work a crappy job for minimal pay and get asked to enforce the mask mandate on top of this. As far as getting law enforcement involved, in most jurisdictions mask compliance is not a criminal offense where they even could get involved. Even if they could, they are often overburdened with other matters to get involved with enforcing a mask mandate. The issue is cultural-- we are a society that emphasizes personal convenience over any greater good. We see this even in those that don't think they are that way-- even the most stringent mask proponents are often seen in situations where they let their guard down for their own comfort (Evers, Fauci). Mask compliance was probably better a month or two ago shortly after the mandate came out. Now those who didn't want to wear one in the first place have a much better idea of what places will actually enforce it and which won't. You're not going to change an entire culture in a year or two. People ignoring mask policies is what it is and any time and energy spent trying to change that is pretty well pointless.

They're not comparing the odds of being up 5 or 8. They're comparing the odds of the decision to go for it there or the decision to kick it there. The odds are comparing the decisions prior to the 4th down with no knowledge of the result of the individual play.

https://www.acmepackingcompany.com/nfl-draft-2020-packers/2020/10/13/21513481/the-2020-packers-draft-class-is-barely-playing-jordan-love-aj-dillon-josiah-deguara-kamal-martin

Or if only Alex Smith had fallen instead of Rodgers... That's a chicken or egg argument too, though. Some believe that had Smith spent 3 years in the Packer system that he may have wound up being the star rather than being immediately forced into action. If Rodgers had been immediately starting in San Francisco he may not have ended up having the success he did. Coaches...system...receivers...all different. Just speculating, obviously. Maybe Rodgers does lead San Francisco to multiple Super Bowls. We'll never know.

I'd agree with this. I don't like moving up unless the value is off the charts and you have pretty fair certainty based on the board and who is ahead of you and their needs that said player won't be available at your spot. I also don't really agree with the sentiment that you "have intel" that a team will take a player. You might have a pretty good idea about which way a team is leaning but if you truly have intel on who they are picking they did not protect their draft board very well. Teams have a little bit more secrecy around their boards than that, and I'd even take it with a grain of salt if they come out after the fact and say they were going to take a certain player.

I'd just stream QBs based on matchups. You're not going to replace Dak. Any one of those above should be good streamers. If you're absolutely set on sticking with one guy, I think Tannehill is a highly underrated option. I also like Bridgewater and Herbert, if available.

They should have honestly put in a league-wide bye this year, maybe even two, say in Weeks 7 and 14. I understand that would have extended the season by 2 weeks but you can just take out the bye after the conference championships and you're only pushing the Super Bowl back by a week. They could have scheduled COVID makeup games in both Weeks 7 and 14. They would have had so much built-in flexibility. This rescheduling 9 games thing isn't sustainable, they're eventually going to run out of byes to use. At the very least 2 byes per team would have been better. The NFL has done fairly well handling COVID but it's an odd choice not to give themselves more built in flexibility and instead have to adjust everything on the fly. They had plenty of time to figure this out.

No doubt there were questions about Rodgers, by no means was he a perfect prospect. But he was also seen as a consensus top 2 pick just weeks before the draft. So there was absolutely a vast gap in how he was seen and Love was seen as a potential franchise QB. Well, that's part of my point. We spent a 2nd round pick on a position where we have two established players. 2nd day picks at that position are almost universally early contributors at least to some degree. It's not a position that you spend an early pick on a developmental year. I think Jones is likely to be re-signed. I don't think Gute is going to let him walk. And if they were planning on it, I think Dillon would be seeing a lot more game action than he is. I thought he would at least be a threat to the playing time of Jamaal Williams, who is not a special player. I don't think it's a great sign that he has less touches than Tyler Ervin. Starting and playing well? He has 31 career snaps. This seems like a stretch. He has 17 less snaps this season than Tonyan had on opening day. Also, you know as well as I do that position matters when you're talking about a player starting and playing well. A 3rd round rookie starting at WR or CB is notable...it's common for rookies to contribute immediately at tertiary positions like H back/fullback. I like DeGuara. I really do. I'm just talking solely about the draft, and about value. He's a guy I would have loved as a Day 3 pick. I hated the pick because I felt it was a reach in Round 3. My mind certainly isn't going to be changed now that he's going to be coming off of a significant knee injury 31 snaps into his career and competing for snaps as the 3rd TE next season. I guess my bigger point on DeGuara is that H-back/blocking TE's aren't at a premium in the NFL and there's no need to pay a premium price for one in the form of a 3rd round pick when you can just go sign a veteran like Marcades Lewis for 2 million. Maybe it's confirmation bias, but I'm just trying to view it impartially and not forcing myself to like the pick because it's a Packer draft. There are Packer drafts that I have loved, and in the absence of certainty I usually defer to our guys (example, I wanted Courtney Upshaw, but when we took Nick Perry, I was sold on it quickly.) Sometimes I love guys that don't really pan out, Joshua Jackson for example). This particular draft I didn't like at all, and I understand that there have been drafts in the past that have been widely panned and turned out well, and I fully acknowledge that IF DeGuara turns out to be a franchise type QB (here), obviously that will change the entire complexion of this draft.

What COULD have happened to change your mind though? Is there anything that can until we see what Love does as a starter? Also...people should probably keep in mind how people went nuts when we acquired Rodgers and Favre. Favre, the 33rd pick in the previous draft was traded for the 19th pick(despite being the 3rd string QB and throwing 2 picks in 4 passes). People were calling for Wolfs head right out of the gate. And then Favre, a year younger than Rodgers and the most durable at the position in NFL history is drafted after a year the Packers went 10-6 and didn't have a lot of weapons. And contrary to the narrative, he was not threatening retirement at that time. That came primarily over the next three years. So if you were upset about it...you're gonna be upset about it until we see Love play like with Favre and Rodgers before him. I liked the Rodgers pick. I'm sure not everyone was in the same boat, but he was such a great value at 24. That was a damned if you do, damned if you don't choice for TT. Love was a little different. It felt forced. He's far less of a certain prospect than Rodgers (not that Rodgers was a total slam dunk) There were other options. We'll see. As far as what COULD have happened to change my mind, I thought Dillon would have a lot more than a nonexistent role in the offense. I don't see any real signs that he's got the future that people want to believe. Even next year, if Jones is re-signed, Dillon doesn't do more than take over the Jamaal Williams role. It's disappointing that they don't even consider him a short yardage option this year. DeGuara is who he is. An H-back and special teamer, when he can make it on the field. He'll make some future rosters, but that's not a huge return on a 3rd round pick. There's just not a ton of upside there to dream on. But yes, like 2005, the only thing people will remember about the '20 draft will be whatever happens with Love. I think Favre and Rodgers have given people unrealistic expectations for Love, though.

I think it's ok to be impressed with the job the Packers have done putting together a competitive 2020 team, while simultaneously noting that the 2020 draft class hasn't improved the 2020 team in any way. I am excited about the 2020 team, and they've certainly changed my mind since the pre-season. I thought our 2020 draft was quite awful, and nothing has happened since then to change my mind on that.

Is Chase Claypool a must add?

the club option on sogard is $4.5 million with a $500,000 buyout. Well the buyout is happening. The only question is if they happen to bring him back for less. I hope they don't.

The Bucs just went for (and converted) a 4th and 1 from their own 19 in the 2nd quarter with a 10 point lead. I love how this stuff is becoming more "normal".

You guys got it, 2010 was uncapped.

I like the idea of the Titans forfeiting on Sunday if they can't play. It doesn't interfere with the schedule, and maybe guys will start taking this seriously if it starts costing them wins.

Didn't we sort of do this backwards in Wisconsin? Wouldn't March/April have been the right time to say, "Hey, be safe out there. Wear a mask when you go out. Keep your distance from people. " And right now the time to be saying, "Shelter the hell in place, we need to flatten that curve." I feel like we utilized these two strategies in exactly the opposite times from when they were appropriate. We didn't need to shut down Wisconsin in March, and we really shouldn't be traveling unnecessarily at all right now.

this. Houser proved he is not a starter, and we continue running him out there, something is definately wrong. Give Freddy a shot, he won't be worse than Houser, and if he isn't ready yet, put him back in the bullpen. Freddy is 24, he's a kid... He tried the rotation a couple years ago, failed, but he's so young, he deserves another shot. In 2019, around this time, we thought Burnes was done as a starter. Then 2020 happened, and he was dominant in the rotation. Not saying Houser's Burnes, but I would not bet against a rebound. He just saw a teammate pull it off. Right now, Burnes and Woodruff 1-2 in the rotation. Peralta and Houser are probably in the mix with Lauer, Suter, File, and Lindblom. Rebound to what? Houser has never been a great starter, or even good starter, at any level. I don't know why we is but I don't think many people thought Burnes was done as a starter after 2019.

I agree with this. If there was a "Burnes is cooked" camp after 2019, it was a small group of people. I think the vast majority of fans here still believed in Burnes and his arm.

Without looking it up, anyone know what the salary cap was the season the Packers won Super Bowl 45?

I'm always open to moving a player for the right price,; in this case you'd have to get back more than the #26 pick that you put into him. I can't see this actually happening for several reasons, though. A team that needs a QB now at mid-season 2020 isn't looking for a Jordan Love. He's not NFL-ready, he's not even our backup QB. He's not going anywhere and helping someone else in a new system win in Week 10 of this season. Love has always been a 2 to 3 year project and still is. He's more likely to be dealt in the off-season, but even then I have a hard time seeing it happen. Even if WE believe he is in a much better spot after 1 year, how is any other GM going to know that enough to compensate properly for him? It's possible Love gets dealt in 2 to 3 years if Rodgers is still playing at a very high level and showing no signs of decline. You'd be hard pressed to recoup his value though after 2 to 3 years of no game action for anyone to go off of. But no one would want him now for a win now move.

Are you saying I'm not funny?!? Mean. I think if I had a teammate that blurted out on Twitter that we would take an "L" because he was out of the lineup and then we hung another 30 spot on a team and won the game, he might hear a couple zingers his way that next week. It doesn't make Adam's a bad guy. Just a really dumb thing to say outloud or on Twitter. I do think Lazard has more of an impact on the entire offense for the Packers. It wasn't do dog on Adam's at all but to recognize all the small things Lazard does that do go unnoticed a lot of the time. Do I think he is a better pass catcher? No. I think that would be pretty foolish to think. But maybe Lazard's loss won't be felt as much as I thought if we end up having actual tight ends that can do what they did last night. I think you're a funny guy. Just not in this particular instance. I like Lazard as well. Not as much as Adams obviously, but it's true that the blocking prowess of Lazard in addition to his pass catching abilities serves this offense well. Should get Adams back after the bye which will be welcome. Lazard sounds like it could be anywhere from a month to the rest of the season. Hopefully it will be on the short end. Anyone know anything about when/if ESB is ever going to get on the field?

Source? Everything I'm seeing says Snacks will be in Seattle today and is scheduled to visit Green Bay on Wednesday. I would think there's a chance Seattle doesn't let him leave the building without signing on the dotted line. I got the day wrong. Get it together.

What's going on with both the Packers and Cowboys is not a great look for Mike McCarthy. With that said, the Cowboys aren't having a problem moving the ball and scoring, which is generally seen as MMs role. Mike Nolan was brought in for the defensive side. With THAT said, MM is the guy who decided to hire Nolan, knowing full well his track record.

On the Hopkins deal: Were other GMs aware that Hopkins was available and that was just the best deal he could get? Or did O'Brian just deal with one team and incredulously take the first lowball offer he got?

You don't seem to like Davante Adams very much. Every once in awhile, try laughing. I like him a lot actually. But the guy acted dumb and deserves the ribbing that is more than likely coming from his teammates. I think he will be okay... I laugh a lot. At things that are funny. I think Davante will be ok too. I am not sure why he is going to get a ribbing from his teammates for being frustrated that he couldn't play tonight, but maybe. I don't know. Do you really like him? I mean, you did say that Lazard would be the bigger loss. Anyway, to your point, it's obviously great that the Packers have shown they can move the ball and score without Adams. Tonyan is really starting to emerge, and Jamaal Williams is showing that even with Aaron Jones running the backfield, he is still an important part of this offense. And #12 is just playing on another level right now. He looks like an MVP again.