adambr2

Because he is a really good kicker and % of kicks made is a poor metric. Crosby has attempted a ton of kicks from 50+ in his career. 66 of them, hitting 53%. For reference, Steven Gostkowski is the same age, has attempted 22 more, and has attempted...35 from 50+. That's going to hurt your overall numbers. Ryan Longwell, with 28 more career attempts, fired 39 from 50+. Crosby was a little bit of a relic, in that the trend definitely shifted from guys with boots to accuracy being more important in the 2000s. But he was both. He was pretty close to automatic inside 40 = 92.4% from his career, and basically on par with Gostkowski from 40-49, a couple points lower. And Crosby still gave you chance with those 55+ boomer kicks. I think you're being grossly disingenuous with what Mason Crosby has accomplished, playing half his games in GB no less, along with the number of high pressure kicks he's made. The one he made into the wind to send the NFCCG in Seattle into OT was probably the best kick of his career. Kicker is a position with a lot of variables. It's probably the worst position in the league for scanning a list of guys for % and determining where they rank amongst their peers. It's rare that two kicks are the same and nobody is influenced as much by the weather. He's not a really good kicker. He was a really good kicker in 2019. He's fine. He's a guy. Most modern NFL kickers are great these days or they hit the unemployment line. I do give Mason some credit for the intangibles you mentioned like 50+ attempts, but the way some Packer fans talk about him you'd think he was one of the greatest ever. It's not as big of a factor as you're making it out to be, though. When you compare him to Gostkowski on 50+ yard attempts, it looks like it is. Then compare him to Justin Tucker, who attempts a far higher number of 50+ kicks on a per year basis and his career percentage blows Crosby out of the water.

I remember when Robbie Gould wanted 3 million per year and the dumb GM said he wasn't going to let a kicker make that type of demand and showed Gould the door. That one worked out real well. The same Robbie Gould that hit 74% of his kicks this year while Piniero hit 82? And while Parkey wasn't good in 2018, he wasn't 2012 Crosby bad, either. He was lights out in 2017, was a little bit worse than average in 2018 and the Bears made an impulsive emotional decision to dump him because of one playoff kick that wasn't even his fault.

I'm ok with bringing back Crosby on a short reasonable deal, but he's coming off a really good year that history shows probably won't be repeated and his percentage benefitted in 2019 from almost all short kicks. I'm not interested in having to spend $5-6M a year or whatever to make him the highest paid kicker in the league if that's what it takes. I will never for the life of me understand why Packer fans have been so in love the last decade with a kicker with a career FG% more than 3 points less than Cody Parkey who can't even find work.

Those are no longer relevant stats for a punter because it depends so much on where you are punting from. The Packers punt so much from midfield that it's about % inside the 20, hang time, and % returned. I don't know about this past season, but as a rookie Scott either led the league or was 2nd in the league in hang time and I believe he led the league in lowest % returned. In practice he regularly bounces them off of the Hutson Center roof. There is also weather. The difference between Scott and 14th in the league is two yards per punt, so it's not really a big difference and could be explained by how often they are punting from midfield versus other teams. You don't need to look any further than the Seattle game from last year to see what he can do. They were pinned deep in their territory, and Scott flipped the field with a 65-yard punt - mostly in the air, not a 45 yard punt that rolled for another 20 yards. Denver waived Brett Kern halfway through his second year. It wasn't until his 5th year that he really figured it out, and has been perhaps the best punter in the league the last three years. It also depends on coaching, and the Packers haven't had good special teams coaching at all the last two years. Average net and gross yards aren't irrelevant stats, you just need other stats for context. (He wasn't near the top in inside 20% in 2019, however. I can't find a hang time stat for 2019 but I'd venture to guess he wasn't near the top). Yes, like all professional punters he does have the leg strength to boom some kicks, and as the eye test will tell you he has some that go the other way. His 23 yard shank in San Francisco was a really bad result at a really bad time and set up a 17-0 49er lead. We saw that all too often in the second half. I don't buy into the "weather" thing much, Green Bay is not the only in climate weather city in the NFL in late months. Scott plays one third of his divisional games in domes, and we played two home games after November 10th this year. He was really bad in the second half and it had nothing to do with the weather. Again, Scott will be back but I would certainly disagree with any argument that he was anything close to good in 2019. Your point about Kern is understood but I don't blame Denver in retrospect for moving on. 5 years of bad results is a really long time to wait on a punter.

Of course I thought they'd improve. It would have been hard not to. They weren't really a 6-9-1 bad roster the year before. 7 wins is a great improvement, but it's a relative one. Every team is a few good or bad bounces between 6-10 or 10-6. Usually those good bounces won't get you to 13-3, but this was an unusual year. The defense definitely improved significantly, but they did have glaring and exploitative flaws that reared their ugly head on Sunday. I'm not sure if their second half improvement was legitimate or more the result of a string of very bad offenses with one or two exceptions. I'm not sure Pettine is the right guy moving forward or not. He looked massively outcoached on Sunday. The offense has been the exact same inconsistent outfit since the 2015 season (with the exception of the run the table stretch in 2016). Long gone are the days of them imposing their will on anyone. I don't know if it's just a result of neglect from having to invest so much in the defense, but if they're going to have time left they need immediate and significant additions to the offense.

For sure. Now off to Paris.

15 turnovers in one half? Come on. Don't pull this crap today, Bucks. Nobody is in the mood for it.

The Bucks are definitely in the best spot right now, but they still have to do it. They could mow everyone over and win it all and Giannis signs after. They could get there and fall to the Clips or Lakers. Or they could get upset in the ECF and Giannis could not sign his extension. I don't even like to think about that, but all these are possible. The Brewers have done a remarkable job staying competitive in the Stearns era, but they are always going to be fighting an uphill battle and they're just never going to be the favorite. The best that we can hope for is that they continue to find a way to get in and maybe, just maybe go into a postseason playing their best ball and go on a run. I really don't know what to think of the Packers. With the key piece of their team being a 36 year old QB with his best years behind him, it's tough for me to think of them as a team on the rise. They got a ton of breaks this year, and a 10-6 record and divisional round exit wouldn't shock me next year. They've got a lot of weaknesses to fix, and it's hard to keep plugging holes as they keep showing up. They will probably do everything they can to put a championship team around Rodgers while they still have time, which is great. But the 49ers look like a really tough out for the foreseeable future in the NFC unless they really get bit by the injury bug or otherwise have bad luck.

It would feel fantastic if the Bucks win the NBA title followed by Giannis signing the supermax. I know it wouldn't be the same for all Wisconsin sports fans who maybe just follow the Bucks from a distance, but for me indeed it would be breaking a glass ceiling.

I think enjoying and appreciating the journey is crucial, for sure. But I also believe you have to break through and win it all once in awhile to make up for how last night felt. To make up for how Seattle felt. To make up for how it felt when Yasiel Pulg homered in Game 7 of the NLCS. Even it is just a few times in your lifetime, you have to have those moments to appreciate greatness and appreciate being the 1 team out of 30-32 that rose above everyone else to make up for all the times you fell short.

Not picking on you in general but I never get this kind of thinking by fans and WI fans in general. Why? You have to enjoy the journey, but it is important to win championships once in awhile too. Otherwise, what are you working toward?

I really need the Bucks to win an NBA title this year. The state of Wisconsin needs it.

Sounds like the Brewers may have an offer on the table for Strop. Pretty good bounceback candidate. Worst case scenario should be a back end of the pen guy, best case he rebounds into a late inning option. He was remarkably consistent from '14 to '18. https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2020/01/pedro-strop-rumors-cubs-brewers-marlins-rangers.html

I know I'll be crucified for saying it, and I know it will never happen, but if a team like the Chargers came around and offered their next 3 to 4 first round picks for Rodgers, I'd pull the trigger and start over.

Yeah, there was really no need to rub salt in the wound. You kicked our asses again, congrats. Try to be gracious about it for once. What did he expect us to say? "Oh great, 49ers again, here comes another ass kicking."

Richard Sherman heard the chatter from the Green Bay Packers locker room earlier in the week heading into the rematch against the San Francisco 49ers, but the sequel was just like the original -- a box office flop for Green Bay. "There was a ton of confidence," Sherman said, via NFL.com. "We took our starters out in the fourth quarter of that game. It could have been worse, and we knew that. I think they were trying to pump themselves up. They were trying to hype themselves up, talking about a revenge game. Like they weren't coming in with an advantage into that game. We were coming off of a battle with Seattle, and they were coming off a bye (entering the Week 12 game). So saying payback. Saying when you stay ready you don't got to get ready. "They were trying to hype themselves up like 'man, we're going to be ready this time.' If you weren't ready the first time and that was in front of the whole country, that was a Sunday night game. It wasn't like it was a middle-of-the-day 1 o'clock game. It kind of bothered us a little bit. Like 'oh my god, we're going to be ready this time.' Like do you not take the game seriously? When do we not take games seriously in the regular season? If you would have won that one-seed, we would have been going to Green Bay. But, hey, it wasn't that big of a deal you were going to be ready this time."

What evidence do you have that our WRs are as bad as everyone says they are? I'm tired of this narrative. I see Lazar and Kumerow make athletic plays all over the field when they get a target. If they are so bad that they can't properly run a route and then don't deserve targets they should be cut. Every other team is capable of fielding a WR corps and we have a QB that used to be able to spread the ball around. And let me clarify my argument about Rodgers. Do I not think he was a top 10 QB in the 2019 regular season. I do not expect him to be a top 10 QB in 2020 without some changes made. Do I think he is one of the best 10 QBs in football currently- yes, without a doubt. But the results were not there and will not be there if we do the exact same thing next year. If you think Rodgers without a doubt is one of the top 10 best QBs in football but you also think our WRs are good enough, that doesn't really jive. You say he won't be a top 10 QB in 2020 without some changes, that's fair. What do you think needs to change?

If he puts up the same numbers he did in 2019 over the next two years, his next deal is going to be for the minimum. I don't disagree with you that he needs to improve. Just that his spot on the 2020 roster is almost assuredly secure. I agree with your last sentence for sure. Maybe not for the exact same reasons but I would be very surprised if they moved on from Scott.

I don't think I'm advocating a tear down. I think we'll draft a WR high and add a pretty decent one in free agency. Maybe take another late one as a project guy. That's three additions, minimum of two. Adams is obviously back and I think Lazard did enough to be pretty safe. That leaves one or two spots for Kumerow, MVS and ESB. I think Rodgers has a pretty good relationship with Kumerow which factors in, I see him as an ideal #5 receiver. They're certainly not going to keep more than 6 receivers I wouldn't think. At some point, it becomes a numbers game. MVS had his shot to shine this year and didn't do enough. Maybe ESB gets the benefit of the doubt because of the injury but late round receivers aren't really guaranteed that benefit. Again if I'm a betting man I'd expect one, but not both of MVS and ESB back in 2020. But I wouldn't see it as a big surprise if neither were.

But if he continued this level of production over 4 seasons he wouldn't be signed back for a FA punter deal (usually starting around 2M a year), that's all I was saying. He's cheap and yes they spent a draft pick on him which factors in and makes it easier to bring him back by default. But every punter at this level has obvious leg talent or they wouldn't be here.

So you're going to give up on the guy because he lost a season due to injury? And yeah, 21 catches and 328 yards as a rookie 6th round pick is a good thing, not the bad thing you seem to be making it out as. If the talent around him improves enough to push him off the depth chart, then yeah. He's got talent, but it's a 6th round pick. Jeff Janis had talent. Jared Abbrederis had talent. Trevor Davis had talent. J'Mon Moore had talent. Late round WRs with "talent" are a dime a dozen. ESB is a guy you can certainly invite to training camp and see what happens, but there's nothing special about him where you pencil him into the depth chart for 2020. The last thing we need is for our WR room in '20 to become a repeat of '19.

Or .... you coach him up and hope he improves his consistency. I mean, you know he has a huge leg, and he's only 24 years old. He was one of the top punters in the league the first half of the year, then hit a wall for some reason. It's obvious that the talent is there, though. Well like I said that's probably what they're going to do for two more seasons because he's cheap and on a rookie deal. But at some point at that position the results need to be there. Hasn't been good enough through his first two seasons.

No one talks about the punter, but JK Scott was quietly one of the worst in the NFL in 2019. 30th in gross average, 28th in net average. My guess is he is back because he's on a rookie deal and cheap but he's definitely a guy you just let walk after his rookie deal expires.

I see plenty of possibility that neither is back. This was the important year for both and is why we proceeded with the WR group we had and that proved to be a mistake. I think Lazard will be back as maybe a #4 and Kumerow as a #5. Allison for sure is history. I think taking a WR high and maybe adding a veteran like Cobb makes sense this offseason for our 2 and 3. Smart money says one is back but I could us moving on from MVS and ESB both. MVS's disappearing act in the 2nd half of the season would be some justification for moving on from him, but I doubt they just cut bait on him unless they decide to totally remake that WR room. St. Brown stands even less of a chance of being let go, though. Of the 3 WRs they drafted, he probably looked the most complete in 2018, and obviously 2019 was lost to injury. He isn't going anywhere. I mean, what would be your justification for moving on from him? My justification would be that he's a 6th round pick with 21 catches and 328 yards in 12 games over 2 seasons in his professional career and we improved the WR room enough to keep him on the outside looking in. It's not hard to justify. It wouldn't be like giving up on Davante Adams after 2 seasons. St. Brown might be back, but it's not a foregone conclusion.

I see plenty of possibility that neither is back. This was the important year for both and is why we proceeded with the WR group we had and that proved to be a mistake. I think Lazard will be back as maybe a #4 and Kumerow as a #5. Allison for sure is history. I think taking a WR high and maybe adding a veteran like Cobb makes sense this offseason for our 2 and 3. Smart money says one is back but I could us moving on from MVS and ESB both.