Play the Packer GM (Thanksgiving version)

[go pak go]

So we're probably stuck with Savage? Damn.

It doesn't make any sense to cut him. He could be an $8 million backup if anything...

How much was HaHa on the books for before we were able to dump him?

The difference with Savage and Haha is Savage is 100% dead cap. We picked up his 5th year option which means 100% of his contract is guaranteed. So a cut still means we have to pay him and we eat 100% of his contract.

So as Pckfn23 stated, it actually saves the Packers money to have him as a backup compared to paying someone else a minimum salary to replace Savage as a backup.

[Yoop]

If you are the GM you don't need to see Love play. As fans we want to see him play because we don't see his training reps scout team etc.

Love is not the saviour. If he was Rodgers wouldn't be here just like how Favre was pushed out when needed to get Rodgers on the field.

"Favre was pushed out" That's an...interesting way to put it. I remember it very differently.

Favre was the one who retired/quit. If he didn't he would have been our starter in 2008. But once he did TT and MM knew what they had in AR (I suspect Brett did too and that was one of the reasons why he "retired") so when Favre decided to return then they traded him to NY.

Pugger Ted still took Brohm in the 2nd and Finley later to cover for Rodgers just in case, again the QB position is hugely mental, and till your up against a tough defense when the games count it's hard to be sure what kind of QB you have, obviously Rodgers had great college tape and success, but so have many that didn't do that well as a pro. I'd like to see how Love does no matter what happens going forward, we have to plan for post Rodgers, I'd hate to have to spend a high first round pick on a QB, but if Love doesn't impress we may have to.

[Acrobat]

"Favre was pushed out" That's an...interesting way to put it. I remember it very differently.

Favre was the one who retired/quit. If he didn't he would have been our starter in 2008. But once he did TT and MM knew what they had in AR (I suspect Brett did too and that was one of the reasons why he "retired") so when Favre decided to return then they traded him to NY.

Pugger Ted still took Brohm in the 2nd and Finley later to cover for Rodgers just in case, again the QB position is hugely mental, and till your up against a tough defense when the games count it's hard to be sure what kind of QB you have, obviously Rodgers had great college tape and success, but so have many that didn't do that well as a pro. I'd like to see how Love does no matter what happens going forward, we have to plan for post Rodgers, I'd hate to have to spend a high first round pick on a QB, but if Love doesn't impress we may have to.

I was fine with the Brohm pick because even though they knew what they had, you just never know what can happen. Brohm was designed to be a security blanket in case things just didn't work out. Obviously things did work out and Flynn ended up being the better backup anyway, but I had no problem with the pick.

[Yoop]

It doesn't make any sense to cut him. He could be an $8 million backup if anything...

How much was HaHa on the books for before we were able to dump him?

The difference with Savage and Haha is Savage is 100% dead cap. We picked up his 5th year option which means 100% of his contract is guaranteed. So a cut still means we have to pay him and we eat 100% of his contract.

So as Pckfn23 stated, it actually saves the Packers money to have him as a backup compared to paying someone else a minimum salary to replace Savage as a backup.

right, might as well keep him, the Savage decline is hard to figure out, the last half of 2020 he was a highly rated safety, about 10 PD's, 3 or 4 picks, about 35 tackles or so the last 8 or so games, mostly as a rover, it's why he was mentioned to become the Star Nickel, then we fired Pettine, and under Barry looks basically like a different player, now we see him struggle at nickel, Pettines 2 high, cover 2 was perfect for both Savage and Amos, halving the field gives each a smaller coverage zone, to me it was a mistake to fire Pettine, Barry was handed some good talent, gotten more and his defense is worse then last year, we spe3nt a lot on Savage, more on Alexander, under Barry, Both aren't as good as they where with Pettine, our ILB's are doing better though, thats a mild form of sarcasm

[lupedafiasco]

How much was HaHa on the books for before we were able to dump him?

The difference with Savage and Haha is Savage is 100% dead cap. We picked up his 5th year option which means 100% of his contract is guaranteed. So a cut still means we have to pay him and we eat 100% of his contract.

So as Pckfn23 stated, it actually saves the Packers money to have him as a backup compared to paying someone else a minimum salary to replace Savage as a backup.

right, might as well keep him, the Savage decline is hard to figure out, the last half of 2020 he was a highly rated safety, about 10 PD's, 3 or 4 picks, about 35 tackles or so the last 8 or so games, mostly as a rover, it's why he was mentioned to become the Star Nickel, then we fired Pettine, and under Barry looks basically like a different player, now we see him struggle at nickel, Pettines 2 high, cover 2 was perfect for both Savage and Amos, halving the field gives each a smaller coverage zone, to me it was a mistake to fire Pettine, Barry was handed some good talent, gotten more and his defense is worse then last year, we spe3nt a lot on Savage, more on Alexander, under Barry, Both aren't as good as they where with Pettine, our ILB's are doing better though, thats a mild form of sarcasm

The Savage decline isn’t that deep.

He doesn’t have the defensive mentality to play in the NFL. He doesn’t want to tackle or be physical or all for that matter. First time I saw it and I knew he was going to be a bum right then and there was when he attempted a tackled of Dalvin Cook as the last line of defense and in was the most blatant flop I ever saw. He pretty much dived way early too avoid contact. I used to see this from HS players that only wanted to play offense. He doesn’t want to hit.

The other thing is he’s always been pretty bad man to man which was one of his strengths out of college.

Said it then and it’s more clear now. He was a massive reach and wasn’t even the best player at his position. I also said they shouldn’t have paid his option. I would have forced him into a contract season and made him play hard. But here we are rewarding mediocrity, a Packers staple.

[Pckfn23]

http://packersnews.net/phpbb3/viewtopic ... lit=Savage

Massive reach... that definitely wasn't said at the time.

[LombardiTime]

Just like with HaHa Clinton-Dix in his first season and a half in Green, I thought Savage might really become a player for the Packers.

Heck, I was so optimistic (or delusional) about the defense heading into this season that I still held out hope he'd be player for us in 2022. That Gutekunst picked up his 5th year option gave me even more hope he truly was going to come on. It often takes time at safety.

Sadly, Savage has regressed so badly and he so obviously avoids contact that he is the latest embodiment of the Pack's soft approach to playing defense. That he got rewarded by having his 5th year option picked up sends a bad signal to everyone.

And whether or not the Savage selection was a massive reach at the time or not, it has certainly been a costly one for the Packers.

Not only did Gutekunst give up two 4th round picks to move up and take Savage, but he could have stayed at the end of the first round and taken a Deebo Samuel or a DK Metcalf or an AJ Brown at WR.

There are some draft misses that hurt more than others and the trade up to take Savage is a miss that really, really hurt this team.

[NCF]

http://packersnews.net/phpbb3/viewtopic ... lit=Savage

Massive reach... that definitely wasn't said at the time.

Yeah, not a massive reach... think who you are talking to. But, in lupe's defense, it certainly wasn't a value pick, either. Especially when we could have stood pat and had our pick of Savage or Juan Thornhill, whoever was left. I think I remember reading something that said Savage would have been gone if we didn't trade up, but to me, and many, Thornhill would have been a really nice consolation prize.

[NCF]

I think the talent across the entire defense is better than they have played (obviously) and I think there has been a mismanagement of that side of the ball that goes all the way back to McCarthy and Capers. All of the wasted resources on the defensive side of the ball over the years and I think the biggest issue is that the FO and Coaching Staff can't agree on a vision for how to play defense.

After the Packers won the Super Bowl, they began doubling-down on a defensive strategy that had already shown signs of being outdated. Then they changed what they were looking for along the DL and EDGE positions. When that failed, they tweaked the scheme but then didn't have the players for it. Then they invested in players and fired Capers. Pettine inherited a mess and, again, they invested in new players until they got sick of that scheme. Then the word of the day was the need to get faster and more athletic. Once again, the scheme seems broken.

If LaFleur is to be here for the foreseeable future, I would like to see him invest in the defensive strategy he prefers, hires a guy that can make it happen, and the FO drafts guys to fit that strategy and scheme. You can't change every two years and expect to fix things. That is why teams fail to turn around their franchises and contrarily I think it's also a reason the Packers offense has been so good over the last 30 years. There is a lot of continuity and subtle changes from Holmgren to Mac to LaFleur, but a general vision that allows the FO and coaching staff to be in sync. That is where we need to get on the defensive side of the ball.

[Pckfn23]

http://packersnews.net/phpbb3/viewtopic ... lit=Savage

Massive reach... that definitely wasn't said at the time.

Yeah, not a massive reach... think who you are talking to. But, in lupe's defense, it certainly wasn't a value pick, either. Especially when we could have stood pat and had our pick of Savage or Juan Thornhill, whoever was left. I think I remember reading something that said Savage would have been gone if we didn't trade up, but to me, and many, Thornhill would have been a really nice consolation prize.

Ya, 100% not a value pick. Trading up almost always doesn't equate to value. I agree, would have rather waited and got 1 of the 2 as well. Using hindsight however, Thornhill hasn't been good either.

[Scott4Pack]

It doesn't make any sense to cut him. He could be an $8 million backup if anything...

How much was HaHa on the books for before we were able to dump him?

The difference with Savage and Haha is Savage is 100% dead cap. We picked up his 5th year option which means 100% of his contract is guaranteed. So a cut still means we have to pay him and we eat 100% of his contract.

So as Pckfn23 stated, it actually saves the Packers money to have him as a backup compared to paying someone else a minimum salary to replace Savage as a backup.

…or to replace Savage as a starter.
:-)

[go pak go]

How much was HaHa on the books for before we were able to dump him?

The difference with Savage and Haha is Savage is 100% dead cap. We picked up his 5th year option which means 100% of his contract is guaranteed. So a cut still means we have to pay him and we eat 100% of his contract.

So as Pckfn23 stated, it actually saves the Packers money to have him as a backup compared to paying someone else a minimum salary to replace Savage as a backup.

…or to replace Savage as a starter.
:-)

That's a coaching decision. Not a personnel decision

[Scott4Pack]

I’m not sure if it’s the holiday sentiment or something else, but part of me thinks that I’m being overly-hard on Aaron Rodgers. So, I am willing to discuss that.

I am disappointed in Aaron’s performance this year. But I think that he would say the same thing, if he’s just evaluating himself. But the question that I consider is whether this is because of his aging and “natural” declining of skill, or is it because of injury, or because of talent around him (including coaching), or some combination of all of those?

First, I will say that I do feel that if Green Bay goes into 2023 with him as starter and keeps our current RBs and young WRs (I include Lazard in that, but not sure about Cobb), I do think that Aaron can play very well next year. If he stays healthy… Yeah, he still needs a TE, but the good ones are harder to find than we care to admit. Yeah, he needs one or two veteran WRs added to the team. And I do feel that Guty will make one of them happen. They likely draft another WR in the first three rounds. Maybe two. So, assuming the offense has a more consistent year around him in 2023, he can still play real well most of the year.

That brings up my second point. Cold weather. It was my thought before this season ever began that Aaron is having a harder time playing in the cold. And I can accept this to be true for most older vets. That belief hasn’t changed one bit. I think of our loss to the Titans and two badly missed crunch time throws in this. In 2023, even if we play very well over the entire regular season, we will need to depend upon him less going into December and January. (Yes, we WILL go into the playoffs!)

So how does this workout? If I am GM, I think it plays out like this.
1. Support every way that you can help Aaron be healthy. That includes giving Love some substantial playing time once we are eliminated (officially) from 2022 playoffs. Yes, give Aaron the bulk of the snaps. (Please no discussion about tanking. Not being considered here at all.)
2. Get a new DC. Even if I didn’t think about firing our current guy before this point, I would now. If I am serious about January football next year, I must have a new scheme on defense. And if MLF is against that, then that is grounds enough to fire him too. I love the guy, but I need confidence NOW about the defense in 2023, in addition to drafting.
3. Draft for talent on offense. The D has gotten the bulk of the priority in recent drafts. But we need more high level depth on offense and the draft is how 85% of that will happen. Get two more WRs, one more RB, one or two TEs that can handle the ball. Add the typical third round OLineman and another depth guy.
4. Find a FA guy at WR. We can make one significant FA addition on offense. The veteran presence is needed. Maybe Cobb can still gut out another season. I don’t mind if he does. But we need another veteran WR. Maybe a TE would suffice, if the right guy. BTW, Bobby Tonyan is only good enough if he’s the fourth/fifth option in the passing game.
5. Keep Bahktiari healthy. Maybe this is hard at his current age. But he clearly keeps Aaron clean. And I don’t know that Jenkins or Nehman can do nearly as well.

That probably isn’t all. But I’m getting more used to the idea that Aaron is our QB1 in 2023 unless we don’t make the playoffs. We need to plan accordingly.

[bud fox]

If you are the GM you don't need to see Love play. As fans we want to see him play because we don't see his training reps scout team etc.

Love is not the saviour. If he was Rodgers wouldn't be here just like how Favre was pushed out when needed to get Rodgers on the field.

"Favre was pushed out" That's an...interesting way to put it. I remember it very differently.

They packed up his locker and said they will send it to him.

[lupedafiasco]

http://packersnews.net/phpbb3/viewtopic ... lit=Savage

Massive reach... that definitely wasn't said at the time.

Yeah, not a massive reach... think who you are talking to. But, in lupe's defense, it certainly wasn't a value pick, either. Especially when we could have stood pat and had our pick of Savage or Juan Thornhill, whoever was left. I think I remember reading something that said Savage would have been gone if we didn't trade up, but to me, and many, Thornhill would have been a really nice consolation prize.

The Seahawks said they would have taken Savage if they didn’t trade the pick. To me that’s the same thing as Justin Harrell. I don’t care if someone else was going to reach. Let that team do the stupid move and take bad value.

[wallyuwl]

If LaFleur is to be here for the foreseeable future, I would like to see him invest in the defensive strategy he prefers, hires a guy that can make it happen,

He had a chance to do this and just hired his buddy instead of the best coach he could find.

[Pckfn23]

If LaFleur is to be here for the foreseeable future, I would like to see him invest in the defensive strategy he prefers, hires a guy that can make it happen,

He had a chance to do this and just hired his buddy instead of the best coach he could find.

Joe Barry was his buddy? I thought they had very little connection before the hire?

The one thing that is concerning is that LaFleur talked at length about how Barry had the aggressive philosophy he preferred, but now is not implementing that. LaFleur even calling that out in press conferences.

[lupedafiasco]

If LaFleur is to be here for the foreseeable future, I would like to see him invest in the defensive strategy he prefers, hires a guy that can make it happen,

He had a chance to do this and just hired his buddy instead of the best coach he could find.

I think if you keep LaFleur here you have to strip his coordinator privileges which is pretty damning. Not only did he hire the worst STs coordinator of all time in Drayton, he kept him on the staff the entire year. Now he hires Barry and it’s looking like he will keep him the entire year as well.

I don’t understand why you would hire someone with a history of failure. I would much rather take a shot on an up and comer than take someone I know who sucks.

[Pckfn23]

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/ ... cCaMi0.htm

[Yoop]

If LaFleur is to be here for the foreseeable future, I would like to see him invest in the defensive strategy he prefers, hires a guy that can make it happen,

He had a chance to do this and just hired his buddy instead of the best coach he could find.

I think if you keep LaFleur here you have to strip his coordinator privileges which is pretty damning. Not only did he hire the worst STs coordinator of all time in Drayton, he kept him on the staff the entire year. Now he hires Barry and it’s looking like he will keep him the entire year as well.

I don’t understand why you would hire someone with a history of failure. I would much rather take a shot on an up and comer than take someone I know who sucks.

first of all Savage was a highly thought of Safety in that draft class, and was showing it his second season with Pettine, since Barry he looks like a after thought in this defense, at times this season Savage has looked like a quitter, the team may have picked up his 5th year option, but Savage plays like a player that wants a trade, and how can you blame him, stuck in a cover 3 and single high zone scheme he's like a fish out of water.

as to Lafluer's cord hires, a lot was said about the Packers opening the pocket book to lure in Bisaccia this season, so does Lafluer get the same open wallet to hire cords? I doubt that very much, and if thats the case then Lafluer is only allowed to hire cords that will accept what the team will pay, the Stenavich promotion wreaks of this, and so does the Barry hire, so does Leonard turning down the offer.

all this talk of Lafluer being a lousy coach is mostly based on the presumption that this guy or that guy would have been better, and the nostalgia of prior coaches, thing is a coach is only as good as the players he has to work with and his subordinate assistants ( teachers) to mold those players, McCarthy's schemes failed because of the lack of quality receivers, same thing with Lafluer.

people are always looking for someone to blame, problem is they never look high enough.