From Lambeau to Lombardi, Holmgren, McCarthy and LaFleur and from Starr to Favre, Rodgers and now Jordan Love we’re talking Super Bowl Champion Green Bay Packers football. This Packers Forum is the place to talk NFL football and everything Packers. So, pull up a keyboard, make yourself at home and let’s talk some Packers football.
By my count the team has 51 players on the roster on their website.
That 51 still includes Shepherd and does not include Austin, so that balances out. The DT Rush is included.
That leaves 2 spots (which we've left open a decent amount) which could indicate a) we're working on another signing, and/or b) we're looking to bring someone back from IR.
Maybe the rookie OG is going to be activated now that he's practicing. Maybe they're saving space for Adams' return in a week or two (don't remember when he was IRed)
Maybe we're signing Kenny Stills
Kenny Stills= Andre Rison, bring that guy aboard, not every game will be as easy as this Chicago stomping
By my count the team has 51 players on the roster on their website.
That 51 still includes Shepherd and does not include Austin, so that balances out. The DT Rush is included.
That leaves 2 spots (which we've left open a decent amount) which could indicate a) we're working on another signing, and/or b) we're looking to bring someone back from IR.
Maybe the rookie OG is going to be activated now that he's practicing. Maybe they're saving space for Adams' return in a week or two (don't remember when he was IRed)
Maybe we're signing Kenny Stills
Barnes and Dillon need to be reactivated from the COVID list.
Good piece. Gets you pumped up about Love. I haven't finished reading it yet, only through the first Love part. But guessing the rest is worth it as well.
Good piece. Gets you pumped up about Love. I haven't finished reading it yet, only through the first Love part. But guessing the rest is worth it as well.
I was just coming to post this. Nice article. Really not anything new, but laid out nicely and in good depth. Also, as much as I read up on Jordan Love after The Draft, I never came across that bit about his father. That has to be incredibly tough on a kid, especially a teenager.
Good piece. Gets you pumped up about Love. I haven't finished reading it yet, only through the first Love part. But guessing the rest is worth it as well.
Very good read, thanks for bringing it! Though I was already pretty pumped about Love and Dillon. Interesting they went with Sternberger in there as well, along with Lazard.
Surprised they didn't talk about the changes on the OLine when talking about a physical mentality, but it's already a long, full piece, as it is.
If Dillon is cleared from the COVID list and gets some good practice in, I'm kinda excited to spring him late in the game like Starks (except much better). They used him a little as a closer in one of our early games and it'd be fun to get him in there with fresh legs in the 4th quarter in some 4-minute offense scenarios.
Good piece. Gets you pumped up about Love. I haven't finished reading it yet, only through the first Love part. But guessing the rest is worth it as well.
Actually finished that and came here to share, it is really well done. Super stoked about the future again, when you get caught up in our season right now that feeling kind of goes away. I have full faith in the men in that locker room for the future. Hopefully lightning can strike three times in a row.
Wisconsin Cheese Is Better Than California Cheese!
Good piece. Gets you pumped up about Love. I haven't finished reading it yet, only through the first Love part. But guessing the rest is worth it as well.
Good article!
Interesting bits about Love I hadn't heard before:
Ex-Utah State offensive coordinator David Yost estimates he talked to six or seven teams pre-draft, but only one head coach: LaFleur.
...
Yost made it clear that Love had the freedom to change plays at the line. Love always had multiple options off whatever plays were sent it. Yost was more so suggesting plays and Love used his brain.
Sternberger's recollection of his game against Seattle's Clowney is pretty funny!
“We didn’t lose the game; we just ran out of time.”
- Vince Lombardi
"What makes LaFleur’s scheme unique, he explains, is that everything looks the same for “a solid second or a half” after the snap. The Packers could be running eight different plays out of what you see in those 1 ½ seconds — LaFleur’s disguises keep all 11 defenders guessing. There’s no way a cornerback can tell what Lazard is doing because Lazard prides himself on his “strike step” five strides into a route. He could break in, break out, stop, go deep. He wants the corner questioning where he’s going every time. He tries to be as “fluent” and “indistinguishable” as possible."
Good piece. Gets you pumped up about Love. I haven't finished reading it yet, only through the first Love part. But guessing the rest is worth it as well.
Meh. I mean no one is gonna know until he gets in there. Without a preseason we’ve got literally nothing to go on. You can take what you want from his former coach and receiver but what are they supposed to say other than be supportive of a friend? Same goes for ML and BG. They obviously believe in him and if anything he’s shown proves that he’s a mistake they aren’t going to own up to it this early.
No one can convince me this was a good choice. If you wanted to get yourself something to develop you could have done that later. This pick could have been put to better use. Same goes for Dillon. Yeah get the allure of taking a big back with those numbers. That’s rare, but you can get a back anywhere.
The Jace Sternberger part was hilarious with Clowney. Pretty awful about his childhood friend.
No one can convince me this was a good choice. If you wanted to get yourself something to develop you could have done that later.
I mean this is pretty stupid. If Jordan Love is a great quarterback it will be a great choice no matter how early he is taken in draft order or years order.
You can't just draft another Aaron Rodgers because they don't exist. You can't draft another Pat Mahomes because they don't exist.
You act as if quarterbacks are just ready for the picking every year which is just not true. Absolutely Love could be a bad pick because the player doesn't work out, but the timing of the pick shouldn't be a factor if the player is fantastic.
Going from Favre to Rodgers should have taught us this by now. Sure we could have picked a "Matt Ryan" in a 2021 or 2022 draft(which we actually couldn't because he would have been too high) but Matt Ryan is not as good of a player or draft pick as Rodgers was. Or we could have placed our bet on a Day 2 or 3 guy like the Eagles did with Kolb back in the day, but that too didn't work out.
If Jordan Love ever brings a Lombardi Trophy back to 1265 Lombardi, it will be a fantastic pick. Period.
But in the meantime, it is too early to judge any of this. Let it play out.
I mean my goodness. Look just at our own division since 1990. No team in our division has ever had a consistent franchise quarterback outside of Matthew Stafford. That is 30 years with Jay Cutler, Brad Johnson and Kirk Cousins being the closest thing to a franchise quarterback of longer than 3 years for any team in the NFC North/Central. That's how hard it is to find these guys.
So by all means, if Love turns out, we are the biggest envy of the league for having 40+ years of franchise quarterback play.
No one can convince me this was a good choice. If you wanted to get yourself something to develop you could have done that later.
I mean this is pretty stupid. If Jordan Love is a great quarterback it will be a great choice no matter how early he is taken in draft order or years order.
You can't just draft another Aaron Rodgers because they don't exist. You can't draft another Pat Mahomes because they don't exist.
You act as if quarterbacks are just ready for the picking every year which is just not true. Absolutely Love could be a bad pick because the player doesn't work out, but the timing of the pick shouldn't be a factor if the player is fantastic.
Going from Favre to Rodgers should have taught us this by now. Sure we could have picked a "Matt Ryan" in a 2021 or 2022 draft(which we actually couldn't because he would have been too high) but Matt Ryan is not as good of a player or draft pick as Rodgers was. Or we could have placed our bet on a Day 2 or 3 guy like the Eagles did with Kolb back in the day, but that too didn't work out.
If Jordan Love ever brings a Lombardi Trophy back to 1265 Lombardi, it will be a fantastic pick. Period.
But in the meantime, it is too early to judge any of this. Let it play out.
I mean my goodness. Look just at our own division since 1990. No team in our division has ever had a consistent franchise quarterback outside of Matthew Stafford. That is 30 years with Jay Cutler, Brad Johnson and Kirk Cousins being the closest thing to a franchise quarterback of longer than 3 years for any team in the NFC North/Central. That's how hard it is to find these guys.
So by all means, if Love turns out, we are the biggest envy of the league for having 40+ years of franchise quarterback play.
You keep saying if with Jordan Love. Which is cool. He could be good. He could be ass booty butt cheeks. Rodgers is a guarantee. We already have a good QB.
Again if you wanted a QB to develop over a long period of time take one in the middle rounds. Work on him and see what you have over the coming years. The Favre and Rodgers comparison is irrelevant because they arent the same. Favre was talking retirement. Rodgers has never done that. Rodgers was the 2nd best QB in his class and some people considered him the 1st overall pick. Jordan Love was the 4th QB in his class. Rodgers fell to the Packers, no trade required. The Packers moved up for Love. Nothing about these scenarios are the same other than a QB being drafted in the 1st round.
Again if you wanted a QB to develop over a long period of time take one in the middle rounds. Work on him and see what you have over the coming years. The Favre and Rodgers comparison is irrelevant because they arent the same. Favre was talking retirement. Rodgers has never done that. Rodgers was the 2nd best QB in his class and some people considered him the 1st overall pick. Jordan Love was the 4th QB in his class. Rodgers fell to the Packers, no trade required. The Packers moved up for Love. Nothing about these scenarios are the same other than a QB being drafted in the 1st round.
Yes, we all remember Brunell and Hasselbeck, but that was another era. In more recent times, they failed miserably with Hundley, Coleman, Brohm, and Martin. I don't know how to classify Flynn; his arm & mobility probably weren't good enough to be a long-term starter.
In my opinion, the front office knows that mid-round guys rarely pan out, so they improved their odds and used an early pick. With Rodgers at age 36 (now 37), and with an injury history, they have no way of knowing how long they really have to replace him. If Love is even Stafford/Romo caliber, it's a huge win for the team long term.
“We didn’t lose the game; we just ran out of time.”
- Vince Lombardi
The article is good and makes me root for him, but I am ~kinda~ with lupe, tbh. I would have rather tried to go "all-in" on this year and the next couple as our championship window had IMO just opened -- yes, even if that means not taking a passer with Franchise QB talent, and only really entertain the idea of a successor just before the window comes to a close.
I also feel like this was too early, even by "better to be too early"-standards, but even if it wasn't... I would have rather gone all-in. No right or wrong approach, just a philosophical difference. I wasn't even gung-ho about getting Rodgers another WR like most who hated this pick.
“Most other nations don't allow a terrorist to be their leader.”
“... Yet so many allow their leaders to be terrorists.”—Magneto
Does going "all-in" really work? In the last 20 years, I can only think of the Peyton Manning era Broncos off hand, but that almost blew up in their faces with Manning going down hill so quickly. Then they (predictably) followed that championship up with years of losing - with no end in sight.
“We didn’t lose the game; we just ran out of time.”
- Vince Lombardi
Does going "all-in" really work? In the last 20 years, I can only think of the Peyton Manning era Broncos off hand, but that almost blew up in their faces with Manning going down hill so quickly. Then they (predictably) followed that championship up with years of losing - with no end in sight.
It's a risky move, I am not denying that, but it's a risk I would take under the present circumstances. Besides, the route we took also risks a similar nosedive scenario if it does not work out (i.e. the QBotF busts), so is it really appreciably riskier than what we did? Maybe somewhat, but not enough for me to not take a leap of faith for the Lombardi trophy.
“Most other nations don't allow a terrorist to be their leader.”
“... Yet so many allow their leaders to be terrorists.”—Magneto
how does moving up a bit more for a player likely to help the team as a rookie versus a bench warmer for 3 or 4 years translate to going all in, what it says to me is the FO recognizes short comings that could hinder a deep play off run and fixed it.
2 years ago Gutey traded up to slot 21 to take Savage, this year he wouldn't move up for a blue chip receiver to help Rodgers, instead he moved up for his replacement, if this offense struggles to out score opponents in the play offs Guty will be to blame.
and my comments have nothing to do with Love as a person, simply our use of our #1 pick.
Does going "all-in" really work? In the last 20 years, I can only think of the Peyton Manning era Broncos off hand, but that almost blew up in their faces with Manning going down hill so quickly. Then they (predictably) followed that championship up with years of losing - with no end in sight.
It's a risky move, I am not denying that, but it's a risk I would take under the present circumstances. Besides, the route we took also risks a similar nosedive scenario if it does not work out (i.e. the QBotF busts), so is it really appreciably riskier than what we did? Maybe somewhat, but not enough for me to not take a leap of faith for the Lombardi trophy.
Using a draft pick on a player who has a chance to participate is hardly going all in. Your draft picks are gambles. Once you've used them or traded them away. You're stuck with what you took. We've watched duh bares choosing players before the draft and spending crazy draft capital to aquire that specific player. They still suck. We usually let the draft come to us. Taking the best on the board or moving back.
If we used our #1 pick for another position, not even on an immediate need and saved the 4th for somebody else you'd still expect some contributions. You are still looking at these guys as long term players but they can help in the short term. I usually expect two picks out of the top four to contribute. Not necessarily start but be good enough to get on the field and show some potential. In case of injury or by years end be ready to help in the final push. We've only had one rookie with signifcant playing time Runyan, that is tough unless you've brought in some FAs to fill the gap. Hopefully our recent pick ups will step up.
Picking Bulaga in the 1st rnd. of 2010 wasn't going all in. You're filling a long term need. But when Tauscher went down after four games we needed him. He played like the rookie he was until the playoffs, and then he was lights out. He's the kind of unexpected contributor that can put you over the top. We got a lot of work out of Rs in 2010. We don't win without Sam Shields a FA rookie. We are not getting that boost from the Rookie class.
AR has been the anti-Favre throughout his career. He puts a lot more stock in this franchise, and his legacy, than Favre did. He wants to be Bart Starr when this is all over for him sometime in his 40's. Considering the crap he took, none of it his fault during the transition, we are lucky he is still here. He is not threatening to leave anytime soon, but if it happens I'm sure he'll do it graciously. Unlike Favre who held a gun to the head of the organization for years with the, will I or won't I retire act. A guy who left a franchise that made it to the AFC Championship game with Butt-Fumble for our rival, trying to stick it to the franchise and his adoring fans. There was really no immediate or even long term, (3 years in the league now) to jump on a QB. Now that we have Love I hope he works out in some fashion for us but he is not going to do anything short term.
Good piece. Gets you pumped up about Love. I haven't finished reading it yet, only through the first Love part. But guessing the rest is worth it as well.
[/quote]
Until someone admits to buying and wearing a Love jersey .............. there will be no Anti-Aaron
Last edited by RingoCStarrQB on 05 Dec 2020 06:54, edited 2 times in total.
Does going "all-in" really work? In the last 20 years, I can only think of the Peyton Manning era Broncos off hand, but that almost blew up in their faces with Manning going down hill so quickly. Then they (predictably) followed that championship up with years of losing - with no end in sight.
It's a risky move, I am not denying that, but it's a risk I would take under the present circumstances. Besides, the route we took also risks a similar nosedive scenario if it does not work out (i.e. the QBotF busts), so is it really appreciably riskier than what we did? Maybe somewhat, but not enough for me to not take a leap of faith for the Lombardi trophy.
Using a draft pick on a player who has a chance to participate is hardly going all in. Your draft picks are gambles. Once you've used them or traded them away. You're stuck with what you took. We've watched duh bares choosing players before the draft and spending crazy draft capital to aquire that specific player. They still suck. We usually let the draft come to us. Taking the best on the board or moving back.
If we used our #1 pick for another position, not even on an immediate need and saved the 4th for somebody else you'd still expect some contributions. You are still looking at these guys as long term players but they can help in the short term. I usually expect two picks out of the top four to contribute. Not necessarily start but be good enough to get on the field and show some potential. In case of injury or by years end be ready to help in the final push. We've only had one rookie with signifcant playing time Runyan, that is tough unless you've brought in some FAs to fill the gap. Hopefully our recent pick ups will step up.
Picking Bulaga in the 1st rnd. of 2010 wasn't going all in. You're filling a long term need. But when Tauscher went down after four games we needed him. He played like the rookie he was until the playoffs, and then he was lights out. He's the kind of unexpected contributor that can put you over the top. We got a lot of work out of Rs in 2010. We don't win without Sam Shields a FA rookie. We are not getting that boost from the Rookie class.
AR has been the anti-Favre throughout his career. He puts a lot more stock in this franchise, and his legacy, than Favre did. He wants to be Bart Starr when this is all over for him sometime in his 40's. Considering the crap he took, none of it his fault during the transition, we are lucky he is still here. He is not threatening to leave anytime soon, but if it happens I'm sure he'll do it graciously. Unlike Favre who held a gun to the head of the organization for years with the, will I or won't I retire act. A guy who left a franchise that made it to the AFC Championship game with Butt-Fumble for our rival, trying to stick it to the franchise and his adoring fans. There was really no immediate or even long term, (3 years in the league now) reason to jump on a QB now. We have Love I hope he works out in some fashion for us but he is not going to do anything short term.
