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.
If Wilson wasn’t an athletic QB he would be the most sacked QB in the league. That man runs a marathon for his life every week avoiding the instasheds his lineman give up.
I see it both ways.
Wilson has always been a high-sack QB. If you look at the most mobile QBs, they all usually are. There's a degree to which a superior athlete with supreme confidence will assume he can escape the pressure and extend the play and winds up taking a sack when a QB like Brees or Brady would have thrown it away. Going back to Vick, there's usually a high correlation between QB rushing yards and QB sacks that feels counterintuitive to a lot of people.
That said, the Seahawks' OLine has been pretty bad lately, so I get it. But Wilson taking sacks isn't new nor is it entirely outside of his own control and playing style.
Russell "Magic Water" Wilson trade talk is heating up. Hope he goes someplace where he gets sacked as much or more.
Wilson is right in his case to complain about the offensive line. The Seahawks have done an awful job trying to protect him. And it’s not like they haven’t tried because they did draft OL early but the lot of them were some really bad picks. Schneider came out hot nailing his picks but recently they’ve been horrible. James Carpenter. Germaine Ifedi. Horrible picks and all reaches IMO.
If Wilson wasn’t an athletic QB he would be the most sacked QB in the league. That man runs a marathon for his life every week avoiding the instasheds his lineman give up.
No doubt. He causes many of those sacks on his own due to running around. But I'm sure he feels he has no choice given the situation.
No matter, I like seeing him get sacked. I am not a Seahawks fan and I am not a Russel Wilson fan. Dude bugs me.
If Wilson wasn’t an athletic QB he would be the most sacked QB in the league. That man runs a marathon for his life every week avoiding the instasheds his lineman give up.
I see it both ways.
Wilson has always been a high-sack QB. If you look at the most mobile QBs, they all usually are. There's a degree to which a superior athlete with supreme confidence will assume he can escape the pressure and extend the play and winds up taking a sack when a QB like Brees or Brady would have thrown it away. Going back to Vick, there's usually a high correlation between QB rushing yards and QB sacks that feels counterintuitive to a lot of people.
That said, the Seahawks' OLine has been pretty bad lately, so I get it. But Wilson taking sacks isn't new nor is it entirely outside of his own control and playing style.
what about Rodge Podge? I always thought he was one of the best ever at avoiding sacks and extending plays, perfect early on with McCarthy's iso verticles, naturally I think those days are gone now, but he seemed the best at it for a long time
what about Rodge Podge? I always thought he was one of the best ever at avoiding sacks and extending plays, perfect early on with McCarthy's iso verticles, naturally I think those days are gone now, but he seemed the best at it for a long time
Oh he totally fits this.
Back when he was more mobile, he had more rushing yards, and while he escaped sacks brilliantly, he also took them. The late MM years were the years in which he was wrestling with his diminishing mobility. He still tried to avoid sacks like he used to with a much lower success rate, which led to all the "holds the ball too long" commentary, which was true, but also not new. He actually led the league in sacks taken in 2009 and 2012, back when he was running a lot more frequently and nimbly. He used to hold the ball too long and take some sacks he shouldn't have, but he succeeded enough to make the risks worth taking.
Under MLF, especially in year two, he finally began to adapt his game to being a less-mobile QB who needs to throw the ball faster more consistently and pick his moments to extend plays and avoid sacks rather than trying to do it down in and down out. Rodgers took 49 sacks in MM's last season; 36 in MLF's first and 20 in MLF's second season. Rodgers has adapted to being a less-mobile QB and his play style caught up and the sack numbers are dropping (not that he didn't have some 21 and 22 sack seasons earlier; this isn't clearly linear--but it also is a decent fit to the narrative of mobile QBs taking more sacks)
Jurrell Casey was released by Denver. He only player 3 games last year but this guy has been great every year.
He built like a mike daniels and is 31 but maybe a bargin 1 year fit. The guy can get pressure inside.
I had the same thought, but I think we also need to recognize that among the 10-15 teams with pretty ample cap space (including 11 teams with $20+ million), the smart teams will be able to scour the cut veteran list and make the vast majority of those bargain additions.
We're simply not in a great place to take advantage of the glut of veteran cuts that are likely to take place this year. That's a bummer on one hand, but on the other it's because we already have a great roster.
what about Rodge Podge? I always thought he was one of the best ever at avoiding sacks and extending plays, perfect early on with McCarthy's iso verticles, naturally I think those days are gone now, but he seemed the best at it for a long time
Oh he totally fits this.
Back when he was more mobile, he had more rushing yards, and while he escaped sacks brilliantly, he also took them. The late MM years were the years in which he was wrestling with his diminishing mobility. He still tried to avoid sacks like he used to with a much lower success rate, which led to all the "holds the ball too long" commentary, which was true, but also not new. He actually led the league in sacks taken in 2009 and 2012, back when he was running a lot more frequently and nimbly. He used to hold the ball too long and take some sacks he shouldn't have, but he succeeded enough to make the risks worth taking.
Under MLF, especially in year two, he finally began to adapt his game to being a less-mobile QB who needs to throw the ball faster more consistently and pick his moments to extend plays and avoid sacks rather than trying to do it down in and down out. Rodgers took 49 sacks in MM's last season; 36 in MLF's first and 20 in MLF's second season. Rodgers has adapted to being a less-mobile QB and his play style caught up and the sack numbers are dropping (not that he didn't have some 21 and 22 sack seasons earlier; this isn't clearly linear--but it also is a decent fit to the narrative of mobile QBs taking more sacks)
IMHO talent decline, both through injury and also simply a lack of talent played a pretty big part with over extending the scrambling, Rodgers was considered the best scrambler in the league when he had a healthy JJ, Nelson, Cobb, Jones and then Adams, I don't want to beat a dead horse, but I'am convinced as those guys declined, then the schemes declined along with them, and thats when the scrambling and sacks increased, least the last 4 or 5 years, I think early it was just a reversal, he had Jennings and a aging Driver, bound to be some scrambling with a rookie and a aging vet, so obviously to you'll see more sacks, my point is when the stable was full of horses Rodgers was able to throw more often on schedule.
IDK, but I suspect your right in that scrambling QB do get sacked more, and Rodgers was a scrambler, but the only years that it seemed purposeful was when he didn't have anyone or maybe just one WR that could come clean on schedule, that does make a difference.
Jurrell Casey was released by Denver. He only player 3 games last year but this guy has been great every year.
He built like a mike daniels and is 31 but maybe a bargin 1 year fit. The guy can get pressure inside.
I had the same thought, but I think we also need to recognize that among the 10-15 teams with pretty ample cap space (including 11 teams with $20+ million), the smart teams will be able to scour the cut veteran list and make the vast majority of those bargain additions.
We're simply not in a great place to take advantage of the glut of veteran cuts that are likely to take place this year. That's a bummer on one hand, but on the other it's because we already have a great roster.
Yeah, I'd be very surprised to see the Packers very active this year, especially with the initial wave of free agency. My hope is that with the cap crunch impacting league wide, there will be considerably more of the veteran bargain shopping opportunities the Packers (and everyone else) seem to prefer. Those contracts signed two and three weeks into FA that come at a bargain and present little risk. If the team can create $10-15 mil in maneuver space under the cap, I think there will be some real veteran value to be had.
Well this is an early surprise and extremely relevant
ESPN agrees to TV deal with NFL, setting up possible salary cap bump for 2021 All of the league’s TV deals appear to be nearing completion, and the contracts may be officially announced in the next few days.
By Evan "Tex" Western@TexWestern Feb 26, 2021, 3:00pm CST
At this point, it’s a matter of days, not weeks or months, before the NFL announces the framework of its new television contracts. The final media company to agree to the basics of a deal with the NFL was Disney, which owns ESPN and ABC; according to the Sports Business Journal, the two sides have agreed on the structure of their new contract as of Friday afternoon.
SBJ reports that all of the other major networks — CBS, NBC, and FOX — along with Amazon have already reached this same point in their negotiations. That means that with the final major player on board, the details should come together quickly to finalize all of the contracts. Indeed, SBJ says that media networks hope that all of them will be finalized and announced next week.
The timing of the agreement on these contracts is critical for the NFL, which has been waiting to announce a salary cap number for the 2021 season. These new deals, which reportedly involve several networks paying double the amount in their previous contracts, will result in a significant influx of revenue for the NFL. By the terms of the collective bargaining agreement signed last spring, players’ share of league revenue is set to increase to 48 percent in 2021 and beyond, and so these deals should set up a massive jump in the salary cap numbers in future years.
However, with the agreements likely coming before the 2021 cap number is set, some of the increase in revenue may get rolled into the coming year to help offset the reduction in cap expected as a result of revenues lost due to the COVID-19 pandemic. One question is whether the NFL Players Association, which negotiates the cap number with the league, will try to push harder for a more spread-out cap reduction, taking a smaller increase in the next few years to allow for a higher cap number in 2021.
Those hoping for a higher 2021 cap have reason to be optimistic today, however. Although the cap will be no lower than $180 million, as the NFL told its teams last week, finalizing these deals could push it higher and may alleviate the financial concerns facing several teams, including the Green Bay Packers. Green Bay is currently projected to be about $12 million over the cap if it comes in at $180 million, meaning that any increase in the cap will provide significant help as the team tries to maintain financial flexibility for the coming season.
In 2020, the league released projections of the cap on February 28th, estimating the cap to be about $200 million, but the final value was not formalized until March 15th, just three days before the start of the league year. If that schedule holds, teams would learn of the final cap value on March 14th this year, though the league has yet to formalize a projected cap number — only releasing the minimum possible value of $180 million.
Stay tuned next week for more news about the TV deals and their potential impact on the 2021 cap.
Well this is an early surprise and extremely relevant
Good news. Still feels like the owner's may want to squeeze something out of the Player's Union to make it happen, but could bode very, very well for us.
Should have always been this way in my opinion. You’ve got all the bad teams trying to poach the teams still in contention. Takes away from the playoffs. All the bad teams get first dibs on new coaching candidates.
Yikes, this stopped me in my tracks just a little bit.
Yeah, football seem sooos old, crazy to think we have been watching for over 50% of the super bowl era.
Much like Jesus is closer to us than he was to pyramids being built in Egypt.
I think Packers fans viewpoints on this subject highly depend on the eras that they recall, or have spoken to others about. I look at it this way:
Biggest Packers win since the Ice Bowl was the playoff win over the Niners on January 6, 1996. That was a 28 year gap between the 1967 Packers and 1995 Packers. Then we waited until Super Bowl 31 to happen which was the biggest Packers win since Super Bowl 2 (a 29 year gap). The 28/29 year gap closing was due to the Reggie White free agent signing combined with other Ron Wolf / Mike Holmgren era achievements which included a stellar coaching staff, a great defensive line, new offense, new QB, competent CBs and Pro Bowl quality safeties, competent LB play, great punter and kicker, greater RB combination (Bennett and Levens), etc.
So there was another gap .... the 14 year gap between Super Bowl 31 and Super Bowl 45. Most of us understand the 14 year gap because we lived it.
But there is another interesting gap that many of us don't understand completely (including myself) .......... the 1944 to 1960/1961 gap. 17 years. More than the current gap that we're in ..... which is a 10 year gap so far. Now that we're in the midst of this 10 year gap, this is why I say its got to be "go all in" in 2021 with Rodgers still ready, willing and able while the window is still open.
This is my perspective because I come from the 1960s Packers era. I have never had any conversations with older Packers fans that are still alive and kicking to tell us what is was really like in the 1950s Packers era (before Vince Lombardi arrived on the scene in 1959). What was that 17 year gap between 1944 and 1961 really like? Based upon what I've read, I can imagine parallels between the 1959-1960 Packers to the 1993-1995 Packers ........ but that's as far as I can go.
Can’t wait till the Saints start making some hard moves here, and other teams.
And guys still getting like fair market value. Simply just going to run out of available dollars this offseason. Not even just the FAs, but the huge surplus of guys who are going to be getting cut as well.
Don’t sign or resign anyone until most the league runs out of money first.
Can’t wait till the Saints start making some hard moves here, and other teams.
And guys still getting like fair market value. Simply just going to run out of available dollars this offseason. Not even just the FAs, but the huge surplus of guys who are going to be getting cut as well.
Don’t sign or resign anyone until most the league runs out of money first.
Yep, let the Jaguars and Jets have their fun and see what's left.
