2020 General Draft Discussion

[Drj820]

Well I am not avoiding reality for this particular offseason (I understand the cap situation). I was pointing out teams who had been very good, were close, and made moves to attempt to get over the hump. Several years of over the last decade with the best qb in football we have been in those exact situations...very good, close, and just not quite there yet roster wise. We continued to plan for three years down the road. Hence why the ship has remained steady for all this time.

But I do not consider our offseason last year to be in the same category as the examples I listed above. Why? Because we weren’t close or very good when we made massive overhaul moves that happened to work very well. We had just fired a coach, a gm, and missed the playoffs two years in a row.

That's fair. But I'm just pointing out that for a large number of those teams--like the Saints and the Cowboys and what the Eagles did before their Super Bowl run (there was that big offseason where the players deemed themselves some sort of gawdy nickname that flamed out entirely) and then after their Super Bowl run... it didn't work. That the teams who go all in aren't MORE successful than we are. The teams that push the chips in fail as often as they succeed (depending on what failure is.. if it's a Super Bowl, they fail much more often than they succeed).

I just don't think the "push the chips in, be aggressive, make a big run right now" model deserves any sort of special praise among fans, because it is no more successful than "be a perennial competitor and hope you can strike when the opportunities arise." We aren't perennial contenders at the expense of winning Super Bowls. If you show me a team that goes all in, wins the Super Bowl, crashes, reloads, gets close, goes all in again, and wins the Super Bowl again" as some sort of business cycle, then yeah, sure. Ok. But that team hasn't really existed. I guess the closest you could come is the Giants, but they got lucky more than pushed their chips in... and it hasn't happened for nearly a decade now.

Basically, the Patriots are the best in the business, primarily because Belichick is. And they blocked other teams from having that sort of sustained success because they're better than us. No one can win multiple Super Bowls in an era when the Pats win 6 of them. In our conference, ove rthe past decade, only the Seahawks and 49ers have made two trips to the Super Bowl, and no one has won more than one. No one has made as many trips to the NFC Championship game as us.

The Patriots beat everyone at this. Their domination does two things: 1) it sets a nearly impossible standard to try to replicate. And 2) It has diminished and blocked the accomplishments of other teams who could have had some of that success had the Patriots not existed.

That's really all there is to it. NO ONE is winning more Championships and games than we are... except the Patriots. Period.


Here is a post from the old forum I made on January 1st, 2020 (with a couple updated numbers given the outcome of the playoffs:

In the 2010s, the Packers were 102-56-2 in the regular season and 10-7 in the postseason.

The Packers won 6 NFC North Division Crowns, and one Super Bowl.

The Packers appeared in the playoffs 8 times and appeared in the conference championship game 4 times.

No team other than the New England Patriots did better than ANY of those numbers.

The Packers have the....
- 2nd most wins (regular season, playoffs, and total)
- 2nd most playoff games played (tied with the Seahawks)
- 2nd most division titles
- 2nd most playoff appearances (tied with the Seahawks)
- 2nd most Conference Championship Game appearances
- 2nd most Super Bowl titles (no one but the Pats had more than 1)

So for all the things we've complained about; for enduring the 2 non-playoff years, the firing of a HC, the transition of a GM... for having a hole at ILB that never died and going from a record-setting offense to constantly questioning its effectiveness....

for all of that, the Packers have been, unequivocally, the second-most successful NFL franchise of this decade.

It's been a joy, it's been heartbreaking, it's been fun, it's been frustrating... and it's been remarkably successful. I'm glad to be a Packers fan and I'm glad to have spent most of the decade debating this stuff with you all.

Good post. Personally even with all that success in a way I think one could say we underachieved. Because the pats don’t have anything to do with us. We are in the nfc and have had the conferences best qb for literally almost 25 years give or take a few bumps in the road. The pats didn’t affect our journey to the dance.

That said, if you read my original statement that started this...it was completely neutral. I wasn’t downing one side or praising the other philosophy. I was just stating how I see that we have operated. It’s made us generally happy every Sunday, but we have also felt so close we could taste it...and not made a move like giving a 1st for a frank clark that might put us over the top. That’s all.

[YoHoChecko]

Good post. Personally even with all that success in a way I think one could say we underachieved. Because the pats don’t have anything to do with us. We are in the nfc and have had the conferences best qb for literally almost 25 years give or take a few bumps in the road. The pats didn’t affect our journey to the dance.

That said, if you read my original statement that started this...it was completely neutral. I wasn’t downing one side or praising the other philosophy. I was just stating how I see that we have operated. It’s made us generally happy every Sunday, but we have also felt so close we could taste it...and not made a move like giving a 1st for a frank clark that might put us over the top. That’s all.

All true. The Seahwks and 49ers have both been much bigger impediments to our success than the Pats. Of the 7 times we lost in the playoffs in the past decade, the 49ers knocked us out of the playoffs 3 times. The Seahawks only once, but they did make it to two Super Bowls. The Falcons, Giants, and... Cardinals ( )... were the others.

The 49ers 23-20 win and the Seahawks' 2014 comeback win will always haunt me--the Seahawks even more than the 1998 49ers and the TO TD after the Rice fumble did or the Broncos Super Bowl and Elway's helicopter.

In my life, those are what I truly believe are the "we should have had the championship" years. Well, that and the Jan 2008 (2007 season) with the OT loss to the Giants, but I was in basic training and didn't see the game... plus I anticipate that we would have lost to the 18-0 Pats. So I can get behind underachieving. Simple luck would indicate that more of those would go our way, by the odds. For all the success the Packers have had, we've had an awful lot of postseason gut punch games... but even those, like, it was SO close and SO likely that it's difficult to find fault in anyone from management or the coaching staff or the QBs. Just....

[go pak go]

When I look at the Packers, and he have talked about this so freaking much. We had probably 4 years of teams where it truly was our window, our chips were in, our roster was ready and we just blew it in the post season.

2007, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014.

I think 2007 was blown becuse we played an old guy in the cold. 2011 was blown because our offense and team choked and played very uncharacteristic Packers football. 2012 was blown because of the Fail Mary play that forced us to go on the road to San Fran rather than host San Fran. 2013 was blown because of the Rodgers injury...same could be said for 2014.

Other teams who have "pushed in the chips"

2009 Vikings
2011 Eagles
2018 Rams
2018 Bears
2015 Seahawks

Just to name a few. The only team who didn't see a significant collapse after that all in season was Seattle.

[Scott4Pack]

@Scott4Pack

He got a haircut whoever he is.

Who he is is the most celebrated rugby player and athlete in South Africa. (That's where I'm living.) He could also probably be a pretty good H-back!

[Carl Gerbschmidt]

I will not complain until losses pile up, stop complaining the 2020 Packers are still undefeated.

lol apologies for discussing the gm and the draft on the 2020 general draft discussion thread.

I made an I statement not a you statement simmer down.

[Yoop]

When I look at the Packers, and he have talked about this so freaking much. We had probably 4 years of teams where it truly was our window, our chips were in, our roster was ready and we just blew it in the post season.

2007, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014.

I think 2007 was blown becuse we played an old guy in the cold. 2011 was blown because our offense and team choked and played very uncharacteristic Packers football. 2012 was blown because of the Fail Mary play that forced us to go on the road to San Fran rather than host San Fran. 2013 was blown because of the Rodgers injury...same could be said for 2014.

Other teams who have "pushed in the chips"

2009 Vikings
2011 Eagles
2018 Rams
2018 Bears
2015 Seahawks

Just to name a few. The only team who didn't see a significant collapse after that all in season was Seattle.

a person can come up with a excuse for every time they fail, we failed because we didn't do enough to win, we either couldn't run the ball, couldn't stop the other team from running, or we couldn't stop the pass, we where good enough usually to win the div. even play in the nfcc game a few times, but thats as far as we usually get, and in those games we've mostly shown that we didn't belong there, and the only reason we got there in the first place was because of our QB, sure I'am thankful for that, it's better then losing and not even having a chance, good football can be satisfying, and we've been good, almost 3 decades of winning football, that should be good enough, yet here I'am disappointed because through out all the winning seasons, we could only muster 2 championships, both Rodgers and Favre really let us down, hopefully this love kid will be stronger and carry this team to more championships

[go pak go]

When I look at the Packers, and he have talked about this so freaking much. We had probably 4 years of teams where it truly was our window, our chips were in, our roster was ready and we just blew it in the post season.

2007, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014.

I think 2007 was blown becuse we played an old guy in the cold. 2011 was blown because our offense and team choked and played very uncharacteristic Packers football. 2012 was blown because of the Fail Mary play that forced us to go on the road to San Fran rather than host San Fran. 2013 was blown because of the Rodgers injury...same could be said for 2014.

Other teams who have "pushed in the chips"

2009 Vikings
2011 Eagles
2018 Rams
2018 Bears
2015 Seahawks

Just to name a few. The only team who didn't see a significant collapse after that all in season was Seattle.

a person can come up with a excuse for every time they fail, we failed because we didn't do enough to win, we either couldn't run the ball, couldn't stop the other team from running, or we couldn't stop the pass, we where good enough usually to win the div. even play in the nfcc game a few times, but thats as far as we usually get, and in those games we've mostly shown that we didn't belong there, and the only reason we got there in the first place was because of our QB, sure I'am thankful for that, it's better then losing and not even having a chance, good football can be satisfying, and we've been good, almost 3 decades of winning football, that should be good enough, yet here I'am disappointed because through out all the winning seasons, we could only muster 2 championships, both Rodgers and Favre really let us down, hopefully this love kid will be stronger and carry this team to more championships

Okay you're right. Let's make it simple.

2007 - we lost because Al Harris couldn't contain Plaxico and Brett Favre looked old in the cold.
2011 - we lost because our MVP choked with a 57% completion percentage and a poorly timed fumble by Ryan Grant and a last second hail mary worked for NYG that put us in too large a hole. Our MVP quarterback only had 264 yards with 2 TDs and 1 INT. Far less than what we needed from our MVP quarterback. Especially that year when our whole team was designed to make him succeed.
2012 - we lost because Capers completely botched the game plan.
2013 - we lost because Aaron stunk. He threw for 177 yards and 1 TD. The excuse is he just came back from injury.
2014 - we lost because Aaron stunk. He threw for 178 yards, 1 TD and 2 INTs. The excuse is he just came back from injury.

You keep doing this circle around of defending Capers and defending Rodgers and how the organization has screwed both of them the last 15 years. The fact is if Rodgers wants to be a big boy, then play when the big boys need to play. Because in our years of loss, he didn't. Plain and simple. Outside of 2012, our "championship" years were let down because our QB crapped the bed.

Or accept that there are lots players who need to play as a big boy and that us winning 2 since 1996 is not bad at all and be grateful we are basically tied for 2nd most accomplished team in the league in any peramiter you can think of since 1992.

[go pak go]

a person can come up with a excuse for every time they fail, we failed because we didn't do enough to win, we either couldn't run the ball, couldn't stop the other team from running, or we couldn't stop the pass

yet here I'am disappointed because through out all the winning seasons, we could only muster 2 championships, both Rodgers and Favre really let us down, hopefully this love kid will be stronger and carry this team to more championships

These two quotes are the most telling.

1. You just can't come to grips to ever blame the quarterback and thus list every facet of the team except the most important aspect of the team for the reason of the failings. This is fall in love with the player and it's everyone else's fault.

2. Strangely in the same post the realization can't help but sneak in. We want to say Favre and Rodgers are the GOAT. We wanted to say Favre was the GOAT...only he wasn't. That's why we all got so excited about Rodgers in 2010 because he finally seemed to be the guy who Favre wasn't and we didn't have to lie to ourselves no more! Someone who was calm and delivered when it matter most. I mean this board and Packer nation thought 3 championships at minimum because of how un-rattled Rodgers was in the post season....until he wasn't.

And I will finally end with this. Rodgers nor Favre let us down. They earned the money we paid them. They gave us great memories. However their great moments like the AZ Cardinals or Dallas Cowboys game overshadows their colossal failures like the 07 Giants, 13 49ers or 14 Seahawks. They're human but at the end of the day, they don't have the rings because of them.

All it takes is one game to suck. That's the thing about the NFL. And honestly Rodgers had that happen in 2010 too. It's just that his suck in Chicago wasn't as sucky and BJ Raji decided to take it to the house whereas Morgan Burnett didn't.

[British]

The parity of the NFL and the knockout nature of the playoffs means the best way of winning Superbowls is to get in the dance as often as you can and then hope you get lucky/hit a hot streak.

That's how we won in 2010. We didn't look like a real SB contender, we survived a ton of injuries but we stayed alive, scraped in and as the 6th seed went on a wold ride to the Championship.

Consistent playoff appearances is better than trying to build a superteam once every five years.

Over the past 20 years we've been the most successful team in the NFC. Pretty much every fan base would kill to have the success we've had:

[YoHoChecko]

Other teams who have "pushed in the chips"

2009 Vikings
2011 Eagles
2018 Rams
2018 Bears
2015 Seahawks

Just to name a few. The only team who didn't see a significant collapse after that all in season was Seattle

I very much appreciate this post--especially this part--for illustrating the often failures of pushing in the chips; and I know the subject was brought up neutrally and not to compare, but plenty of people really want to see that from us, so this continues to indicate that it very often fails with nothing to show for it but a rebuild process.

I also, personally, have no desire to continue re-litigating our past. We're heading into the 2020 season (fingers crossed) coming off of being a top-4 regular season team and a top-4 playoff team in 2019. We're entering year 2 with MLF, and draft weekend just concluded.

There is much we want that we do not have. But there is also much we didn't have last year and heck, last week, that we do have now. I'm very interested to see how it is implemented and how it changes the team. I am also very interested t see how affected we are by what we do not have.

[Yoop]

a person can come up with a excuse for every time they fail, we failed because we didn't do enough to win, we either couldn't run the ball, couldn't stop the other team from running, or we couldn't stop the pass

yet here I'am disappointed because through out all the winning seasons, we could only muster 2 championships, both Rodgers and Favre really let us down, hopefully this love kid will be stronger and carry this team to more championships

These two quotes are the most telling.

1. You just can't come to grips to ever blame the quarterback and thus list every facet of the team except the most important aspect of the team for the reason of the failings. This is fall in love with the player and it's everyone else's fault.

2. Strangely in the same post the realization can't help but sneak in. We want to say Favre and Rodgers are the GOAT. We wanted to say Favre was the GOAT...only he wasn't. That's why we all got so excited about Rodgers in 2010 because he finally seemed to be the guy who Favre wasn't and we didn't have to lie to ourselves no more! Someone who was calm and delivered when it matter most. I mean this board and Packer nation thought 3 championships at minimum because of how un-rattled Rodgers was in the post season....until he wasn't.

And I will finally end with this. Rodgers nor Favre let us down. They earned the money we paid them. They gave us great memories. However their great moments like the AZ Cardinals or Dallas Cowboys game overshadows their colossal failures like the 07 Giants, 13 49ers or 14 Seahawks. They're human but at the end of the day, they don't have the rings because of them.

All it takes is one game to suck. That's the thing about the NFL. And honestly Rodgers had that happen in 2010 too. It's just that his suck in Chicago wasn't as sucky and BJ Raji decided to take it to the house whereas Morgan Burnett didn't.

right, without Favre and Rodgers who knows how good we could have been these last 28 years, why is it the QB's fault every time we loss, why should either have to do better then they did or we lose, simple, because the rest of the team never had a chance to even be in those games.

lis, people like you will use stats to obscure what really was happening in those games, whenever Favre or Rodgers ( very rare for Rodgers) made poor decisions it's because no one else was making any smart ones, and it came down to desperation, that happens when a player lacks the support needed from other players or his coaches that would eliminate the need to do so.


WE don't have the rings because the people running this team wouldn't give them receivers, both these QB's will go to the HOF in spite of the GM's, and we only have 2 SB's because the GMis so invested in D&D that when he misses, his fix is next years draft class, rinse and repeat, thats why I defended Capers, and it's the only reason Pettines defense is better, better players, the offense as has been pointed out is a dead zone, and other then a spark of talent from Jones and Adams has been near void of impact talent.

I wont defend this front office like I often did with the last, I'am fed up with these empty promises, when Wolf finally got receiver talent for Farve we won a SB, doesn't mean a damn thing that he didn't set the house on fire, the point is thats what it took to get there and the team talent carried him, it's what it took to win it. and for the last half doz years Ted has missed on a lot of picks, and I have to watch Guty revamping this team using slot 12 on a back up last year and this year blowing a chance for a impact receiver, he gave Rodgers the one finger salute last year, and just to send the message home he did it again this year.

[Yoop]

The parity of the NFL and the knockout nature of the playoffs means the best way of winning Superbowls is to get in the dance as often as you can and then hope you get lucky/hit a hot streak.

That's how we won in 2010. We didn't look like a real SB contender, we survived a ton of injuries but we stayed alive, scraped in and as the 6th seed went on a wold ride to the Championship.

Consistent playoff appearances is better than trying to build a superteam once every five years.

Over the past 20 years we've been the most successful team in the NFC. Pretty much every fan base would kill to have the success we've had:

no, we won 6 games straight, and a few knuckle bitters, we over came a ton of challanges to get there, and wouldn't have, by a long shot had it not been for Rodgers first and formost, but also with a loaded roster, we had built that team to do exactly what it did, that team was missing about 10 starters, so that should be all you need to know to realize just how well built that team was, it had excellent starters at the key positions and a very well stocked bench, NO SALE British.

[British]

I'm glad you're praising the team building nous of TT. It was a great squad for sure, but we were far from favourites entering the playoffs. The most important thing is consistently giving yourselves chances to win by getting in the playoffs. That graph shows that we've been the most consistent team in the NFC the past 20 years.

[NCF]

no, we won 6 games straight, and a few knuckle bitters, we over came a ton of challanges to get there, and wouldn't have, by a long shot had it not been for Rodgers first and formost, but also with a loaded roster, we had built that team to do exactly what it did, that team was missing about 10 starters, so that should be all you need to know to realize just how well built that team was, it had excellent starters at the key positions and a very well stocked bench, NO SALE British.

So, what happened in 2011-2013 with largely the same roster?

[Yoop]

no, we won 6 games straight, and a few knuckle bitters, we over came a ton of challanges to get there, and wouldn't have, by a long shot had it not been for Rodgers first and formost, but also with a loaded roster, we had built that team to do exactly what it did, that team was missing about 10 starters, so that should be all you need to know to realize just how well built that team was, it had excellent starters at the key positions and a very well stocked bench, NO SALE British.

So, what happened in 2011-2013 with largely the same roster?

we lost a couple more key positions, even when there are NO changes (there where though) each season brings a new team.

[British]

Hey Yoop, you're going to love Bob McGinn's latest on the difference between drafting Rodgers and drafting Love:

“I think we tried to put the interests of the Green Bay Packers first,” Thompson said that night 15 years ago. “It wasn’t necessarily that comfortable taking that position (quarterback) maybe as some other things we’d like to have done, but you make draft choices and draft-day decisions based on the long-term best interests of your organization. I think that’s what we did today."

One of the differences in the decisions was the fact that Favre was playing better football at the time than Rodgers is now.

...If Rodgers had been more impressive last season, especially in his two inept performances against the 49ers, Gutekunst might have been more inclined to keep developing Boyle and draft for immediate help at another position.

[Yoop]

I'm glad you're praising the team building nous of TT. It was a great squad for sure, but we were far from favourites entering the playoffs. The most important thing is consistently giving yourselves chances to win by getting in the playoffs. That graph shows that we've been the most consistent team in the NFC the past 20 years.

when you have a HOF QB your almost guaranteed of making the play offs year after year, it takes a bit more to win it all, without that, your just dancing with lady luck, and shes hated us most seasons, thats what angers me the most we allow lady luck to often to decide our future.

[YoHoChecko]

when you have a HOF QB your almost guaranteed of making the play offs year after year, it takes a bit more to win it all, without that, your just dancing with lady luck, and shes hated us most seasons, thats what angers me the most we allow lady luck to often to decide our future.

I guess I wonder...

...are Saints fans this way? The saints have a HoF QB. They are CLEARLY focused on prolonging their championship window as long as Brees is there. Their coach is viewed as some sort of wunderkind by the media and fanbase at large.

And yet they have no more success than the Packers do. They have had bad defenses, they have had a lack of weapons. They have splurged to try to solve those issues. But the Packers have more wins, more playoff appearances, and as many Super Bowls. I think we so often say things like "well you have a HoF QB, so you should be winning more championships.

But Rivers never even got to a Super Bowl. Brees only has one. In fact, I think only 13 QBs in NFL history have won more than one Super Bowl, but there are a lot more HoF QBs than that. Peyton Manning and John Elway couldn't win multiple Super Bowls until their aging decaying bodies were surrounded with elite defenses and running games (both of Elway's, one of Manning's). Eli Manning basically won two on fluke offseasons, fluke Super Bowls, and fluke plays in each one.

Brady had a dynasty, Aikman had a dynasty, Montana had a dynasty, Bradshaw had a dynasty.

But Steve Young? One Super Bowl win. Brett Favre? One Super Bowl win. Kurt Warner? One Super Bowl win.

Dan Marino? Jim Kelly? No Super Bowls!Fran Tarkenton, who retired as the leader in every passing category? No Super Bowls.

I mean, we have seen some GREAT QBs play this game. And with Drew Brees, the timing and the era even lines up. Brees and Rodgers' careers with MM and Payton line up. Winning a Super Bowl is GREAT. Winning more is INCREDIBLY rare. This notion that having a HoF QB entitles you to more rings doesn't match the reality.

[Yoop]

when you have a HOF QB your almost guaranteed of making the play offs year after year, it takes a bit more to win it all, without that, your just dancing with lady luck, and shes hated us most seasons, thats what angers me the most we allow lady luck to often to decide our future.

I guess I wonder...

...are Saints fans this way? The saints have a HoF QB. They are CLEARLY focused on prolonging their championship window as long as Brees is there. Their coach is viewed as some sort of wunderkind by the media and fanbase at large.

And yet they have no more success than the Packers do. They have had bad defenses, they have had a lack of weapons. They have splurged to try to solve those issues. But the Packers have more wins, more playoff appearances, and as many Super Bowls. I think we so often say things like "well you have a HoF QB, so you should be winning more championships.

But Rivers never even got to a Super Bowl. Brees only has one. In fact, I think only 13 QBs in NFL history have won more than one Super Bowl, but there are a lot more HoF QBs than that. Peyton Manning and John Elway couldn't win multiple Super Bowls until their aging decaying bodies were surrounded with elite defenses and running games (both of Elway's, one of Manning's). Eli Manning basically won two on fluke offseasons, fluke Super Bowls, and fluke plays in each one.

Brady had a dynasty, Aikman had a dynasty, Montana had a dynasty, Bradshaw had a dynasty.

But Steve Young? One Super Bowl win. Brett Favre? One Super Bowl win. Kurt Warner? One Super Bowl win.

Dan Marino? Jim Kelly? No Super Bowls!Fran Tarkenton, who retired as the leader in every passing category? No Super Bowls.

I mean, we have seen some GREAT QBs play this game. And with Drew Brees, the timing and the era even lines up. Brees and Rodgers' careers with MM and Payton line up. Winning a Super Bowl is GREAT. Winning more is INCREDIBLY rare. This notion that having a HoF QB entitles you to more rings doesn't match the reality.

you make my point, they didn't do enough either, why do you keep comparing us to other teams, NE is the bench mark, yet I've never said anything about winning a BUNCH of SB's, can't I want to win just one or two more then we have, or for that matter expect to at least play in them.

there is a huge difference Yoho in what led to our win in 2010 versus how we've built this team lately, same as the talent increase to put us over the top in 97, that you wont or can't recognize that is on you, now I'am sure British or GPG will jump forth with some stats to say I'am wrong, but I know I'am not, Wolf brought impact to the offense, and Ted built a damn good team his first 4 seasons, since then it's been a patch work job of mostly misses, yet we wonder why Rodgers isn't as good any more,

[Waldo]

Hey Yoop, you're going to love Bob McGinn's latest on the difference between drafting Rodgers and drafting Love:

“I think we tried to put the interests of the Green Bay Packers first,” Thompson said that night 15 years ago. “It wasn’t necessarily that comfortable taking that position (quarterback) maybe as some other things we’d like to have done, but you make draft choices and draft-day decisions based on the long-term best interests of your organization. I think that’s what we did today."

One of the differences in the decisions was the fact that Favre was playing better football at the time than Rodgers is now.

...If Rodgers had been more impressive last season, especially in his two inept performances against the 49ers, Gutekunst might have been more inclined to keep developing Boyle and draft for immediate help at another position.

Haha

I think the progression this offseason has been a great comedy.

As I said in a post in another thread...

Media talking heads and the fans that follow them, and the rest of the fanbase in general has settled onto a consensus of what exactly is The Problem™. This has been a progression since the season, because near the end of the season, there was widespread agreement that #12 was very much a part of The Problem™, but as the offseason has progressed, this has almost completely been dropped, his portion instead has been parlayed onto the WR portion, which in turn has amplified it to a fever pitch.

Thing is, I don't think MLF and Gute agree with the general consensus with regards to The Problem™.