Packers Huddle

Labrev wrote: ↑

02 Nov 2023 16:52

Papa John wrote: ↑

02 Nov 2023 15:44

That being said, I think that we can agree that the team was primed for high-level success in '20-21.

It might seem obvious that we were primed for success because we know in hindsight that it happened, and because everyone almost always expects the team to improve over last season (and yet, many don't).

But ahead of the 2020 season, I think there were reasons for skepticism: that Rodgers's play at QB was not good enough to be a serious contender, that maybe even he was in decline. When we faced SF, we didn't look like we belonged (people keep talking about another WR, how about addressing the stuff that actually caused us to lose, e.g. stopping the run).

Ahead of 2021, yeah, Rodgers back in MVP form, *that* team seemed primed for great success (and yet, ended worse than the year before). And our draft that year did seem to reflect that, the guys we took seemed primed for more immediate impact than previous years.

Regardless of what you think about his level of commitment at that point, he was still going to be the best option we had at QB for those 2 years- regardless of whether we drafted a QB in round 1, 2020.

If motivating the current starting QB is the best that can come out of drafting a QB when the roster desperately needs a #2 WR, then it's not smart to draft a QB.

With the way Rodgers was playing 2018-2019, it was not hard to believe you could find a better option in the draft. Lamar Jackson won MVP the season before that draft as a second-year player. Lots of QBs on their rookie contracts were playing better ball than he was.

So it actually is a pretty smart move, provided you draft a good QB. You land a Jalen Hurts and suddenly it's a very different conversation. Now either Rodgers improves, and you just have the young QB wait a couple seasons and then have your good successor ready to go, or he doesn't, in which case you deal him much sooner (midseason or next year) and try to make a push while you have a good QB on the cheap deal (one of the only models that had any championship success at the time other than having Tom Brady).

First of all I need to commend you for your ability to construct an argument in favor of a losing point. The problem is that you're choosing absolve the GM of his biggest responsibility. The fact of the matter is that the hindsight argument could be valid if the conversation were about a layperson. But the General Manager is supposed to know the collective talent that he is working with at any given time and he should be able to predict with reasonable accuracy how far that talent can take the team. If he cannot reliably do that, then he's not the guy.

Papa John wrote: ↑

03 Nov 2023 10:10

But ahead of the 2020 season, I think there were reasons for skepticism: that Rodgers's play at QB was not good enough to be a serious contender, that maybe even he was in decline. When we faced SF, we didn't look like we belonged (people keep talking about another WR, how about addressing the stuff that actually caused us to lose, e.g. stopping the run).

who is it that thought Rodgers was in decline in 2019, I'd like to see the names on that list, from 2016 on the talent on offense was in decline, McCarthy almost refused to run the ball, the receivers didn't fit McCarthy's pass schemes.
2019 brought in Lafleur and a completely different offense approach, and eventually the ofrfense started to improve, anyone that says Rodgers wasn't any good in that transition is talking out there a ss

no one that knows this game would say Rodgers was the problem that year, thats nothing but a defense for this GM moving up and drafting Love, and a shallow one at that.

Yoop wrote: ↑

03 Nov 2023 10:38

Papa John wrote: ↑

03 Nov 2023 10:10

But ahead of the 2020 season, I think there were reasons for skepticism: that Rodgers's play at QB was not good enough to be a serious contender, that maybe even he was in decline. When we faced SF, we didn't look like we belonged (people keep talking about another WR, how about addressing the stuff that actually caused us to lose, e.g. stopping the run).

who is it that thought Rodgers was in decline in 2019, I'd like to see the names on that list, from 2016 on the talent on offense was in decline, McCarthy almost refused to run the ball, the receivers didn't fit McCarthy's pass schemes.
2019 brought in Lafleur and a completely different offense approach, and eventually the ofrfense started to improve, anyone that says Rodgers wasn't any good in that transition is talking out there a ss

no one that knows this game would say Rodgers was the problem that year, thats nothing but a defense for this GM moving up and drafting Love, and a shallow one at that.

Hey Yoop, nice post. I didn’t write that though. No idea how my name ended up in your quoted post.

I disagree. He was right to identify the QB as an under-performing player/position and address it accordingly. It worked itself out in a way that I do not believe would have worked out if not for doing so.

Alternatively, (*edit*) if Rodgers did NOT get it figured out (for whatever reason one supposes he needed to, to revert to MVP form), well, then you probably were not headed to the playoffs, much less making a championship push, and now have a QB who hopefully is an improvement.

Yoop wrote: ↑

03 Nov 2023 10:38

Papa John wrote: ↑

03 Nov 2023 10:10

But ahead of the 2020 season, I think there were reasons for skepticism: that Rodgers's play at QB was not good enough to be a serious contender, that maybe even he was in decline. When we faced SF, we didn't look like we belonged (people keep talking about another WR, how about addressing the stuff that actually caused us to lose, e.g. stopping the run).

who is it that thought Rodgers was in decline in 2019, I'd like to see the names on that list, from 2016 on the talent on offense was in decline, McCarthy almost refused to run the ball, the receivers didn't fit McCarthy's pass schemes.
2019 brought in Lafleur and a completely different offense approach, and eventually the ofrfense started to improve, anyone that says Rodgers wasn't any good in that transition is talking out there a ss

no one that knows this game would say Rodgers was the problem that year, thats nothing but a defense for this GM moving up and drafting Love, and a shallow one at that.

You can add my name to the list. Rodgers was not "great" in 2019. He wasn't awful but wasn't anywhere near MVP form. Going further back, Rodgers only had one MVP level stretch in the 5 seasons prior, the "Run The Table" stretch in 2016. Everything else was pretty mediocre or above average at best.

Acrobat wrote: ↑

03 Nov 2023 11:23

Yoop wrote: ↑

03 Nov 2023 10:38

who is it that thought Rodgers was in decline in 2019, I'd like to see the names on that list, from 2016 on the talent on offense was in decline, McCarthy almost refused to run the ball, the receivers didn't fit McCarthy's pass schemes.
2019 brought in Lafleur and a completely different offense approach, and eventually the ofrfense started to improve, anyone that says Rodgers wasn't any good in that transition is talking out there a ss

no one that knows this game would say Rodgers was the problem that year, thats nothing but a defense for this GM moving up and drafting Love, and a shallow one at that.

You can add my name to the list. Rodgers was not "great" in 2019. He wasn't awful but wasn't anywhere near MVP form. Going further back, Rodgers only had one MVP level stretch in the 5 seasons prior, the "Run The Table" stretch in 2016. Everything else was pretty mediocre or above average at best.

Co-sign

Labrev wrote: ↑

02 Nov 2023 16:52

With the way Rodgers was playing 2018-2019, it was not hard to believe you could find a better option in the draft. Lamar Jackson won MVP the season before that draft as a second-year player. Lots of QBs on their rookie contracts were playing better ball than he was.

So it actually is a pretty smart move, provided you draft a good QB. You land a Jalen Hurts and suddenly it's a very different conversation. Now either Rodgers improves, and you just have the young QB wait a couple seasons and then have your good successor ready to go, or he doesn't, in which case you deal him much sooner (midseason or next year) and try to make a push while you have a good QB on the cheap deal (one of the only models that had any championship success at the time other than having Tom Brady).

I'd go further. Even if your 36 year old future-Hall-of-Fame QB is still playing MVP standard, and another potential Hall of Fame QB is available, then you should draft him. You have the new boy locked up for 5 years and it is virtually certain (based on past history) that your current QB will show signs of decline by the new boy's 4th year. And then what? HoF QBs do not grow out of every draft, let alone several in each draft. So if one comes up, and you know one is going to be needed soon, then you draft him.

Of course, there is the question of whether you have drafted the right QB. If your QB is a bust, then it doesn't matter how good your current QB is, it was a bad pick. Love? Time will tell.

The problem with what yal saying is in the evaluation of Love. Sure, if an Aaron rodgers type prospect falls in your lap then go ahead and secure the loot.

But if a guy falls and you have to go up to get him, and it turns out he sucks…that’s a big difference.

Basically you’re a hero if your right and it’s firable if you are wrong.

The problem for Gute is he may have been wrong

dsr wrote: ↑

03 Nov 2023 13:36

Labrev wrote: ↑

02 Nov 2023 16:52

With the way Rodgers was playing 2018-2019, it was not hard to believe you could find a better option in the draft. Lamar Jackson won MVP the season before that draft as a second-year player. Lots of QBs on their rookie contracts were playing better ball than he was.

So it actually is a pretty smart move, provided you draft a good QB. You land a Jalen Hurts and suddenly it's a very different conversation. Now either Rodgers improves, and you just have the young QB wait a couple seasons and then have your good successor ready to go, or he doesn't, in which case you deal him much sooner (midseason or next year) and try to make a push while you have a good QB on the cheap deal (one of the only models that had any championship success at the time other than having Tom Brady).

I'd go further. Even if your 36 year old future-Hall-of-Fame QB is still playing MVP standard, and another potential Hall of Fame QB is available, then you should draft him. You have the new boy locked up for 5 years and it is virtually certain (based on past history) that your current QB will show signs of decline by the new boy's 4th year. And then what? HoF QBs do not grow out of every draft, let alone several in each draft. So if one comes up, and you know one is going to be needed soon, then you draft him.

Of course, there is the question of whether you have drafted the right QB. If your QB is a bust, then it doesn't matter how good your current QB is, it was a bad pick. Love? Time will tell.

That’s always been my position more or less. I’d rather they picked someone else, but if you see a guy you think is going to be great at QB, I’d take him.

If he’s good, whenever he’s good, it’s a wise choice. If not? Man, he really blew it.

dsr wrote: ↑

03 Nov 2023 13:36

Labrev wrote: ↑

02 Nov 2023 16:52

With the way Rodgers was playing 2018-2019, it was not hard to believe you could find a better option in the draft. Lamar Jackson won MVP the season before that draft as a second-year player. Lots of QBs on their rookie contracts were playing better ball than he was.

So it actually is a pretty smart move, provided you draft a good QB. You land a Jalen Hurts and suddenly it's a very different conversation. Now either Rodgers improves, and you just have the young QB wait a couple seasons and then have your good successor ready to go, or he doesn't, in which case you deal him much sooner (midseason or next year) and try to make a push while you have a good QB on the cheap deal (one of the only models that had any championship success at the time other than having Tom Brady).

I'd go further. Even if your 36 year old future-Hall-of-Fame QB is still playing MVP standard, and another potential Hall of Fame QB is available, then you should draft him. You have the new boy locked up for 5 years and it is virtually certain (based on past history) that your current QB will show signs of decline by the new boy's 4th year. And then what? HoF QBs do not grow out of every draft, let alone several in each draft. So if one comes up, and you know one is going to be needed soon, then you draft him.

Of course, there is the question of whether you have drafted the right QB. If your QB is a bust, then it doesn't matter how good your current QB is, it was a bad pick. Love? Time will tell.

Yes and time is starting to chirp. Only Kenny Pickett looks worse right now than Love as far as starting QBs. Loved his game against the Saints. Since then an abundance of mediocrity at best

musclestang wrote: ↑

03 Nov 2023 13:44

dsr wrote: ↑

03 Nov 2023 13:36

Labrev wrote: ↑

02 Nov 2023 16:52

With the way Rodgers was playing 2018-2019, it was not hard to believe you could find a better option in the draft. Lamar Jackson won MVP the season before that draft as a second-year player. Lots of QBs on their rookie contracts were playing better ball than he was.

So it actually is a pretty smart move, provided you draft a good QB. You land a Jalen Hurts and suddenly it's a very different conversation. Now either Rodgers improves, and you just have the young QB wait a couple seasons and then have your good successor ready to go, or he doesn't, in which case you deal him much sooner (midseason or next year) and try to make a push while you have a good QB on the cheap deal (one of the only models that had any championship success at the time other than having Tom Brady).

I'd go further. Even if your 36 year old future-Hall-of-Fame QB is still playing MVP standard, and another potential Hall of Fame QB is available, then you should draft him. You have the new boy locked up for 5 years and it is virtually certain (based on past history) that your current QB will show signs of decline by the new boy's 4th year. And then what? HoF QBs do not grow out of every draft, let alone several in each draft. So if one comes up, and you know one is going to be needed soon, then you draft him.

Of course, there is the question of whether you have drafted the right QB. If your QB is a bust, then it doesn't matter how good your current QB is, it was a bad pick. Love? Time will tell.

That’s always been my position more or less. I’d rather they picked someone else, but if you see a guy you think is going to be great at QB, I’d take him.

If he’s good, whenever he’s good, it’s a wise choice. If not? Man, he really blew it.

you really cant miss though if you are in that position. If you do, it can cost you your job. If GB had a real owner that was real impatient, Gute would be on the chopping block today.

Acrobat wrote: ↑

02 Nov 2023 08:50

I really dislike the argument of "If Gute had drafted a different player than Love in the 2020 draft, we probably would have won the Super Bowl". The ONLY player I could maybe get on board with is Justin Jefferson. But that's a fictional narrative as he wasn't available at our slot. And even if we had pulled off a trade to get him, I'm not sure that he would have been able to stop the Tom Brady hail mary at the end of the half or somehow prevent Aaron Jones from fumbling to start the 3rd Quarter. Those 2 plays ultimately decided the ball game.

You're right that the argument is lame. There's absolutely no doubt that any other player drafted instead of Love would have improved the Packers' chances though. Heck, Love wasn't even active for a single game that year.

BF004 wrote: ↑

02 Nov 2023 08:51

I completely estimate it properly, I've been coaching 6/7 year old flag football the last two years.

Either way, the playbook and playcalling needs to be dumbed down a bit more then. If we get the offensive equivalent of Preston covering Davante, I'd be more okay of that knowing the O can't make every check and audible if they are keeping it simple.

But we basically aren't having a chance, like one out of every 5 plays has some type of catastrophic mental breakdown.

My point was that there's no way for the coaching staff to eliminate all those mental mistakes by our young players as they're bound to happen with some many inexperienced guys on the roster. If that continues next season as well with all of the players having had an offseason to correct all those things I would be more inclined to blame the coaching staff.

Acrobat wrote: ↑

02 Nov 2023 09:31

There's also the argument to be made that drafting Love was a great motivational tool for Rodgers, as Rodgers had not looked great since the latter part of 2016, which was really his only good stretch in about a 5 year span and I think a lot of us were ready to move on.

I think that's a lame excuse for the selection of Love by fans desperately searching for a reason to justify Gutekunst drafting him in the first place.

Labrev wrote: ↑

02 Nov 2023 16:52

Rodgers got comfy after signing his 2018 megadeal. All set financially, de facto job-security. He took it easy. His play had dropped, he admitted it, but said his down years are other QBs' career years, so who cares? The GM took the fall, then the coach, and he felt zero heat.

Do you honestly blame Rodgers for the Packers moving on from Thompson?

Acrobat wrote: ↑

02 Nov 2023 11:24

The 1st WR taken after our pick was Tee Higgins. I don't see how Tee Higgins could have stopped the Brady Hail Mary or Aaron Jones fumble, unless the Packers put rookie Tee Higgins at safety at the end of the half and also called a route for him to be right next to Aaron Jones to scoop up a fumble.

Higgins might have caught the ball on the throw Rodgers was intercepted when targeting Lazard shortly before halftime. Maybe he would have been open so Rodgers wouldn't have thrown the ball to Jones on the play he fumbled.

There's no way of knowing. But it's guaranteed Higgins would have had a bigger impact in 2020 than a player who wasn't active even once that year.

go pak go wrote: ↑

02 Nov 2023 12:10

The 2020 draft was arguably the deepest draft at WR at the top. There were 11 WRs taken in the first 50 selections. We now have benefit of hindsight to see who was worth it.

Good Pick
1. CeeDee Lamb
2. Justin Jefferson
3. Brandon Aiyuk
4. Tee Higgins
5. Michael Pittman

Not Worth the Pick
1. Henry Ruggs
2. Jerry Jeudy
3. Jalen Reagor
4. Laviska Shenault
5. KJ Hamler
6. Chase Claypool

I believe it is safe to say we would have been better off taking the good 5 recievers instead of Love but there is also a great chance that one of the top WRs taken would have been a bust in GB as well.

In the end, the draft is a thing of chance. Position of need matters but hitting on the player is even more important. We should have drafted Higgins. But it's pretty easy to say that with benefit of 3 years of hindsight.

Even the ones you listed as not worth the pick had a higher impact than Love in 2020.

Labrev wrote: ↑

02 Nov 2023 16:52

It might seem obvious that we were primed for success because we know in hindsight that it happened, and because everyone almost always expects the team to improve over last season (and yet, many don't).

But ahead of the 2020 season, I think there were reasons for skepticism: that Rodgers's play at QB was not good enough to be a serious contender, that maybe even he was in decline. When we faced SF, we didn't look like we belonged (people keep talking about another WR, how about addressing the stuff that actually caused us to lose, e.g. stopping the run).

Ahead of 2021, yeah, Rodgers back in MVP form, *that* team seemed primed for great success (and yet, ended worse than the year before). And our draft that year did seem to reflect that, the guys we took seemed primed for more immediate impact than previous years.

It was obvious the Packers were a contender entering the 2020 draft as they made it to NFCCG the previous season and didn't lose any significant players. Gutekunst decided it was a smart decision to solely draft backups with his first three picks for some reason though. I can't understand how any Packers fan can support or even understand that.

Packers went 13-3 and made it to the NFCCG game and some fans think it was the right move to not try to increase firepower and run it back? lol

It's up past its bedtime, folks!

CWIMM wrote: ↑

03 Nov 2023 13:51

It was obvious the Packers were a contender entering the 2020 draft as they made it to NFCCG the previous season and didn't lose any significant players. Gutekunst decided it was a smart decision to solely draft backups with his first three picks for some reason though. I can't understand how any Packers fan can support or even understand that.

no kidding, every pick was for the future, yet according to some here, Guty went all in to win, according to some Rodgers was bad in 2019, 18, 17.

thanks for your input CWIMM

Labrev wrote: ↑

03 Nov 2023 14:00

It's up past its bedtime, folks!

whats your excuse

reality hurts sometimes.

The thing I was harping on that offseason was Defense. I could not get over the defense letting up >200 rushing yards to ONE player, and not even some generational talent at RB, but a just solid 'back in Raheem Mostert, such that the opposing offense did not even attempt a double digit number of passes. That is unheard of in a regular season game, never mind playoffs.

I don't care how high-powered your offense is, when the opposing team only bothers to pass the ball eight(!) times, even an offense led by Deshone Kizer (who never won a game as a starting QB) can beat you.

I found that alarming, as was the lack of alarm from seemingly anyone else: coaches, fans, mgmt. Just more nonsense about the offense, and now we debate if the 2020 draft was offensey enough.

I would made the same trade-up that Gute did, too ... and taken Patrick Queen.


But drafting Love, or a QB in general, ... not what I would have done, but I can see the logic behind it. I mean, if that pick is Jalen Hurts (and looks as good as he does now) then nobody is relitigating and criticizing this pick.

I mean by and large your draft picks will be backups their rookie season when you are a contending football team.They are a rookie.

5 of the 11 WRs taken in the top 50 picks would have/could have been a #2. Pittman and Higgins would have been good picks.

But the others would have been just as much of a backup with the same impact.

Cripes. AJ Dillon would have beaten the Bucs had MLF just given him the ball instead of Jones. We had the answer. We just didn't use it.

Yoop wrote: ↑

03 Nov 2023 10:38

who is it that thought Rodgers was in decline in 2019, I'd like to see the names on that list, from 2016 on the talent on offense was in decline, McCarthy almost refused to run the ball, the receivers didn't fit McCarthy's pass schemes.
2019 brought in Lafleur and a completely different offense approach, and eventually the ofrfense started to improve, anyone that says Rodgers wasn't any good in that transition is talking out there a ss

no one that knows this game would say Rodgers was the problem that year, thats nothing but a defense for this GM moving up and drafting Love, and a shallow one at that.

Why does it matter who thought that he was in decline? People who thought that were proven wrong. He still was an elite talent, as he proved in the public eye during the 2 subsequent seasons.

go pak go wrote: ↑

03 Nov 2023 16:05

Cripes. AJ Dillon would have beaten the Bucs had MLF just given him the ball instead of Jones. We had the answer. We just didn't use it.

Or if we threw a few more passes to MVS, who was red hot that day.

That's my biggest issue with relitigating the 2020 draft. We had what we needed. It was a coach/player fail, not a mgmt fail.