Packers Huddle

Don’t believe we offered a 2 for a second lol

Drj820 wrote: ↑

01 Nov 2022 17:57

Don’t believe we offered a 2 for a second lol

Gotta try and save their jobs.

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑

01 Nov 2022 18:03

Drj820 wrote: ↑

01 Nov 2022 17:57

Don’t believe we offered a 2 for a second lol

Gotta try and save their jobs.

If we wanted claypool enough to offer a 2, we would offer a 7 with it just to get it done. This story is cap.

Drj820 wrote: ↑

01 Nov 2022 18:27

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑

01 Nov 2022 18:03

Drj820 wrote: ↑

01 Nov 2022 17:57

Don’t believe we offered a 2 for a second lol

Gotta try and save their jobs.

If we wanted claypool enough to offer a 2, we would offer a 7 with it just to get it done. This story is cap.

Perhaps. But also if you think the bears pick will be 36 and ours will be like 45, a 7th won’t swing it.

You can be doubtful of the story, yet logical.

BF004 wrote: ↑

01 Nov 2022 18:55

Drj820 wrote: ↑

01 Nov 2022 18:27

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑

01 Nov 2022 18:03

Gotta try and save their jobs.

If we wanted claypool enough to offer a 2, we would offer a 7 with it just to get it done. This story is cap.

Perhaps. But also if you think the bears pick will be 36 and ours will be like 45, a 7th won’t swing it.

You can be doubtful of the story, yet logical.

You always make excuses for the packers sitting on their thumbs while other teams improve at the trade deadline. I’m not surprised.

Drj820 wrote: ↑

01 Nov 2022 22:02

BF004 wrote: ↑

01 Nov 2022 18:55

Drj820 wrote: ↑

01 Nov 2022 18:27

If we wanted claypool enough to offer a 2, we would offer a 7 with it just to get it done. This story is cap.

Perhaps. But also if you think the bears pick will be 36 and ours will be like 45, a 7th won’t swing it.

You can be doubtful of the story, yet logical.

You always make excuses for the packers sitting on their thumbs while other teams improve at the trade deadline. I’m not surprised.

And you don't believe &%$@ even when someone slaps you in the face with obvious facts.

So.....

paco wrote: ↑

01 Nov 2022 22:08

Drj820 wrote: ↑

01 Nov 2022 22:02

BF004 wrote: ↑

01 Nov 2022 18:55

Perhaps. But also if you think the bears pick will be 36 and ours will be like 45, a 7th won’t swing it.

You can be doubtful of the story, yet logical.

You always make excuses for the packers sitting on their thumbs while other teams improve at the trade deadline. I’m not surprised.

And you don't believe &%$@ even when someone slaps you in the face with obvious facts.

So.....

?

BF004 wrote: ↑

01 Nov 2022 18:55

Drj820 wrote: ↑

01 Nov 2022 18:27

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑

01 Nov 2022 18:03

Gotta try and save their jobs.

If we wanted claypool enough to offer a 2, we would offer a 7 with it just to get it done. This story is cap.

Perhaps. But also if you think the bears pick will be 36 and ours will be like 45, a 7th won’t swing it.

You can be doubtful of the story, yet logical.

If I were the Steelers, I would absolutely prefer the Bears 2nd round pick over the Packers 2nd round pick as the Bears just traded away two of their top defenders and should be prohibitive underdogs in all of their remaining games except the two with the Lions and, sadly, possibly at home against the Packers.

It would probably have taken a 2nd and the Packers 3rd to have outbid Chicago's 2nd round pick.

That said, it is absolutely uncanny how the Packers have been linked to so many players over the years who do end up getting traded, but never traded to the Packers.

I don't want Claypool at all. Would rather gamble with other teams PS players.

texas wrote: ↑

01 Nov 2022 22:36

I don't want Claypool at all. Would rather gamble with other teams PS players.

That’s what we always do

Drj820 wrote: ↑

01 Nov 2022 22:02

BF004 wrote: ↑

01 Nov 2022 18:55

Drj820 wrote: ↑

01 Nov 2022 18:27

If we wanted claypool enough to offer a 2, we would offer a 7 with it just to get it done. This story is cap.

Perhaps. But also if you think the bears pick will be 36 and ours will be like 45, a 7th won’t swing it.

You can be doubtful of the story, yet logical.

You always make excuses for the packers sitting on their thumbs while other teams improve at the trade deadline. I’m not surprised.

I always make excuses for the packers sitting on their thumbs?




Ah the old if you don’t post exactly like me every single post, you must be diametrically opposed, logic train.

When you are a defensive stance away or 2 from being the bottom team in the NFC and talking about selling Aaron Jones....I'm glad we didn't end up sending a 2 & 3/4 to the Steelers for a player we will have to cut most likely this offseason anyways.

I'm okay with people saying we should have done something in 2020 or 2021....but this year? Good grief people. That's just b*tching to b*tch.

go pak go wrote: ↑

02 Nov 2022 07:18

When you are a defensive stance away or 2 from being the bottom team in the NFC and talking about selling Aaron Jones....I'm glad we didn't end up sending a 2 & 3/4 to the Steelers for a player we will have to cut most likely this offseason anyways.

I'm okay with people saying we should have done something in 2020 or 2021....but this year? Good grief people. That's just b*tching to b*tch.

The problem is the packers wanting to play in two worlds. One world pays the old QB 50 million a year which suggests WIN NOW, and handcuffs the future.

One world says “protect the future” or “look to the future” when you draft Love, draft a rookie ILB, draft a first round DLmen that’s a couple years away from contributing, draft a total project at WR who played FCS ball, never want to give premium picks away to get real difference makers.

Playing in both worlds is destroying both worlds. The decision to bend the knee to Rodgers and pay him a fortune without a doubt hurts the future. Yet we sacrifice the now by protecting the future by drafting for the future instead of loading up while we have the QB.

The result is coming up short in playoffs and what we have now.

I supported a trade for this year just because the NFC basically sucks and a WC spot is still there for the taking. But that would require some sacrifice of the future for the now

As you said, the biggest blunder thus far was resigning Rodgers in August of 2018 to a huge deal and then drafting Love 18 months later. We needed to ride or die with Rodgers, even though he looked marginal in 2018 and 2019. We made our bed there and needed to lie in it. Then we doubled down on that because of Rodgers' excellent play in 2020 and 2021 and signed him to an even larger deal.

HOWEVER, the wasting of a 1st round pick is not the main reason this team is playing poorly in 2022. The talent on this team is not the main reason this team is playing this poorly. Look no further than right here: https://www.packers.com/team/coaches-roster/

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

02 Nov 2022 08:48

As you said, the biggest blunder thus far was resigning Rodgers in August of 2018 to a huge deal and then drafting Love 18 months later. We needed to ride or die with Rodgers, even though he looked marginal in 2018 and 2019. We made our bed there and needed to lie in it. Then we doubled down on that because of Rodgers' excellent play in 2020 and 2021 and signed him to an even larger deal.

HOWEVER, the wasting of a 1st round pick is not the main reason this team is playing poorly in 2022. The talent on this team is not the main reason this team is playing this poorly. Look no further than right here: https://www.packers.com/team/coaches-roster/

I agree plenty of blame should go to coaching. But i stand firm that we know who rodgers is. He likes the wiley vet that can read his mind and knows the game. He would rather have less physical traits and more mental traits (cobb) than speed and no brain. Its why he also likes Lazard and like Whitewater Jesus so much. So to enter the year with the two vets who cant stay on the field and a cast of rookies was always a disaster waiting to happen. Brady might have the leadership style to properly get those guys up to speed, Rodgers just does not. And we all know that. I wouldnt have played in both worlds of looking to future, while I love Quay and like the pic, the defense has just signed Campbell and they had plenty to work with. I would have used the two first rounders we had and gone and got a top rookie prospect, and signed an actual vet with the money we saved not bringing back Rodgers.

So yes blame coaching, but playing for the now (paying Rodgers enough to destroy future caps), while protecting the future (drafting for the future and saving picks), is preventing the team from taking the roster over the top while we have the 50m dollar man.

Drj820 wrote: ↑

02 Nov 2022 08:39

go pak go wrote: ↑

02 Nov 2022 07:18

When you are a defensive stance away or 2 from being the bottom team in the NFC and talking about selling Aaron Jones....I'm glad we didn't end up sending a 2 & 3/4 to the Steelers for a player we will have to cut most likely this offseason anyways.

I'm okay with people saying we should have done something in 2020 or 2021....but this year? Good grief people. That's just b*tching to b*tch.

The problem is the packers wanting to play in two worlds. One world pays the old QB 50 million a year which suggests WIN NOW, and handcuffs the future.

One world says “protect the future” or “look to the future” when you draft Love, draft a rookie ILB, draft a first round DLmen that’s a couple years away from contributing, draft a total project at WR who played FCS ball, never want to give premium picks away to get real difference makers.

Playing in both worlds is destroying both worlds. The decision to bend the knee to Rodgers and pay him a fortune without a doubt hurts the future. Yet we sacrifice the now by protecting the future by drafting for the future instead of loading up while we have the QB.

The result is coming up short in playoffs and what we have now.

I supported a trade for this year just because the NFC basically sucks and a WC spot is still there for the taking. But that would require some sacrifice of the future for the now

The specific thing the Packers screwed up this past offseason was not making the trade for AJ Brown. They could have very easily traded their 22nd pick and 2nd rounder to the Titans which would have been too good to refuse for the Titans. Maybe get a 4th rounder from TN in return.

We then could have still drafted Walker at #28 which would have filled an immediate need and then do with what you will in the 2nd round.

Absolutely. I have been very much on that mindset the past few weeks.

I strongly feel the Packers screwed this up. They should have traded Rodgers to Denver. I was all about that last offseason. They rolled the dice and it didn't work. It could have still worked. I thought our defense would be stronger and our coach and Rodgers would ride the run game harder...but I think we are now too late in the process of reviving the Packers personnel strategy.

Gute's job is going to be linked hard to this. He will need to have a team to be optimistic for by the end of the 2024 season or he will be gone. The challenge for Gute is he has to draft really well to make that happen since he won't be able to buy success like he was afforded to from 2019 - 2022.

e likes the wiley vet that can read his mind and knows the game. He would rather have less physical traits and more mental traits (cobb) than speed and no brain. Its why he also likes Lazard and like Whitewater Jesus so much. So to enter the year with the two vets who cant stay on the field and a cast of rookies was always a disaster waiting to happen.

We would still be in this situation if we traded up for a 1st round receiver.

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

02 Nov 2022 09:14

e likes the wiley vet that can read his mind and knows the game. He would rather have less physical traits and more mental traits (cobb) than speed and no brain. Its why he also likes Lazard and like Whitewater Jesus so much. So to enter the year with the two vets who cant stay on the field and a cast of rookies was always a disaster waiting to happen.

We would still be in this situation if we traded up for a 1st round receiver.

Yeah, and I would call that a Rodgers problem, not a GM problem.

He likes slow JAGs, well good for him; we still need a guy like MVS or Christian Watson on the field in some situations, even if they are not 95% reliable.

He was not-so-subtly implying we needed to cut Doubs's reps after last week. And take our most dynamic WR off the field, when we have no one else with remotely as much ability?

The guy just didn't understand the task before him when he returned knowing Adams would be gone. We had to "do more with less" to make it work this season. If he wasn't up for that, he shouldn't have come back to this team.

But hey, he's being paid a lot of money to !@#$ the season away so... good for him.

Labrev wrote: ↑

02 Nov 2022 10:06

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

02 Nov 2022 09:14

e likes the wiley vet that can read his mind and knows the game. He would rather have less physical traits and more mental traits (cobb) than speed and no brain. Its why he also likes Lazard and like Whitewater Jesus so much. So to enter the year with the two vets who cant stay on the field and a cast of rookies was always a disaster waiting to happen.

We would still be in this situation if we traded up for a 1st round receiver.

Yeah, and I would call that a Rodgers problem, not a GM problem.

He likes slow JAGs, well good for him; we still need a guy like MVS or Christian Watson on the field in some situations, even if they are not 95% reliable.

He was not-so-subtly implying we needed to cut Doubs's reps after last week. And take our most dynamic WR off the field, when we have no one else with remotely as much ability?

The guy just didn't understand the task before him when he returned knowing Adams would be gone. We had to "do more with less" to make it work this season. If he wasn't up for that, he shouldn't have come back to this team.

But hey, he's being paid a lot of money to !@#$ the season away so... good for him.

This is a very good post.

go pak go wrote: ↑

02 Nov 2022 09:12

he specific thing the Packers screwed up this past offseason was not making the trade for AJ Brown. They could have very easily traded their 22nd pick and 2nd rounder to the Titans which would have been too good to refuse for the Titans. Maybe get a 4th rounder from TN in return.

this makes to much sense for Guty to do, he'd rather give a ol dog like Rodgers raw recruits to learn up, so mind boggling it's been impossible for me to grasp.

look at what Airens did for Brady, gave him his favorite TE, gave him experienced WR's, thats what Rodgers has needed, experienced receivers that can pick up pro schemes fast, this has always felt like a power struggle ever since Guty took control.

I called MVS, Brown and that other jag the 3 stooges based on that reasoning, and this last draft is basically the same approach, Watson is raw, but very athletic ( Brown) Doubs, less raw, maybe the same with Toure, he was forced to move up in round two for Watson, not to and Rodgers would have probably hired a hit man to take Guty out (chuckle). and Doubs and Toure seemed like best available receivers, no real complain with any of these guys, but it wasn't enough.

AJ Brown would have given Rodgers a go to guy, add in the rookies and they wouldn't have been under pressure to succeed, less pressure usually leads to better results, Rodgers called out Doubs and everyone to the media, I'd also like to hear what he said to Doubs and some others one on one, Rodgers isn't stupid, a tongue lashing, then a sit down can be a very positive thing, it says ya need to take responsibility for failing, however your problems may be that your trying to hard and losing concentration.

not sure Walker would have lasted till slot 28, if not, who cares, we obviously needed a ready to play WR then we did a ILB