Page 9 of 51
Re: 2023 NFL Draft Discussion
Posted: 30 Jan 2023 21:12
by Drj820
Labrev wrote: ↑30 Jan 2023 20:38
Nah Geno can play. He was a good talent coming outta college, he just needed a situation like what Love (and Rodgers before him) had, but the Jets (who have NEVER developed a good QB of their own!!) threw him into action before he was ready and it was a setback.
But he kept grinding and worked himself into a Top-10 QB (statistically, not in mere opinion) of 2022.
To a lesser extent, same was true of Blaine Gabbert. Amazing talent, but Jacksonville threw him out there as a raw rookie and his growth was stunted. He kept grinding and managed to work himself up to a serviceable backup, just imagine how differently the story would have gone if he had been developed properly.
Although yes, Seattle does a better job playing complimentary football than we do, but another reason why I think we should yeet Rodgers is to see how much of that problem is due to him running the McC*rthy offense.
Lafleur is the HC. This is Year what…4? Packers brass including Lafleur have begged rodgers back at every turn up until now…at this point Lafleur owns the offense. If he has no identity or scheme in his O, that’s on him…if he really trusted his philosophy he could have yeeted Rodgers twice already.
What the Offense is, is Lafleurs responsibility at this point. He’s got to own it
Re: 2023 NFL Draft Discussion
Posted: 30 Jan 2023 21:23
by bud fox
go pak go wrote: ↑30 Jan 2023 21:08
bud fox wrote: ↑30 Jan 2023 19:54
This packers team without Rodgers - we saw Love's only start - god help us.
I saw Aaron Rodgers vs the Lions this year. I think I can handle just about any QB performance at this point.
You have no idea what it will be like.
You really need to watch other teams and see how bad and boring some offences can be due to qb limitations.
We have been blessed to watch the highest possible level of qb play. The sophistication, ability, talent.
Healthy Rodgers be back next year. Hopefully with a decent receiver on the team.
Re: 2023 NFL Draft Discussion
Posted: 30 Jan 2023 21:46
by Labrev
lupedafiasco wrote: ↑30 Jan 2023 21:08
Labrev wrote: ↑30 Jan 2023 20:38
Nah Geno can play. He was a good talent coming outta college, he just needed a situation like what Love (and Rodgers before him) had, but the Jets (who have NEVER developed a good QB of their own!!) threw him into action before he was ready and it was a setback.
But he kept grinding and worked himself into a Top-10 QB (statistically, not in mere opinion) of 2022.
To a lesser extent, same was true of Blaine Gabbert. Amazing talent, but Jacksonville threw him out there as a raw rookie and his growth was stunted. He kept grinding and managed to work himself up to a serviceable backup, just imagine how differently the story would have gone if he had been developed properly.
Although yes, Seattle does a better job playing complimentary football than we do, but another reason why I think we should yeet Rodgers is to see how much of that problem is due to him running the McC*rthy offense.
Any QB would thrive in Seattle. They are stacked with pass catchers.
Russ wasn't thriving. Patchwork OL is a constant issue for them.
Re: 2023 NFL Draft Discussion
Posted: 30 Jan 2023 21:55
by Labrev
Drj820 wrote: ↑30 Jan 2023 21:12
Lafleur is the HC. This is Year what…4? Packers brass including Lafleur have begged rodgers back at every turn up until now…at this point Lafleur owns the offense. If he has no identity or scheme in his O, that’s on him…if he really trusted his philosophy he could have yeeted Rodgers twice already.
What the Offense is, is Lafleurs responsibility at this point. He’s got to own it
I agree with all of that.
But this was what we wanted in our new head coach at the time, someone who would rejuvenate Rodgers and be deferential to him. Can't really blame MLF for being exactly what he was asked to be, even if I rather he was more like what you've said.
I'm willing to give him a chance to prove he can be the guy with a QB who isn't bigger than him.
Re: 2023 NFL Draft Discussion
Posted: 30 Jan 2023 22:14
by Drj820
Labrev wrote: ↑30 Jan 2023 21:55
Drj820 wrote: ↑30 Jan 2023 21:12
Lafleur is the HC. This is Year what…4? Packers brass including Lafleur have begged rodgers back at every turn up until now…at this point Lafleur owns the offense. If he has no identity or scheme in his O, that’s on him…if he really trusted his philosophy he could have yeeted Rodgers twice already.
What the Offense is, is Lafleurs responsibility at this point. He’s got to own it
I agree with all of that.
But this was what we wanted in our new head coach at the time, someone who would rejuvenate Rodgers and be deferential to him. Can't really blame MLF for being exactly what he was asked to be, even if I rather he was more like what you've said.
I'm willing to give him a chance to prove he can be the guy with a QB who isn't bigger than him.
Lafleurs gotta trust his scheme and trust himself and the operation he and gutey are allegedly running. Last year he looked like he was about to cry at the thought of losing 12. This off-season he’s already publically lobbying rodgers through the media and pressers to come back.
Lafleur needs to boot 12 and stand on his own two feet
Re: 2023 NFL Draft Discussion
Posted: 31 Jan 2023 09:01
by Half Empty
bud fox wrote: ↑30 Jan 2023 19:54
Rodgers with any other offense in the league is a superbowl.
This packers team without Rodgers - we saw Love's
only start - god help us.
The operative word. Do you think you can name anyone who, based on one game, could be evaluated fairly?
Re: 2023 NFL Draft Discussion
Posted: 31 Jan 2023 10:13
by Captain_Ben
Even now, I'd still take Rodgers playing half the season with a broken thumb on his throwing hand (which for some reason doesn't seem to ever be discussed) over Geno Smith.
Re: 2023 NFL Draft Discussion
Posted: 31 Jan 2023 11:48
by NCF
Going back to TEs… I know it can’t be a hard rule, but when looking for scouting low hanging fruit, can we acknowledge guys like George and Travis and Mark are the game changers in the NFL and a guy named Jace probably isn’t breaking into this pack… ever. Sometimes it is the simple things.
Re: 2023 NFL Draft Discussion
Posted: 31 Jan 2023 11:53
by Ghost_Lombardi
bud fox wrote: ↑30 Jan 2023 21:23
go pak go wrote: ↑30 Jan 2023 21:08
bud fox wrote: ↑30 Jan 2023 19:54
This packers team without Rodgers - we saw Love's only start - god help us.
I saw Aaron Rodgers vs the Lions this year. I think I can handle just about any QB performance at this point.
You have no idea what it will be like.
You really need to watch other teams and see how bad and boring some offences can be due to qb limitations.
We have been blessed to watch the highest possible level of qb play. The sophistication, ability, talent.
Healthy Rodgers be back next year. Hopefully with a decent receiver on the team.
No doubt we have been blessed. Past tense. His play this year and that thumb injury is sign of things to come - more injuries, slower recoveries, reduced mobility in the pocket, a loss of accuracy, relying on experience rather than what he is seeing (deciding pre-snap where to go with the ball)...all of this gets worse, not better.
Re: 2023 NFL Draft Discussion
Posted: 31 Jan 2023 12:36
by BF004
I was really warming up to Zay Flowers, kid is electric, fast, great catcher.
But Flowers came in at 5’9 1/4″ and 182 pounds at the Shrine Bowl. Someone will likely be willing to bite long before I'd be okay with that size. Hate being that guy, but not sure if can be in play for 15 for me at that size. Gunna be a tough one for me.
I definitely haven't dug into everyone yet, but I might be ready to call him the best route runner in the class so far. Have a hard time seeing anyone doing it better than this.
Game just seems to move slow for him, smart player.
Kind of in the same boat with Josh Downs, maybe a step down. I'd be more comfortable with Downs around 25-40 and Flowers around 15 though.
Re: 2023 NFL Draft Discussion
Posted: 31 Jan 2023 12:42
by go pak go
Yeah I really don't like the WRs in this class to be honest.
But I do really like Flowers. But again...I don't know if I want him at 15.
Re: 2023 NFL Draft Discussion
Posted: 31 Jan 2023 14:56
by APB
lupedafiasco wrote: ↑25 Jan 2023 17:13
APB wrote: ↑25 Jan 2023 16:30
Scott4Pack wrote: ↑25 Jan 2023 15:45
I keep hearing people mention the Colts. They do go after QBs, for sure. But who in the heck thinks that Rodgers would approve that? I don’t see it at all.
He doesn't need to, there's no no-trade clause in his contract. The Packers can trade him to whomever they want should they choose to do him the dirty like that.
Rodgers definitely has a no trade clause. Its called retirement. He mentions that word to any team trying to trade for him and that deal over.
Re: 2023 NFL Draft Discussion
Posted: 31 Jan 2023 14:58
by Labrev
Half Empty wrote: ↑31 Jan 2023 09:01
bud fox wrote: ↑30 Jan 2023 19:54
Rodgers with any other offense in the league is a superbowl.
This packers team without Rodgers - we saw Love's
only start - god help us.
The operative word. Do you think you can name anyone who, based on one game, could be evaluated fairly?
Hell, half of Rodgers's games cannot be evaluated fairly, because of his OL, WRs, defense, coach, trainer, waterboy...
Re: 2023 NFL Draft Discussion
Posted: 31 Jan 2023 16:06
by YoHoChecko
BF004 wrote: ↑31 Jan 2023 12:36
Kind of in the same boat with Josh Downs, maybe a step down. I'd be more comfortable with Downs around 25-40 and Flowers around 15 though.
I'm in the "Flowers is too small at 15" camp. Heck, I'm in the "Flowers is too small in the first round" camp.
I'm very confused about the consensus around the "top" WRs in this class (just saw that 3 of the 4 ESPN analysts, Kiper, McShay, Reid, and Matt Miller) had the same 5 in slightly different orders (JSN, Addison, Johnson, Flowers, Downs, and I'm super confused and intrigued as to why there isn't more diversity in opinion with guys like Boutte and Hyatt (the one exception to the uniformity--also cracked Dane Brugler's top 5) or even guys we like like Rice and AT Perry, though we have to see them run.
The fact that we could put our newest WR in the slot does open up options for me, but I'm not sure I want to go Flowers small or even Downs or Tyler Scott small. if you're under 190 pounds, it's a tough sell for me.
Re: 2023 NFL Draft Discussion
Posted: 31 Jan 2023 16:38
by go pak go
YoHoChecko wrote: ↑31 Jan 2023 16:06
BF004 wrote: ↑31 Jan 2023 12:36
Kind of in the same boat with Josh Downs, maybe a step down. I'd be more comfortable with Downs around 25-40 and Flowers around 15 though.
I'm in the "Flowers is too small at 15" camp. Heck, I'm in the "Flowers is too small in the first round" camp.
I'm very confused about the consensus around the "top" WRs in this class (just saw that 3 of the 4 ESPN analysts, Kiper, McShay, Reid, and Matt Miller) had the same 5 in slightly different orders (JSN, Addison, Johnson, Flowers, Downs, and I'm super confused and intrigued as to why there isn't more diversity in opinion with guys like Boutte and Hyatt (the one exception to the uniformity--also cracked Dane Brugler's top 5) or even guys we like like Rice and AT Perry, though we have to see them run.
The fact that we could put our newest WR in the slot does open up options for me, but I'm not sure I want to go Flowers small or even Downs or Tyler Scott small. if you're under 190 pounds, it's a tough sell for me.
I love Flowers. He is small...he certainly doesn't seem to play small. I think he's my favorite WR in this draft. Would I take him at 15?
Maybe. Would rather have a better option but I really like Flowers. My guess is he could add another 5 to 10 pounds of muscle and not lose his quickness.
Re: 2023 NFL Draft Discussion
Posted: 31 Jan 2023 16:40
by Yoop
APB wrote: ↑31 Jan 2023 14:56
lupedafiasco wrote: ↑25 Jan 2023 17:13
APB wrote: ↑25 Jan 2023 16:30
He doesn't need to, there's no no-trade clause in his contract. The Packers can trade him to whomever they want should they choose to do him the dirty like that.
Rodgers definitely has a no trade clause. Its called retirement. He mentions that word to any team trying to trade for him and that deal over.
ya the Packers will sure show Rodgers, not only will they not have a top 12 QB, they wont get a thing for him and they'll still owe him millions, this revenge thing that Ingalls or you and other fans are on is laugh out loud funny.
we either see him in G&G or we get as much compensation for him from anyone outside the North, and even thats debatable, it sure worked out well playing hardball with Favre, he figured out how to get to where he wanted to go in 1 season, then came to Lambeau and kicked our ass, revenge has a way of back firing often.
Re: 2023 NFL Draft Discussion
Posted: 31 Jan 2023 17:02
by go pak go
Yoop wrote: ↑31 Jan 2023 16:40
APB wrote: ↑31 Jan 2023 14:56
lupedafiasco wrote: ↑25 Jan 2023 17:13
Rodgers definitely has a no trade clause. Its called retirement. He mentions that word to any team trying to trade for him and that deal over.
ya the Packers will sure show Rodgers, not only will they not have a top 12 QB, they wont get a thing for him and they'll still owe him millions, this revenge thing that Ingalls or you and other fans are on is laugh out loud funny.
we either see him in G&G or we get as much compensation for him from anyone outside the North, and even thats debatable, it sure worked out well playing hardball with Favre, he figured out how to get to where he wanted to go in 1 season, then came to Lambeau and kicked our ass, revenge has a way of back firing often.
We would not owe Rodgers any new money if he is not on our team as of week 1.
And we got the ultimate revenge on Favre. He can have his 2009. I will take our 2010.
Re: 2023 NFL Draft Discussion
Posted: 31 Jan 2023 17:15
by Yoop
go pak go wrote: ↑31 Jan 2023 17:02
Yoop wrote: ↑31 Jan 2023 16:40
APB wrote: ↑31 Jan 2023 14:56
ya the Packers will sure show Rodgers, not only will they not have a top 12 QB, they wont get a thing for him and they'll still owe him millions, this revenge thing that Ingalls or you and other fans are on is laugh out loud funny.
we either see him in G&G or we get as much compensation for him from anyone outside the North, and even thats debatable, it sure worked out well playing hardball with Favre, he figured out how to get to where he wanted to go in 1 season, then came to Lambeau and kicked our ass, revenge has a way of back firing often.
We would not owe Rodgers any new money if he is not on our team as of week 1.
And we got the ultimate revenge on Favre. He can have his 2009. I will take our 2010.
ya aught to leave 2010 out of this
at least till we see Love play more then a QT
right no new money, so I guess thats a wash, whatever he does we'll be paying him anyway, he might drag this out till we have to pay him.
I havn't read anything lately about the money, just all the trade gossip. I still think we kick the can down the road, retain, restructure, and give it another shot, Love will be even more ready, and we'll get another season out of a lot of still good older vets, but we'll see.
I just know that I want to either get good compensation in a trade, or Him playing for that money, rather then picking his nose on a couch retired.
Re: 2023 NFL Draft Discussion
Posted: 31 Jan 2023 17:37
by Scott4Pack
Where is an up to date big board that you guys like? I’m thinking about taking a day next week to just stay in my jammies/slippers, have some all-day coffee, and create a mock draft.
Re: 2023 NFL Draft Discussion
Posted: 31 Jan 2023 19:17
by bud fox
APB wrote: ↑31 Jan 2023 14:56
lupedafiasco wrote: ↑25 Jan 2023 17:13
APB wrote: ↑25 Jan 2023 16:30
He doesn't need to, there's no no-trade clause in his contract. The Packers can trade him to whomever they want should they choose to do him the dirty like that.
Rodgers definitely has a no trade clause. Its called retirement. He mentions that word to any team trying to trade for him and that deal over.
He doesn't tell the Packers. He tells other teams and they pull their offers.
Ingalls is an idiot.