The Way a Packers Forum Should Be
https://packers-huddle.com/phpBB/
I think Rodgers is the one that needs pressure in that case. Like, the Packers are all aboard the "he's our guy" train.APB wrote: ↑12 May 2021 18:35I wonder if Goodell and the league brass would apply behind-the-scenes pressure for the Packers to resolve the Rodgers issue were an imminent sit-out year be on the horizon. I’m sure the league would frown heavily at the prospect of their reigning MVP and one of their showcase players being unnecessarily missing in action because of a non-football issue.
Just a thought.
The NFL's schedule very much suggests that Rodgers better be the QB in 2021. We have like 3 noon games.YoHoChecko wrote: ↑12 May 2021 18:38I think Rodgers is the one that needs pressure in that case. Like, the Packers are all aboard the "he's our guy" train.APB wrote: ↑12 May 2021 18:35I wonder if Goodell and the league brass would apply behind-the-scenes pressure for the Packers to resolve the Rodgers issue were an imminent sit-out year be on the horizon. I’m sure the league would frown heavily at the prospect of their reigning MVP and one of their showcase players being unnecessarily missing in action because of a non-football issue.
Just a thought.
Even with the same problems, a very good DC should be able to scheme up something to patch over the consistent inconsistencies/weaknesses. That’s what NFL football is about. So when you face an experienced and savvy QB like Tom Brady, you throw him a curve every now and then and maybe you’ll catch a break or two.go pak go wrote: ↑11 May 2021 10:20It's been a problem that has plagued the Packers honestly my whole life and I for the life of me cannot figure out why the Packers struggle with it so much. No matter the DC, no matter the assistant coaches, no matter the system, no matter the resources devoted....we just always have the same issues year after year.YoHoChecko wrote: ↑11 May 2021 10:06This is an excellent insight, and while I disagree with the critiques of "how acquired," I agree with the issue being weak spots and not strong spots; much like the success of our OL depending on a couple strengths and a couple non-weaknesses.Drj820 wrote: ↑11 May 2021 09:53The problem with the D is not the amount of really good players. There are plenty of those. It is the amount of incompetent players mixed in with the talent. Great Defenses dont play guys like Wil Redmond in championship games, they dont pay the Dean Lowrys of the world 6 million per year, start a 5th round rookie and UDFA at ILB and think that the hole is fixed.
There is talent on the Defense, but the amount of easily exploitable holes and the amount of people for any good QB and OC to pick on during a game on the D is the problem. We dont need stars to replace the glaring holes, just competence.
But you can get players anywhere. You can criticize the 5th and UDFA at LB but can't ignore that we also spent a 3rd and signed a scheme-familiar vet. And we paid Dean Lowry, but we drafted Montravis and developed Lancaster to his greatest potential (which was low) and brought in Snacks when we needed something more immediate.
The problem is not that we aren't putting the resources toward it it's that we're missing on the players in terms of competence. The busts haven't failed to be great, they've often failed to be good--or been so inconsistent that the highs don't make up for the lows (King, Montravis)
Just what "moves" has Rodgers done? We hear so-called reports and tweets from present and past teammates but other than that it is all a lot of talk. The brass at 1265 have all said publicly that they want Rodgers as our starter for the foreseeable future. Until we hear Rodgers say something on the record from his own lips it is impossible to know. This story really has legs, doesn't it?Scott4Pack wrote: ↑17 May 2021 06:23Has anybody discussed whether Rodgers’ moves might only be an early move at the Packer GM position in the future? Maybe it isn’t really about his playing days at all. Because, if he stays healthy, he will be in GB for at least 2 more years. Maybe he’s just trying to make it shown that he thinks he can make big boy decisions in the FO. This is all just an early pawn move that’ll be followed by the rooks and knights and bishops later.
Just thinking out loud here.
Can y'all remember any recent focused parts or segments made about the player Jordan Love? I mean about HIM. Not on AR or Bortles. Concentrating on him. Any fair ones looking at him as a whole?TheSkeptic wrote: ↑17 May 2021 08:28I think the Packers would be a plus to viewership with or without Rogers. Controversy sells. It is also very possible that the Packers are a very good team with Love at QB.
Anything the Packers brass says needs to be taken with a grain of salt. They could be saying that they want Rodgers yet doing things that make it more likely that Rodgers will not be back. The don't want the fans to blame them if Rodgers leaves and Love does not take the Packers to the SB within 2 seasons.
Jordan Love practiced for an entire season with the Packers.YoHoChecko wrote: ↑17 May 2021 21:58@salmar80 I mean that's the whole thing, right? This is happening when no one, not the team or any insiders, knows what we have in Jordan Love. that's intentional. The leverage is greatest before we know what we have in Jordan Love. As long as that information is unknown, Rodgers has leverage. Hence the flex this offseason...
I think your assumptions are wrong.Drj820 wrote: ↑17 May 2021 22:15Jordan Love practiced for an entire season with the Packers.YoHoChecko wrote: ↑17 May 2021 21:58@salmar80 I mean that's the whole thing, right? This is happening when no one, not the team or any insiders, knows what we have in Jordan Love. that's intentional. The leverage is greatest before we know what we have in Jordan Love. As long as that information is unknown, Rodgers has leverage. Hence the flex this offseason...
No media has seen Jordan Love at camp or practice, so myself and them have no idea how good or bad he is.
But after a year in practice, I would hope the team has a “decent” idea.
Lafleur has seen Love toss a ball every day for a year against his defense. There is a reason he is near tears of the Rodgers news.
It's the mental part that is the unknown, a QB, in fact most Qb's that make it to the pro game have the physical tools to do well, it's the gray matter that needs cultivating.Drj820 wrote: ↑17 May 2021 22:15Jordan Love practiced for an entire season with the Packers.YoHoChecko wrote: ↑17 May 2021 21:58@salmar80 I mean that's the whole thing, right? This is happening when no one, not the team or any insiders, knows what we have in Jordan Love. that's intentional. The leverage is greatest before we know what we have in Jordan Love. As long as that information is unknown, Rodgers has leverage. Hence the flex this offseason...
No media has seen Jordan Love at camp or practice, so myself and them have no idea how good or bad he is.
But after a year in practice, I would hope the team has a “decent” idea.
Lafleur has seen Love toss a ball every day for a year against his defense. There is a reason he is near tears of the Rodgers news.
I agree with you about the mental game. Hard disagree that all QBs in the pro game have the physical tools, the separation is just the mind. Many have cannons yet are inaccurate. Some are accurate, but cant throw deep and have noodle arms. Some can run and juke people, but cant throw. Some can throw, but are statues.Yoop wrote: ↑17 May 2021 23:51It's the mental part that is the unknown, a QB, in fact most Qb's that make it to the pro game have the physical tools to do well, it's the gray matter that needs cultivating.Drj820 wrote: ↑17 May 2021 22:15Jordan Love practiced for an entire season with the Packers.YoHoChecko wrote: ↑17 May 2021 21:58@salmar80 I mean that's the whole thing, right? This is happening when no one, not the team or any insiders, knows what we have in Jordan Love. that's intentional. The leverage is greatest before we know what we have in Jordan Love. As long as that information is unknown, Rodgers has leverage. Hence the flex this offseason...
No media has seen Jordan Love at camp or practice, so myself and them have no idea how good or bad he is.
But after a year in practice, I would hope the team has a “decent” idea.
Lafleur has seen Love toss a ball every day for a year against his defense. There is a reason he is near tears of the Rodgers news.
Maybe im wrong, I certainly can respect and see your side of the debate. I just disagree with it myself. I think the staff has had a side eye turned at Love since day one and there are all kinds of conclusions they can draw from a year of practice.APB wrote: ↑17 May 2021 22:52I think your assumptions are wrong.Drj820 wrote: ↑17 May 2021 22:15Jordan Love practiced for an entire season with the Packers.YoHoChecko wrote: ↑17 May 2021 21:58@salmar80 I mean that's the whole thing, right? This is happening when no one, not the team or any insiders, knows what we have in Jordan Love. that's intentional. The leverage is greatest before we know what we have in Jordan Love. As long as that information is unknown, Rodgers has leverage. Hence the flex this offseason...
No media has seen Jordan Love at camp or practice, so myself and them have no idea how good or bad he is.
But after a year in practice, I would hope the team has a “decent” idea.
Lafleur has seen Love toss a ball every day for a year against his defense. There is a reason he is near tears of the Rodgers news.
Love was the no. 3 QB all year. He didn’t get a lot of full team reps on offense against Lafleur’s defense, he got reps on the practice squad simulating opponent tendancies. Now, I do think he got in more meaningful work than your typical no. 3 QB but to say the team has a “decent” idea of what they have in Love is, I think, significantly overstated. No pre-season or regular season game reps still has Love as a big question mark as far as his in game capabilities and potential at this level.
While I respect your respectful retort, I respectfully disagree with your disagreement.Drj820 wrote: ↑18 May 2021 07:52Maybe im wrong, I certainly can respect and see your side of the debate. I just disagree with it myself. I think the staff has had a side eye turned at Love since day one and there are all kinds of conclusions they can draw from a year of practice.APB wrote: ↑17 May 2021 22:52I think your assumptions are wrong.Drj820 wrote: ↑17 May 2021 22:15
Jordan Love practiced for an entire season with the Packers.
No media has seen Jordan Love at camp or practice, so myself and them have no idea how good or bad he is.
But after a year in practice, I would hope the team has a “decent” idea.
Lafleur has seen Love toss a ball every day for a year against his defense. There is a reason he is near tears of the Rodgers news.
Love was the no. 3 QB all year. He didn’t get a lot of full team reps on offense against Lafleur’s defense, he got reps on the practice squad simulating opponent tendancies. Now, I do think he got in more meaningful work than your typical no. 3 QB but to say the team has a “decent” idea of what they have in Love is, I think, significantly overstated. No pre-season or regular season game reps still has Love as a big question mark as far as his in game capabilities and potential at this level.
How does he command the practice squad huddle? Can He remember the plays hes asked to execute? Is he accurate? Does he make the right read?
Lots of answers to be gathered. Nothing final of course, that comes on gameday. I just think they have "some" "pretty good idea" of what they have, and that amount is way more than many are considering. They have had the guy in the QB room for a year and every practice, I think they know alot.
As far as the third string and practice squad, wouldnt that be who goes up against the #1 Packer D in practice? Just playing an offense that resembles the opponents?
Always good to show respect to fellow packers fans in a friendly debatego pak go wrote: ↑18 May 2021 08:23While I respect your respectful retort, I respectfully disagree with your disagreement.Drj820 wrote: ↑18 May 2021 07:52Maybe im wrong, I certainly can respect and see your side of the debate. I just disagree with it myself. I think the staff has had a side eye turned at Love since day one and there are all kinds of conclusions they can draw from a year of practice.APB wrote: ↑17 May 2021 22:52
I think your assumptions are wrong.
Love was the no. 3 QB all year. He didn’t get a lot of full team reps on offense against Lafleur’s defense, he got reps on the practice squad simulating opponent tendancies. Now, I do think he got in more meaningful work than your typical no. 3 QB but to say the team has a “decent” idea of what they have in Love is, I think, significantly overstated. No pre-season or regular season game reps still has Love as a big question mark as far as his in game capabilities and potential at this level.
How does he command the practice squad huddle? Can He remember the plays hes asked to execute? Is he accurate? Does he make the right read?
Lots of answers to be gathered. Nothing final of course, that comes on gameday. I just think they have "some" "pretty good idea" of what they have, and that amount is way more than many are considering. They have had the guy in the QB room for a year and every practice, I think they know alot.
As far as the third string and practice squad, wouldnt that be who goes up against the #1 Packer D in practice? Just playing an offense that resembles the opponents?
While yes you can gleam some things like, "is Love accurate, does he have the arm we thought we did, do teammates respect him, does he remember the plays, does command the huddle etc.", there is still a lot of unknowns after just one year of play.
Rodgers didn't have the respect in 2005. He had shown some traits and shown command of the huddle, but it wasn't until the 2006 QB school that MM said he took that first leap.
Just because there is still unknown about Love after one year does not make him a failure or a bad selection. Year 2 is where you would expect to see more of that growth, confidence, ability etc. Internally, I would expect this is the training camp where coaches will see if they have something in Love or not.
No for sure. MLF absolutely knows more than we do. I won't disagree with that. And just based on the body language of the Packers not being in love with going with Love right now, it tells me that Love likely ain't ready.Drj820 wrote: ↑18 May 2021 08:28Always good to show respect to fellow packers fans in a friendly debatego pak go wrote: ↑18 May 2021 08:23While I respect your respectful retort, I respectfully disagree with your disagreement.Drj820 wrote: ↑18 May 2021 07:52
Maybe im wrong, I certainly can respect and see your side of the debate. I just disagree with it myself. I think the staff has had a side eye turned at Love since day one and there are all kinds of conclusions they can draw from a year of practice.
How does he command the practice squad huddle? Can He remember the plays hes asked to execute? Is he accurate? Does he make the right read?
Lots of answers to be gathered. Nothing final of course, that comes on gameday. I just think they have "some" "pretty good idea" of what they have, and that amount is way more than many are considering. They have had the guy in the QB room for a year and every practice, I think they know alot.
As far as the third string and practice squad, wouldnt that be who goes up against the #1 Packer D in practice? Just playing an offense that resembles the opponents?
While yes you can gleam some things like, "is Love accurate, does he have the arm we thought we did, do teammates respect him, does he remember the plays, does command the huddle etc.", there is still a lot of unknowns after just one year of play.
Rodgers didn't have the respect in 2005. He had shown some traits and shown command of the huddle, but it wasn't until the 2006 QB school that MM said he took that first leap.
Just because there is still unknown about Love after one year does not make him a failure or a bad selection. Year 2 is where you would expect to see more of that growth, confidence, ability etc. Internally, I would expect this is the training camp where coaches will see if they have something in Love or not.
I do agree there is still much more to know, I just think much more is known than some are giving credit for. Just my opinion, probably not changing any minds tho
I agree with this, but it is also disengenious and shortsighted to look at Pat Mahommes as a teammate warrior. Rodgers was relatively cheap too in 2018.