Packers Huddle

Now we know why MLF and Gute traded high-fives when we got him in 2020!

Labrev wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024 10:09

Now we know why MLF and Gute traded high-fives when we got him in 2020!

They weren't in the same room.

But I think Gute hugged his kids

go pak go wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024 10:31

Labrev wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024 10:09

Now we know why MLF and Gute traded high-fives when we got him in 2020!

They weren't in the same room.

But I think Gute hugged his kids

Doesn't mean they didn't high-five at some point that day.

If the NFL would groom QB's the way we do, there would be a lot more Jordon Loves in the NFL, if Chicago groomed Fields he'd very likely be better, I wont exhalt Gute or Lafleur for doing something the right way, thats what there paid to do, imo we took Love (QB) a year or 2 early.

people are probably right, Love was probably just about as ready last year as this one, but last years team was not even near as ready to support Love as this years team, couldn't support the OL QB either.

years ago grooming a new QB a year or two was the norm, now fans demand to see them sooner, GM's cave to owner demands who's goal is to please ticket holders, and the NFL has become a recycle factory of destroyed QB's.

Labrev wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024 11:00

Doesn't mean they didn't high-five at some point that day.

Only via Zoom. Covid ban on meeting at that draft.

Yoop wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024 11:11

If the NFL would groom QB's the way we do, there would be a lot more Jordon Loves in the NFL, if Chicago groomed Fields he'd very likely be better, I wont exhalt Gute or Lafleur for doing something the right way, thats what there paid to do, imo we took Love (QB) a year or 2 early.

people are probably right, Love was probably just about as ready last year as this one, but last years team was not even near as ready to support Love as this years team, couldn't support the OL QB either.

years ago grooming a new QB a year or two was the norm, now fans demand to see them sooner, GM's cave to owner demands who's goal is to please ticket holders, and the NFL has become a recycle factory of destroyed QB's.

That's where Chicago have an opportunity. They have the chance to use pick no. 1 on one of the star QBs, but announce that Fields will start for two years while the new man learns. Then there will be a contest.

Usually the number 1 pick goes to a team without a viable QB - that's why they pick at 1, because they're all-round useless. This time Chicago could buck the trend. but I bet they don't!

RingoCStarrQB wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024 07:26

BF004 wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024 07:17

If the defense is passable and Love doesn’t have another Giants game, getting healthy at WR and TE and RB, don’t see why we couldn’t win 2-3 more games this year yet.

Jordan's already an 'upper cruster'. He's in the freakin effen 'ether zone'. His presence on offense at Lambeau on Sunday will create an intensity in the stands that we all can cheer over.

In celebration of the emergence of Jordan Love, I'll be looking for a good stiff double Old Fashioned before entering Lambeau on Sunday afternoon.

BEAT DA BEARS and GO PACK GO!

I hope you are right. We need the crowd to get back to the 90s and early 2000s. It hasn't been wild like that and it's time

dsr wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024 11:54

Yoop wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024 11:11

If the NFL would groom QB's the way we do, there would be a lot more Jordon Loves in the NFL, if Chicago groomed Fields he'd very likely be better, I wont exhalt Gute or Lafleur for doing something the right way, thats what there paid to do, imo we took Love (QB) a year or 2 early.

people are probably right, Love was probably just about as ready last year as this one, but last years team was not even near as ready to support Love as this years team, couldn't support the OL QB either.

years ago grooming a new QB a year or two was the norm, now fans demand to see them sooner, GM's cave to owner demands who's goal is to please ticket holders, and the NFL has become a recycle factory of destroyed QB's.

That's where Chicago have an opportunity. They have the chance to use pick no. 1 on one of the star QBs, but announce that Fields will start for two years while the new man learns. Then there will be a contest.

Usually the number 1 pick goes to a team without a viable QB - that's why they pick at 1, because they're all-round useless. This time Chicago could buck the trend. but I bet they don't!

agree, use slot one on a QB, groom him at least one season, ya can't win in this league any more minus a very good QB, or a lot of skill position talent like the Niners, which is even harder to assemble, the Bears are sitting pretty, they just have to get this right, hope they don't

Yoop wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024 12:10

dsr wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024 11:54

Yoop wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024 11:11

If the NFL would groom QB's the way we do, there would be a lot more Jordon Loves in the NFL, if Chicago groomed Fields he'd very likely be better, I wont exhalt Gute or Lafleur for doing something the right way, thats what there paid to do, imo we took Love (QB) a year or 2 early.

people are probably right, Love was probably just about as ready last year as this one, but last years team was not even near as ready to support Love as this years team, couldn't support the OL QB either.

years ago grooming a new QB a year or two was the norm, now fans demand to see them sooner, GM's cave to owner demands who's goal is to please ticket holders, and the NFL has become a recycle factory of destroyed QB's.

That's where Chicago have an opportunity. They have the chance to use pick no. 1 on one of the star QBs, but announce that Fields will start for two years while the new man learns. Then there will be a contest.

Usually the number 1 pick goes to a team without a viable QB - that's why they pick at 1, because they're all-round useless. This time Chicago could buck the trend. but I bet they don't!

agree, use slot one on a QB, groom him at least one season, ya can't win in this league any more minus a very good QB, or a lot of skill position talent like the Niners, which is even harder to assemble, the Bears are sitting pretty, they just have to get this right, hope they don't

The Steelers, Colts, Bengals and Browns beg to differ.

go pak go wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024 12:33

Yoop wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024 12:10

dsr wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024 11:54

That's where Chicago have an opportunity. They have the chance to use pick no. 1 on one of the star QBs, but announce that Fields will start for two years while the new man learns. Then there will be a contest.

Usually the number 1 pick goes to a team without a viable QB - that's why they pick at 1, because they're all-round useless. This time Chicago could buck the trend. but I bet they don't!

agree, use slot one on a QB, groom him at least one season, ya can't win in this league any more minus a very good QB, or a lot of skill position talent like the Niners, which is even harder to assemble, the Bears are sitting pretty, they just have to get this right, hope they don't

The Steelers, Colts, Bengals and Browns beg to differ.

never said a rookie can't make it, just that most don't

dsr wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024 11:54

Usually the number 1 pick goes to a team without a viable QB - that's why they pick at 1, because they're all-round useless. This time Chicago could buck the trend. but I bet they don't!

If the Bears plan on sticking w/Fields and DON'T trade out of the top pick, they're idiots. There is far too much value in the no. 1 overall. They could trade down while remaining in the top 5 and likely still get their top non-QB prospect along with a compensation haul.

dsr wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024 11:54

Yoop wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024 11:11

If the NFL would groom QB's the way we do, there would be a lot more Jordon Loves in the NFL, if Chicago groomed Fields he'd very likely be better, I wont exhalt Gute or Lafleur for doing something the right way, thats what there paid to do, imo we took Love (QB) a year or 2 early.

people are probably right, Love was probably just about as ready last year as this one, but last years team was not even near as ready to support Love as this years team, couldn't support the OL QB either.

years ago grooming a new QB a year or two was the norm, now fans demand to see them sooner, GM's cave to owner demands who's goal is to please ticket holders, and the NFL has become a recycle factory of destroyed QB's.

That's where Chicago have an opportunity. They have the chance to use pick no. 1 on one of the star QBs, but announce that Fields will start for two years while the new man learns. Then there will be a contest.

Usually the number 1 pick goes to a team without a viable QB - that's why they pick at 1, because they're all-round useless. This time Chicago could buck the trend. but I bet they don't!

Not the same. Having Caleb Williams getting pointers from Justin Fields is maybe not as big a positive as Love learning from Aaron Rodgers. And I doubt the Bears can match up coaching wise to MLF, Tom Clemments, and Connor Lewis.

AmishMafia wrote: ↑

06 Jan 2024 12:29

dsr wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024 11:54

Yoop wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024 11:11

If the NFL would groom QB's the way we do, there would be a lot more Jordon Loves in the NFL, if Chicago groomed Fields he'd very likely be better, I wont exhalt Gute or Lafleur for doing something the right way, thats what there paid to do, imo we took Love (QB) a year or 2 early.

people are probably right, Love was probably just about as ready last year as this one, but last years team was not even near as ready to support Love as this years team, couldn't support the OL QB either.

years ago grooming a new QB a year or two was the norm, now fans demand to see them sooner, GM's cave to owner demands who's goal is to please ticket holders, and the NFL has become a recycle factory of destroyed QB's.

That's where Chicago have an opportunity. They have the chance to use pick no. 1 on one of the star QBs, but announce that Fields will start for two years while the new man learns. Then there will be a contest.

Usually the number 1 pick goes to a team without a viable QB - that's why they pick at 1, because they're all-round useless. This time Chicago could buck the trend. but I bet they don't!

Not the same. Having Caleb Williams getting pointers from Justin Fields is maybe not as big a positive as Love learning from Aaron Rodgers. And I doubt the Bears can match up coaching wise to MLF, Tom Clemments, and Connor Lewis.

all true, except it's possible, even likely that the Bears have a new coach, with a new plan for next year.

something else to think about, the Bears could keep Fields and groom a late first or 2nd round QB, that kid from Washington has had injury issues, and he's a red shirt senior, so he's older than most teams like for a QB to groom, however he has a prototypical NFL arm, possibly one of the most accurate deep ball pitchers to come out in years, Michael Penix, we can watch him Monday night against Michigan for the National Championship, he still needs to develop as a over all Field General, but the last 2 seasons he's got over 9000 yrds passing for Washington.

I know I'll be watching that game, lots of talented players.

Thing that gets me is that Love is throwing the ball DOWNFIELD. He isn’t settling for dump offs. He has more air yards this year than Rodgers did the past two years combined. (Please check me on that.) I would never expect a new QB to go further downfield so much (Burrow being the exception).

He is working with high confidence and is finally getting synced with his receivers. It’s beautiful to behold. And it’s a valid reason why we could legitimately WIN a playoff game this year.

Might have been mentioned elsewhere, but Love playing for a cool 1.5 million bonus tomorrow, which kicks in if GB makes playoffs

Jordan Love's 2023 season is 12th all time in yards and 11th all time in TDs.

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

07 Jan 2024 18:28

Jordan Love's 2023 season is 12th all time in yards and 11th all time in TDs.

In Packer history right? I mean his stats aren't THAT good.

go pak go wrote: ↑

07 Jan 2024 18:29

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

07 Jan 2024 18:28

Jordan Love's 2023 season is 12th all time in yards and 11th all time in TDs.

In Packer history right? I mean his stats aren't THAT good.

In Packers history.