Packers Huddle

then your main concern isn't giving up dink and dunk- the only way you're going to get beat is over the top.

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

07 Jan 2021 13:38

I agree that we need to mix it up and can't always play the same way every play. We do need to play a bit more aggressive, LaFleur saw that, so we have, for the most part.

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

07 Jan 2021 13:38

then your main concern isn't giving up dink and dunk- the only way you're going to get beat is over the top.

See I don't necessarily agree with this. I think keeping Rodgers off the field and making your defense play 35-40 minutes a game is a bad strategy.

I agree that we need to mix it up and can't always play the same way every play. We do need to play a bit more aggressive, LaFleur saw that, so we have, for the most part.

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

06 Jan 2021 16:26

Bakh gets a simple restructure planned at the time of his extension, saves a ton. Z probably, too, as you said. Push a ton into 2022-4, let the TV deal windfall bail us out (also planned), and then when Rodgers leaves in 23 or 24, we're back in good shape. The tv deal and the end of Rodgers career, plus some basic restructurings, will get the job done.

Christo wrote: ↑

07 Jan 2021 13:59

The NFL may be in for some tough times if they don't correct they're course. Everyone is assuming the next TV contract is going to be a monster. But viewership is down this year [ thanks to social justice clowns like Goodell ] and people are stuck at home for the most part.
And what the Eagles did this past Sunday may cause a massive problem for the league.

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

07 Jan 2021 13:47

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

07 Jan 2021 13:38

I agree that we need to mix it up and can't always play the same way every play. We do need to play a bit more aggressive, LaFleur saw that, so we have, for the most part.

I think it's very circumstantial.

I think forcing opponents to string together long drives and have faith that they will make mistakes is a GREAT strategy when facing a bad QB or inconsistent offense. The likelihood that they will make you pay is low. The Bears did MUCH BETTER against that than I would have expected and STILL only made it to 16 points.

But you can't employ that strategy against a better offense with a better running game and a smarter, less-mistake-prone QB. Which is why against the Titans, we loaded the box to stop the run and relied on playmakers to make plays on the outside. That worked, too.

You play the best strategy to beat your opponent that week, not the best strategy on average or in aggregate. The BEST thing about our defensive performances the past 2 weeks, at least, is seeing that they are able to employ their defense successfully in different ways to suit different matchups.

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

07 Jan 2021 14:05

Christo wrote: ↑

07 Jan 2021 13:59

The NFL may be in for some tough times if they don't correct they're course. Everyone is assuming the next TV contract is going to be a monster. But viewership is down this year [ thanks to social justice clowns like Goodell ] and people are stuck at home for the most part.
And what the Eagles did this past Sunday may cause a massive problem for the league.

You are extremely wrong.

The next TV deals will be monsters. Every responsible and well-run organization is clearly planning for it (including ourselves and the Chiefs). Viewership may have been down slightly this year, but it is MUCH higher than it was the last time a TV deal was reached. Every year, the NFL has 45 or so of the top-50 rated tv programs of the year. Live television is decreasing and making advertising during live events MUCH more valuable (decrease of supply drives up price).

Stop thinking that your political point of view is going to crush the NFL. There is zero--absolutely zero--credible evidence of financial trouble on the horizon for the NFL right now. It is thriving. And the next TV deals, which will have streaming services fully established and ready to pay to play as well, has only increased competition for the NFL's broadcasting rights. There is no need for "assumptions," there are people paid to actually analyze and study this, and your anecdata tinged by your personal opinions will have no impact.

P.S. It's been a while since I graduated but my two undergraduate degrees are in Sports Business and in Economics.

Christo wrote: ↑

07 Jan 2021 14:24

And you didn't address the problem of gambling. If no one has confidence in a fair game, no one bets it.
And all the degrees in the world won't change that.

BSA wrote: ↑

07 Jan 2021 13:49

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

07 Jan 2021 13:38

then your main concern isn't giving up dink and dunk- the only way you're going to get beat is over the top.

See I don't necessarily agree with this. I think keeping Rodgers off the field and making your defense play 35-40 minutes a game is a bad strategy.

I agree that we need to mix it up and can't always play the same way every play. We do need to play a bit more aggressive, LaFleur saw that, so we have, for the most part.

The Packers are number 1 in the entire league in Opponent Time of Possession for 2020.
So that would suggest that Pettine's strategy is actually working and that your concerns are unfounded. The Packers don't have to win every battle in order to win the war. I know it bothers the fans, but you have to consider the Big Picture here and from that POV, there's merit in his approach

https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/o ... -net-of-ot

Mazrimiv wrote: ↑

07 Jan 2021 14:30

Can someone remind me why I give a damn about betting?

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

07 Jan 2021 14:31

Mazrimiv wrote: ↑

07 Jan 2021 14:30

Can someone remind me why I give a damn about betting?

I work for a state budget office, so I can tell you, you probably want your state to get that revenue rather than through more generalized taxes.

But I don't think that's the answer you were looking for.

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

07 Jan 2021 14:26

Christo wrote: ↑

07 Jan 2021 14:24

And you didn't address the problem of gambling. If no one has confidence in a fair game, no one bets it.
And all the degrees in the world won't change that.

Gambling is SKYROCKETING because the Supreme Court just legalized it. Gambling hasn't been this big in generations.

As to the NBA, they had a contentious labor negotiation and lockout because teams claimed many of them were losing money a decade ago, so I don't know what you're talking about with them thinking they were on top of the world, but actually NOW they are. Their TV deal was so big it basically broke free agency for a year or two because teams had so much money to spend. The NBA is doing perfectly fine, also.

Mazrimiv wrote: ↑

07 Jan 2021 14:30

Can someone remind me why I give a damn about betting?

Christo wrote: ↑

07 Jan 2021 14:38

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

07 Jan 2021 14:26

Christo wrote: ↑

07 Jan 2021 14:24

And you didn't address the problem of gambling. If no one has confidence in a fair game, no one bets it.
And all the degrees in the world won't change that.

Gambling is SKYROCKETING because the Supreme Court just legalized it. Gambling hasn't been this big in generations.

As to the NBA, they had a contentious labor negotiation and lockout because teams claimed many of them were losing money a decade ago, so I don't know what you're talking about with them thinking they were on top of the world, but actually NOW they are. Their TV deal was so big it basically broke free agency for a year or two because teams had so much money to spend. The NBA is doing perfectly fine, also.

I believe a good portion of they're money comes from China. Last I checked, the NFL has no following there.
And as for gambling SKYROCKETING, it won't last for long if you start intentionally throwing games.

BF004 wrote: ↑

07 Jan 2021 14:47

Christo wrote: ↑

07 Jan 2021 14:38

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

07 Jan 2021 14:26

Gambling is SKYROCKETING because the Supreme Court just legalized it. Gambling hasn't been this big in generations.

As to the NBA, they had a contentious labor negotiation and lockout because teams claimed many of them were losing money a decade ago, so I don't know what you're talking about with them thinking they were on top of the world, but actually NOW they are. Their TV deal was so big it basically broke free agency for a year or two because teams had so much money to spend. The NBA is doing perfectly fine, also.

I believe a good portion of they're money comes from China. Last I checked, the NFL has no following there.
And as for gambling SKYROCKETING, it won't last for long if you start intentionally throwing games.

Believe me, the NFL is aware there are untapped billions sitting overseas for them to dig into.