Re: Aaron Freaking Rodgers
Posted: 09 Dec 2020 22:31
We have the offense to win it all. Our issues are D and ST. 
Packers Huddle
The Way a Packers Forum Should Be
https://packers-huddle.com/phpBB/
Aaron Freaking Rodgers
Page 12 of 36
Re: Aaron Freaking Rodgers
Posted: 09 Dec 2020 22:49
It's not just a WR, it's the gadget type WR/RB that would help this offense the most, and until we have a excellent ILB the offense will have to carry this defense, lis, this defense performs the best from the side line, keep it off the field, protect Pettines job
Re: Aaron Freaking Rodgers
Posted: 10 Dec 2020 08:57
A gadget upgrade from Ervin (and Austin) who has the speed and slot ability of a WR and the body and elusiveness of a RB (and can handle returns) is, indeed, exactly what I want to add to this team, so I'm with ya. In fact I wouldn't mind a couple--because we have the starters in place; sprinkling explosiveness around the role players would really up our danger factor for opposing Ds.
I'm mixed on ILB; we need better ones, but I'm not sure that Martin, Barnes, Summers, and Kirksey next year might not be those better ones. One of those things where if a phenom drops in our laps, we should take it, but otherwise I won't consider it a need. Kinda like Gutey said about WR last year; once we hit a certain point in the draft (which seemed to be mid-second round), he didn't think there was a rookie who could beat out our depth guys. Taking an upgrade is worth it, but taking another body at the position won't be.
I hope Summers spends all offseason live tackling people. It's really his only weakness, but it's an important one and we don't practice it
Re: Aaron Freaking Rodgers
Posted: 10 Dec 2020 10:00
You think Kirksey is a Packer next year?YoHoChecko wrote: ↑10 Dec 2020 08:57A gadget upgrade from Ervin (and Austin) who has the speed and slot ability of a WR and the body and elusiveness of a RB (and can handle returns) is, indeed, exactly what I want to add to this team, so I'm with ya. In fact I wouldn't mind a couple--because we have the starters in place; sprinkling explosiveness around the role players would really up our danger factor for opposing Ds.
I'm mixed on ILB; we need better ones, but I'm not sure that Martin, Barnes, Summers, and Kirksey next year might not be those better ones. One of those things where if a phenom drops in our laps, we should take it, but otherwise I won't consider it a need. Kinda like Gutey said about WR last year; once we hit a certain point in the draft (which seemed to be mid-second round), he didn't think there was a rookie who could beat out our depth guys. Taking an upgrade is worth it, but taking another body at the position won't be.
I hope Summers spends all offseason live tackling people. It's really his only weakness, but it's an important one and we don't practice it
Re: Aaron Freaking Rodgers
Posted: 10 Dec 2020 10:12
No?
But I didn't think Lane Taylor would be a Packer this year.
And while this would suck for him and I don't know the bonus structure offhand, I'd rather have the veteran presence through the offseason with the young guys--especially because he was clearly and instantly so well-regarded in that locker room--and make that decision after training camp. But my feelings won't be hurt or lifted one way or the other with that guy.
And like, not to be too sentimental about it, but I don't think that Gary develops as well without Z on the roster; I don't think that Tonyan develops as well with out Big Dog on the roster. And I'd like to see Martin and Barnes have a little more time to learn from an experienced team-first leader with an understanding of the game, who worked his way up from a mid-round pick to a revered starter in the game before his injuries apparently sapped him of his difference-making ability. I genuinely believe that, even though I know, like, coaches coach and players play and whatnot.
Ok, but I just saw that his cap number next year is $8million and we save $6M by cutting him so maybe nevermind. Maybe they pull a Taylor and shave him down 2-3 million to stick around. Or maybe he's gone.
Re: Aaron Freaking Rodgers
Posted: 10 Dec 2020 10:21
I think that's what we do. I think we try and push his compensation down unless he does something to earn it the next few weeks.YoHoChecko wrote: ↑10 Dec 2020 10:12No?
But I didn't think Lane Taylor would be a Packer this year.
And while this would suck for him and I don't know the bonus structure offhand, I'd rather have the veteran presence through the offseason with the young guys--especially because he was clearly and instantly so well-regarded in that locker room--and make that decision after training camp. But my feelings won't be hurt or lifted one way or the other with that guy.
And like, not to be too sentimental about it, but I don't think that Gary develops as well without Z on the roster; I don't think that Tonyan develops as well with out Big Dog on the roster. And I'd like to see Martin and Barnes have a little more time to learn from an experienced team-first leader with an understanding of the game, who worked his way up from a mid-round pick to a revered starter in the game before his injuries apparently sapped him of his difference-making ability. I genuinely believe that, even though I know, like, coaches coach and players play and whatnot.
Ok, but I just saw that his cap number next year is $8million and we save $6M by cutting him so maybe nevermind. Maybe they pull a Taylor and shave him down 2-3 million to stick around. Or maybe he's gone.
Our cap will be tight and he is an easy out based on the structure we provided.
I am starting to believe in the ILB is important crowd too so I will definitely be looking for them in the draft. Really hope the answer is already on our roster though as #54.
Re: Aaron Freaking Rodgers
Posted: 10 Dec 2020 17:33
Its going to be a tough year for players IF the revenue drops as predicted, so that gives GB some leverage in pushing his number down
As far as the ILB side of the coin - unless and until we get another talented DL, our ILBs are going to struggle.
Did you see how much Roquan Smith struggled vs GB without Akiem Hicks in front of him ? 8th pick of the draft looked terrible
I'd fix the DL and then watch as the ILBs all make a leap forward. Happy to have fresh blood, but upgrading the DL fixes two spots
Re: Aaron Freaking Rodgers
Posted: 10 Dec 2020 18:33
IMO ILB is a evolving position in todays game, if they can't cover there a liability, Pettine likes the hybrid grouping of 3 safety's and one ILB, thats why I'd prefer a MLB that can do both well.
we've had oppertunity after oppertunity to draft a wide body DT the last couple years, instead we've taken gap penetrators like Keke cause thats what Pettine prefers, even after the shellacking we took in the playoffs against SF we passed on drafting one, my impression of the Snacks interest is that we low balled a offer and he said C Ya,however just showing interest could mean they've changed there minds, and will get a two gapper, even so they need improvement at ILB, whether that comes from these kids Martin or Barnes or a top pick, this defense wont take the next step till that happens
we've had oppertunity after oppertunity to draft a wide body DT the last couple years, instead we've taken gap penetrators like Keke cause thats what Pettine prefers, even after the shellacking we took in the playoffs against SF we passed on drafting one, my impression of the Snacks interest is that we low balled a offer and he said C Ya,however just showing interest could mean they've changed there minds, and will get a two gapper, even so they need improvement at ILB, whether that comes from these kids Martin or Barnes or a top pick, this defense wont take the next step till that happens
Re: Aaron Freaking Rodgers
Posted: 10 Dec 2020 18:40
Not doing this to say told you so. But pointing this out so you know the truth and not that "the Packers are cheap."
This is absolutely incorrect. The Packers did not low ball. Snacks just absolutely did not want to play in GB. Not for a bit. Snacks signed on the Seahawks Practice Squad and has a Vet Minimum deal.
Money absolutely, positively had nothing to do with him not coming to GB.
Re: Aaron Freaking Rodgers
Posted: 10 Dec 2020 19:31
And $%@# him for it.go pak go wrote: ↑10 Dec 2020 18:40Not doing this to say told you so. But pointing this out so you know the truth and not that "the Packers are cheap."
This is absolutely incorrect. The Packers did not low ball. Snacks just absolutely did not want to play in GB. Not for a bit. Snacks signed on the Seahawks Practice Squad and has a Vet Minimum deal.
Money absolutely, positively had nothing to do with him not coming to GB.
All aboard the Anthony Rush train!
Re: Aaron Freaking Rodgers
Posted: 10 Dec 2020 19:34
His arm is bigger than my waste.
- image.png (1.11 MiB) Viewed 467 times
Re: Aaron Freaking Rodgers
Posted: 10 Dec 2020 20:23
Re: Aaron Freaking Rodgers
Posted: 10 Dec 2020 21:24
Re: Aaron Freaking Rodgers
Posted: 13 Dec 2020 13:57
That’ll need to be very long successful career, post Hill and Kelce and Reid, to even just keep pace with Aaron.
Re: Aaron Freaking Rodgers
Posted: 13 Dec 2020 14:16
Re: Aaron Freaking Rodgers
Posted: 14 Dec 2020 01:25
Only 2 people over 2
Re: Aaron Freaking Rodgers
Posted: 14 Dec 2020 08:19
Re: Aaron Freaking Rodgers
Posted: 14 Dec 2020 08:36
I mean it helps that our offense is worthless on short goal line situations in the run game.
Re: Aaron Freaking Rodgers
Posted: 14 Dec 2020 09:21
You have to wonder how many times this has ever happened.
Re: Aaron Freaking Rodgers
Posted: 14 Dec 2020 12:53