Packers Huddle

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

29 Jul 2021 10:44

It seems like more of a perceived slight than an actual slight when it comes to "committing past 2021." The front office was focused on 2021, didn't mention 2022 or 2023 other than using the word "beyond." Rodgers saw that as they were only committed to 2021. Rodgers didn't say anything. It blew up. Communication issue on both sides.

That Rodgers is talking about players from 8 years ago highlights some major passive aggressiveness in my opinion.

I do wonder if Rodgers did not want Gutenkunst as the GM and preferred someone else. There really isn't much in the way of the complaints brought forward that are pinned on Gutenkunst.

Nope. Pretty much Jordy Nelson is it.

Well. Clay Matthews was mentioned too. But that was pretty clear it was time to move on.

go pak go wrote: ↑

29 Jul 2021 10:48

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

29 Jul 2021 10:44

It seems like more of a perceived slight than an actual slight when it comes to "committing past 2021." The front office was focused on 2021, didn't mention 2022 or 2023 other than using the word "beyond." Rodgers saw that as they were only committed to 2021. Rodgers didn't say anything. It blew up. Communication issue on both sides.

That Rodgers is talking about players from 8 years ago highlights some major passive aggressiveness in my opinion.

I do wonder if Rodgers did not want Gutenkunst as the GM and preferred someone else. There really isn't much in the way of the complaints brought forward that are pinned on Gutenkunst.

Nope. Pretty much Jordy Nelson is it.

Well. Clay Matthews was mentioned too. But that was pretty clear it was time to move on.

What?

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

29 Jul 2021 10:49

go pak go wrote: ↑

29 Jul 2021 10:48

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

29 Jul 2021 10:44

It seems like more of a perceived slight than an actual slight when it comes to "committing past 2021." The front office was focused on 2021, didn't mention 2022 or 2023 other than using the word "beyond." Rodgers saw that as they were only committed to 2021. Rodgers didn't say anything. It blew up. Communication issue on both sides.

That Rodgers is talking about players from 8 years ago highlights some major passive aggressiveness in my opinion.

I do wonder if Rodgers did not want Gutenkunst as the GM and preferred someone else. There really isn't much in the way of the complaints brought forward that are pinned on Gutenkunst.

Nope. Pretty much Jordy Nelson is it.

Well. Clay Matthews was mentioned too. But that was pretty clear it was time to move on.

What?

Responding to your last sentence.

go pak go wrote: ↑

29 Jul 2021 10:50

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

29 Jul 2021 10:49

go pak go wrote: ↑

29 Jul 2021 10:48

Nope. Pretty much Jordy Nelson is it.

Well. Clay Matthews was mentioned too. But that was pretty clear it was time to move on.

What?

Responding to your last sentence.

Ah, I got it now!

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

29 Jul 2021 09:06

NCF wrote: ↑

29 Jul 2021 08:54

This is the problem with being passive aggressive. Both guys, Aaron and Gute, talking through their teeth a little bit. Truth probably somewhere more in the middle than the extremes either are suggesting.

As forward as Rodgers was in his presser, this still really came through for me. Like the whole thing about not being committed past 2021, he specifically said "it never came up." Not, I asked about it and they gave a bad answer. But that they kept talking about 2021 but never talked about anything beyond it. And he made inferences about that. Now, those inferences were probably accurate. But it sounds, very clearly, like they were not having these conversations until the whole thing broke down.

Also, I really know I said I wasn't going to post here anymore, but I think we need to give @Yoop a shoutout based on this exact quote from Rodgers yesterday:

So to get Randall back is really special. It’s something that I talked about back in February, wanting to bring in a true slot receiver, I thought would make our offense more dynamic.

thanks Yoho, I think you, me, and some others know that if so much of your offense revolves around short up tempo passing then a slot receiver is a staple in that style offense, I know 7 yards a pop doesn't sound like a lot, but Ervin did make that jet motion work well, defenses had to honor it because he was a threat to get more, and often 7 yrds translates to a 1st down, so if we can get that from a UDFA, just think what Cobb, or the much younger Amari can do, I'am really excited to see what Lafluer schemes up for these guys.

Everyone agreed that a slot was needed...

go pak go wrote: ↑

29 Jul 2021 09:24

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

29 Jul 2021 09:06

Also, I really know I said I wasn't going to post here anymore, but I think we need to give @Yoop a shoutout based on this exact quote from Rodgers yesterday:

So to get Randall back is really special. It’s something that I talked about back in February, wanting to bring in a true slot receiver, I thought would make our offense more dynamic.

Hahaha. I got a pretty good chuckle when Rodgers said that.

I thought of @Yoop instantly.

Way to go Mike.

thank you, as I said I think you and most here know if you aint got a slotty then you have to move one of your boundry receivers in there, cripes Adams ran 1/3 of his routes from the slot, same with Lazard etc, Adams did well, the rest not so much, ya need a quick footed agile guy in that roll, and the big tall lanky guys we have are not such a good fit.

I don't think everyone agreed a slot was needed. I think many of us thought a true slot would be valuable and would certainly have a place within the offense, but many clearly argued against it as a need.

My thoughts based on comments from Rodgers, Cobb, Gutey, and LaFleur:

1.) They are going to use Cobb in a multitude of ways.
2.) They are not going to use Cobb exclusively ahead of Amari Rodgers. Each has their own role, strengths & weaknesses.
3.) Cobb/Rodgers are not going to have any impact on how they use Davante Adams, who as LaFleur said, the passing game is structured around.

So, yes, he didn't have a crystal ball, but I think it is fair to give some props to [mention]Yoop[/mention]. Good work, my friend.

go pak go wrote: ↑

29 Jul 2021 09:27

paco wrote: ↑

29 Jul 2021 09:24

go pak go wrote: ↑

29 Jul 2021 09:21

I truly believe the moves regarding the Safety and CB positions from 2012 - 2017 was the worst collective decisions of TT's career.

I recall a LOT of fans being happy that Hyde and Hayward weren't kept at the time (I wasn't one of them that I recall). Hindsight and all that. But yeah, the replacements really didn't work out.

I could be labled as "happy" for moving on from Casey. Not for Hyde. The biggest wrench in all of what happened was we didn't know Shields would end his career a few months later. That's what really screwed everything. But we had known that by the time Hyde was ready for a deal.

But I am also happy to admit I was wrong and was super high on the TT Koolaid at that time. And why wouldn't I be?

I never heard of Damarious until Draft Night. I was super pumped about him because Waldo convinced me. And what a f*cking train wreck it turned out to be.

I never really concern "was I right about something at the time". I more concern myself regarding about, "okay. was it right or was it wrong and what can be learned from it."

Haha Clinton Dix was a early pick, and actually was better then Hyde his first two seasons at FS, and draft status whether we agree or not does pull some weight, who ya gonna keep, Hyde lost out at safety, and lacked those short area quicks to Hayward, but then Hayward always seemed to be dealing acks and pains, his best season for us was his first.

and he was never able to beat out Shields or Williams for a edge job, right, If we only had a crystal ball to for see Shields career end a year later it's possible Hayward would have remained a Packer, or if Capers used more 2 deep safety, course then ya have to have ILB's that can cover like a safety we may have kept Hyde around too, bottom line Ted tried to be frugal with cap and let a couple players go that wanted starter money, and it didn't work out, I think most of us liked both players though.

I even defend the Randal pick, it was said he was the best remaining DB and we needed DB's and if we look at his stats, he was our best CB his 2nd year, course thats not saying much they all sucked.
my biggest beef with Ted was that he always waited till the next draft to fix what a UFA might have fixed sooner

NCF wrote: ↑

29 Jul 2021 13:36

I don't think everyone agreed a slot was needed. I think many of us thought a true slot would be valuable and would certainly have a place within the offense, but many clearly argued against it as a need.

My thoughts based on comments from Rodgers, Cobb, Gutey, and LaFleur:

1.) They are going to use Cobb in a multitude of ways.
2.) They are not going to use Cobb exclusively ahead of Amari Rodgers. Each has their own role, strengths & weaknesses.
3.) Cobb/Rodgers are not going to have any impact on how they use Davante Adams, who as LaFleur said, the passing game is structured around.

So, yes, he didn't have a crystal ball, but I think it is fair to give some props to @Yoop. Good work, my friend.

thanks, I'am getting a lot of props today

ya Matt will figure out how best to max out the potential of all these receivers, and I'am sure Rodgers will have his ear, we do a lot of jet sweep and motion, both Cobb and Rodgers will get that action.

we do so much more small ball now to, and both while a bit light should be able to do well with RO, imo although we had the #1 offense in the league last year, adding these two to the mix could make this one even more potent.

go pak go wrote: ↑

29 Jul 2021 10:48

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

29 Jul 2021 10:44

It seems like more of a perceived slight than an actual slight when it comes to "committing past 2021." The front office was focused on 2021, didn't mention 2022 or 2023 other than using the word "beyond." Rodgers saw that as they were only committed to 2021. Rodgers didn't say anything. It blew up. Communication issue on both sides.

That Rodgers is talking about players from 8 years ago highlights some major passive aggressiveness in my opinion.

I do wonder if Rodgers did not want Gutenkunst as the GM and preferred someone else. There really isn't much in the way of the complaints brought forward that are pinned on Gutenkunst.

Nope. Pretty much Jordy Nelson is it.

Well. Clay Matthews was mentioned too. But that was pretty clear it was time to move on.

thing is this, when you ask a edge rusher to drop and cover as much as Pettine did last year with P Smith it takes some of his ability to set up the T to have success rushing the passer, and Mathews last season with us Capers had him dropping a lot to, I think that might be the biggest reason for the decline in pressures from both, hopefully P Smith isn't asked to do so as much and his pass rush ability increases, just my opinion anyway.

Yoop wrote: ↑

29 Jul 2021 13:48

NCF wrote: ↑

29 Jul 2021 13:36

I don't think everyone agreed a slot was needed. I think many of us thought a true slot would be valuable and would certainly have a place within the offense, but many clearly argued against it as a need.

My thoughts based on comments from Rodgers, Cobb, Gutey, and LaFleur:

1.) They are going to use Cobb in a multitude of ways.
2.) They are not going to use Cobb exclusively ahead of Amari Rodgers. Each has their own role, strengths & weaknesses.
3.) Cobb/Rodgers are not going to have any impact on how they use Davante Adams, who as LaFleur said, the passing game is structured around.

So, yes, he didn't have a crystal ball, but I think it is fair to give some props to @Yoop. Good work, my friend.

thanks, I'am getting a lot of props today

ya Matt will figure out how best to max out the potential of all these receivers, and I'am sure Rodgers will have his ear, we do a lot of jet sweep and motion, both Cobb and Rodgers will get that action.

we do so much more small ball now to, and both while a bit light should be able to do well with RO, imo although we had the #1 offense in the league last year, adding these two to the mix could make this one even more potent.

I agree that everyone knew it would be nice. It doesn't take much to be like, "oh yeah it's great to have great players with good fit at every position"

The larger argument was:
1. Every team has weaknesses
2. It's about finding ways to play around the weaknesses (and the Packers did)
3. All the slot guys except Shenault were gone by pick 25.

I just thought it was more funny than anything when Rodgers said slot. Not like I haven't heard that 945,342,422,343,434,534,425 times.

My position was always that I had sympathy for Rodgers to the extent that he is looking out for his best interests as a player-employee, but that I am not in favor of bending over backwards to keep him here long-term.

Now that I have heard Rodgers's case, I have definitely moved quite a bit more to his side. I think his wants were reasonable. My position hasn't really changed, but I have a lot more sympathy for his stance/actions. Any belief that he was needlessly causing discord on a playoff-caliber team and any ill feelings for it, no longer.

As he said, what he wants is about on par with how other elite QBs have been treated. Gute seemed to indicate that these issues were not articulated to him clearly and thus were not apparent, but I mean... should they have had to? Or should you have just valued his input enough to ask him unprompted?

I think the analogy about working with an employee to try to get them the best/right tools to do their job is apt.

I don't think Rodgers's ideas are quite as great as he thinks they are, with the way he glows over scrubs like Myles White (lol) or frankly even Kumerow, but then he *is* the guy running the offense on-field like it or not, so if he can run it better with a scrub of his liking... I do think he has earned the right to be asked his input when they make those decisions (bare minimum) if not a serious commitment to make sure he has a few guys of his liking (which is probably more than most are comfortable with, but IMO, reasonable).

After seeing Gutey's press conference this morning I'm more confused than ever. I think Rodgers expected after an MVP season that Gutey would say "ok Aaron let's rip up this contract and commit to you for 4 more years". And I think Gutey was thinking " &%$@ look at the contracts we have coming up, let's wait on Aaron until next year and see what we can do based on the new caps."

They both looked pissed that they have to go through this and each one thinks the other guy is being a jerk about it.

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑

29 Jul 2021 09:03

go pak go wrote: ↑

29 Jul 2021 07:11

Yeah. It's hard to defend the team on the veteran decisions like Wood, Peppers, Hyde, Casey and Nelson.

Casey and Hyde were just moronic "cap savings" moves and if the vets are willing to take a pay cut...I mean just think if we had Woodson back there instead of what's his name...McMillian? I don't even remember.

I thought Rodgers nailed his press conference. He did such a good job of also recognizing reality and that cap is a real thing.

I was just very impressed. I will wear my #12 jersey again this season proudly.

Hyde and Casey was a compound mistake by TT we are still paying for. He drafted Randall and Rollins specifically to replace them. They both sucked so we ended up getting King who also sucked. Then we took Jaire and Jackson and Jackson sucks and now we took Stokes.

Backfilling can be tricky. After Jesse Whittenton and Hank Gremminger left ........... Tom Brown, Doug Hart and Bob Jeter filled in just fine. But then again Adderley and Wood were still on the field and the front 7 included 4 Hall of Famers and an All-Pro non-Hall of Fame linebacker (Lee Roy Caffey). After Adderley and Wood left ...........the defensive backfield was just so-so.........we had Willie Buchanon and Ken Ellis ........ but Jim Hill and Al Matthews had some issues. Deja Vu all over again.

I still remember all of the hype over Terrell Buckley .......... that never worked out very well either. Ahmad Carroll is another one.

Both Gute and Rodgers had GREAT press conferences. Both are very likable guys. Both are great are their jobs. Both are thoughtful. Both should have won a ring last year.

Both are going to win a ring this year.

And my god is the the most "all in" I have ever seen the Packers. I mean we better win a flipping ring this year.

go pak go wrote: ↑

29 Jul 2021 20:06

And my god is the the most "all in" I have ever seen the Packers. I mean we better win a flipping ring this year.

That's the problem with going all-in. If it fails, it is crushing.

go pak go wrote: ↑

29 Jul 2021 20:06

Both Gute and Rodgers had GREAT press conferences. Both are very likable guys. Both are great are their jobs. Both are thoughtful. Both should have won a ring last year.

Both are going to win a ring this year.

And my god is the the most "all in" I have ever seen the Packers. I mean we better win a flipping ring this year.

Someone should archive this post. Looking at the Packers schedule, 13-3 may be attainable again.