Packers Huddle

musclestang wrote: ↑

02 May 2024 09:34

if we ever took the ball out of AR's hands to put it in Hill's for a gadget play I'd want the coach fired.

He was a cool story because he was a heck of an athlete, but your RB's, TE's, WR's and QB's should all be able to do the job better than he could i'm not a fan of taking a more capable and talented player off the field to put in a less capable one. I wouldn't take Love off the field for a gadget player even. He's better at all of it than the gadget.

APB wrote: ↑

02 May 2024 09:42

Well, they took Drew Brees off the field during his final three years, two of them Pro-Bowl performing years, and it's when Hill saw his greatest success.

musclestang wrote: ↑

02 May 2024 11:14

APB wrote: ↑

02 May 2024 09:42

Well, they took Drew Brees off the field during his final three years, two of them Pro-Bowl performing years, and it's when Hill saw his greatest success.

only until the gadget plays were seen and were no longer fooling anyone.

If they chose to pull and MVP level QB for a lesser guy, that's their prerogative. It's not a choice I'd make. I'd leave my QB more capable of knowing what he's seeing in a defense, I'd leave my RB's more capable of running the ball and I'd leave my QB that can throw, hand off, better than the alternative on the field. IMO threats of run or pass are greater with a guy like Rodgers than a guy like Hill running the show.

Once defenses stopped getting stupid in the face of lesser talent and played defense, the gadgets didn't work so well anymore.

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑

02 May 2024 20:38

Not sure if it was posted but the Packers declined Eric Stokes 5th year option officially.

paco wrote: ↑

02 May 2024 21:38

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑

02 May 2024 20:38

Not sure if it was posted but the Packers declined Eric Stokes 5th year option officially.

Easy choice. But hope he plays well and earns a new deal.

Madcity_matt wrote: ↑

03 May 2024 10:20

paco wrote: ↑

02 May 2024 21:38

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑

02 May 2024 20:38

Not sure if it was posted but the Packers declined Eric Stokes 5th year option officially.

Easy choice. But hope he plays well and earns a new deal.

He had 0 percent chance of getting the 5th year option.

APB wrote: ↑

04 May 2024 19:55

Scott4Pack wrote: ↑

05 May 2024 15:31

APB wrote: ↑

04 May 2024 19:55

An "almost modest" mega deal? Please something less than $35M/year (with incentives).
;-)

Scott4Pack wrote: ↑

05 May 2024 15:31

APB wrote: ↑

04 May 2024 19:55

An "almost modest" mega deal? Please something less than $35M/year (with incentives).
;-)

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑

05 May 2024 16:13

Not a shot Love gets less than 50M per year. I guarantee his agent is working all the angles to get that deal. I wouldn’t be surprised if it was 55M.

BF004 wrote: ↑

06 May 2024 06:49

I do hope it’s a nice long contract.

6 for 300 extension.

7 for 312.5 total. 44.6 per. And yes, we will be saying in 2028 that Jordan making $55-$60 million 2029 and 2030 is criminally under paid.

go pak go wrote: ↑

06 May 2024 07:15

BF004 wrote: ↑

06 May 2024 06:49

I do hope it’s a nice long contract.

6 for 300 extension.

7 for 312.5 total. 44.6 per. And yes, we will be saying in 2028 that Jordan making $55-$60 million 2029 and 2030 is criminally under paid.

Yeah but his cap hit will be $85 million in 2029 so nobody will be saying "but look at the small amount of cash compared to the league."

BF004 wrote: ↑

06 May 2024 12:11

go pak go wrote: ↑

06 May 2024 07:15

BF004 wrote: ↑

06 May 2024 06:49

I do hope it’s a nice long contract.

6 for 300 extension.

7 for 312.5 total. 44.6 per. And yes, we will be saying in 2028 that Jordan making $55-$60 million 2029 and 2030 is criminally under paid.

Yeah but his cap hit will be $85 million in 2029 so nobody will be saying "but look at the small amount of cash compared to the league."

Guess I'd be hoping our cap hits on the back end would only be around $60 on a ~45M average contract, but probably would be closer to 70 or 80 I'm sure.