Packers Huddle

BF004 wrote: ↑

15 Feb 2024 11:35

Yoop wrote: ↑

15 Feb 2024 11:20

BF004 wrote: ↑

15 Feb 2024 10:41

Well if we passed on Love in ‘20, we weren’t getting a QB in ‘21.

By the start of the season, maybe 1 QB will still be on their original team by year 4.

Although I would expect Mac Jones to stick around and compete with whatever rookie they get at 3.

did any team use the Packer plan to develop there babies, seems like most of those babies where expected to walk right away, continued to stumble, and now there all on life support

I mean, all kind of.

I think Lawrence was the only QB starting out of the gate.

They can also just be bad QBs.

Quite possible, but also who from that list above do you think could have turned into a decent qb under better circumstances?

Don't hear much about how Ford fits into the new defensive scheme. I think he gets some snaps this year because Wyatt/Clark/Brooks can all play DE in this scheme. We have a lot of flexibility with these guys.

I think Wyatt is a guy you probably want to just keep at 3-tech, but Brooks and Wooden look like guys who you can play at DE. iirc they both played kinda all over the DL in college.

BF004 wrote: ↑

15 Feb 2024 14:34

BF004 wrote: ↑

15 Feb 2024 11:35

Yoop wrote: ↑

15 Feb 2024 11:20

did any team use the Packer plan to develop there babies, seems like most of those babies where expected to walk right away, continued to stumble, and now there all on life support

I mean, all kind of.

I think Lawrence was the only QB starting out of the gate.

They can also just be bad QBs.

Quite possible, but also who from that list above do you think could have turned into a decent qb under better circumstances?

Wilson and Fields right off the top of my head, I'd have to check on the others, like Love early season, pass rush imho is the biggest obstacle a young QB has to over come, we where fortunate that our protection improved, doubt it ever did for Wilson or Fields, and it ruined both.

again I fall back on the thinking part of this game, the more a player has to think during to course of a play the more likely he fails at his task, thats why often just sitting for the rookie season is not enough. jmo

Can’t recall Wilson, but Fields didn’t start right away. They brought in Andy Dalton to start, which is a pretty honest attempt to keep him on the bench. Dalton got hurt and Fields was just simply better than Nick Foles.

At least after 2020 (tricky year with Covid), if Rodgers happened to I don’t know, tear his achilles on the third play of the season, our only plan would have been to throw Love out there, ready or not.

BF004 wrote: ↑

15 Feb 2024 17:31

Can’t recall Wilson, but Fields didn’t start right away. They brought in Andy Dalton to start, which is a pretty honest attempt to keep him on the bench. Dalton got hurt and Fields was just simply better than Nick Foles.

At least after 2020 (tricky year with Covid), if Rodgers happened to I don’t know, tear his achilles on the third play of the season, our only plan would have been to throw Love out there, ready or not.

Can’t recall Wilson? Matty Flynn!!

packman114 wrote: ↑

15 Feb 2024 14:47

Don't hear much about how Ford fits into the new defensive scheme. I think he gets some snaps this year because Wyatt/Clark/Brooks can all play DE in this scheme. We have a lot of flexibility with these guys.

OMG I FORGOT ABOUT FORD

Never mind on the Day three developmental nose. We did that.

NCF wrote: ↑

15 Feb 2024 19:14

BF004 wrote: ↑

15 Feb 2024 17:31

Can’t recall Wilson, but Fields didn’t start right away. They brought in Andy Dalton to start, which is a pretty honest attempt to keep him on the bench. Dalton got hurt and Fields was just simply better than Nick Foles.

At least after 2020 (tricky year with Covid), if Rodgers happened to I don’t know, tear his achilles on the third play of the season, our only plan would have been to throw Love out there, ready or not.

Can’t recall Wilson? Matty Flynn!!

wow, Matty Flynn, that seems like a lifetime ago

It's hard for me to find draft and start dates for these QB's unless I do one at a time.

this list and explains the last 15 years of first round QB's but doesn't actually say they started there first year, injury derailed the progress of quite a few, lots of misses, and is from 2022, so Love gets a basic unknown status

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/nfl- ... from-trevo

more on how first round QB's did starting as rookies, it's not good, most struggle, only a few did well as rookies.

https://thelistwire.usatoday.com/lists/ ... er-murray/

NCF wrote: ↑

15 Feb 2024 19:14

BF004 wrote: ↑

15 Feb 2024 17:31

Can’t recall Wilson, but Fields didn’t start right away. They brought in Andy Dalton to start, which is a pretty honest attempt to keep him on the bench. Dalton got hurt and Fields was just simply better than Nick Foles.

At least after 2020 (tricky year with Covid), if Rodgers happened to I don’t know, tear his achilles on the third play of the season, our only plan would have been to throw Love out there, ready or not.

Can’t recall Wilson? Matty Flynn!!

Also doesn’t feel like a real attempt to keep Wilson on the bench to develop him. Seems like a guy you want to start for maybe 4-6 games before moving to your rookie.

BF004 wrote: ↑

16 Feb 2024 07:16

NCF wrote: ↑

15 Feb 2024 19:14

BF004 wrote: ↑

15 Feb 2024 17:31

Can’t recall Wilson, but Fields didn’t start right away. They brought in Andy Dalton to start, which is a pretty honest attempt to keep him on the bench. Dalton got hurt and Fields was just simply better than Nick Foles.

At least after 2020 (tricky year with Covid), if Rodgers happened to I don’t know, tear his achilles on the third play of the season, our only plan would have been to throw Love out there, ready or not.

Can’t recall Wilson? Matty Flynn!!

Also doesn’t feel like a real attempt to keep Wilson on the bench to develop him. Seems like a guy you want to start for maybe 4-6 games before moving to your rookie.

The plan was legit for Matt Flynn.

Nobody expected Wilson to be as good as he was. Such a frustrating time because up to that point the Seahawks were our little sister team. They would take our fun-loving backups and then lose to us. They were a fun team to root for. Honestly they were my 2nd favorite team....until 2012.

Oh, no no no, not Russell, Zach.

The person in the original tweet about the ‘21 draft class.

BF004 wrote: ↑

16 Feb 2024 08:28

Oh, no no no, not Russell, Zach.

The person in the original tweet about the ‘21 draft class.

Yeah, I was a little confused there myself.

Knowing what we know about this draft (not really any solid 1st round safety prospects, etc). How would you like to see this draft handled just by position.

1 - CB
2a - S
2b - OT/OG
3a - LB
3b - RB
4a - LB
4b - OG/OC

Another CB, another S, another OL.

BF004 wrote: ↑

19 Feb 2024 08:14

Knowing what we know about this draft (not really any solid 1st round safety prospects, etc). How would you like to see this draft handled just by position.

1 - CB
2a - S
2b - OT/OG
3a - LB
3b - RB
4a - LB
4b - OG/OC

Another CB, another S, another OL.

I'd swap the 4th round LB for one of those other DBs, but yeah this is about perfect

Anybody look into Jerry rices kid Brendan? He's a dawg. Good size clocked a 23mph speed last year and just makes big plays. I'm sure he goes top 100 but if he slips to day 3 I would give him a look. He's a different body type we don't have. Explosive athlete and of course the bloodlines

Backthepack4ever wrote: ↑

19 Feb 2024 20:52

Anybody look into Jerry rices kid Brendan? He's a dawg. Good size clocked a 23mph speed last year and just makes big plays. I'm sure he goes top 100 but if he slips to day 3 I would give him a look. He's a different body type we don't have. Explosive athlete and of course the bloodlines

What’s the purpose? You have 5 dawgs already. Wicks, Reed, Watson, Doubs, Melton. Plus Dubose and Heath batting in camp plus a deep group of tight ends in Musgrave, Kraft, Sims, and Tyler Davis.

No reason to get a player at a position group already so deep when we have a lot that need help. Even with the plethora of picks we have we have a lot of short term and long term needs to be filled and WR isn’t one of them. It’s not even in the top 10.

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

16 Feb 2024 06:28

packman114 wrote: ↑

15 Feb 2024 14:47

Don't hear much about how Ford fits into the new defensive scheme. I think he gets some snaps this year because Wyatt/Clark/Brooks can all play DE in this scheme. We have a lot of flexibility with these guys.

OMG I FORGOT ABOUT FORD

Never mind on the Day three developmental nose. We did that.

I don't see a place for Ford unless he somehow replaces TJ Slayton. The rotation in the interior Dline is going to be Clark, Wyatt and Brooks. There is no need for a 320 pound or more Dlineman except on a goal line situation or maybe 3rd down and very short. There definitely is no need for 2 such players. Clark is going to need a breather now and then but in that situation I would put in both Wyatt and Brooks.

So then the question is whether they can get Ford to the PS and we won't know that until the pre-season games. If the consensus is no, then the Packers try to trade either Ford or TJ. The Packers need to find 2 starting Safetys, a slot CB and 2 ILB's. This almost certainly means they are going to draft a bunch of guys at those positions and sign some UDFA's also. Odds are they will have several at these positions they want to keep but do not have room on the 53 for them. Keeping Ford and Slatyon who between them might get about 5% of the snaps and cutting a promising safety or ILB makes no sense. Plus, a safety or ILB can play ST and Ford or TJ can't.

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑

19 Feb 2024 22:50

Backthepack4ever wrote: ↑

19 Feb 2024 20:52

Anybody look into Jerry rices kid Brendan? He's a dawg. Good size clocked a 23mph speed last year and just makes big plays. I'm sure he goes top 100 but if he slips to day 3 I would give him a look. He's a different body type we don't have. Explosive athlete and of course the bloodlines

What’s the purpose? You have 5 dawgs already. Wicks, Reed, Watson, Doubs, Melton. Plus Dubose and Heath batting in camp plus a deep group of tight ends in Musgrave, Kraft, Sims, and Tyler Davis.

No reason to get a player at a position group already so deep when we have a lot that need help. Even with the plethora of picks we have we have a lot of short term and long term needs to be filled and WR isn’t one of them. It’s not even in the top 10.

Frequently keep 6 WRs, and as much as I’m a Bo Melton fan, he’s not stopping me from drafting anyone.

BF004 wrote: ↑

20 Feb 2024 06:40

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑

19 Feb 2024 22:50

Backthepack4ever wrote: ↑

19 Feb 2024 20:52

Anybody look into Jerry rices kid Brendan? He's a dawg. Good size clocked a 23mph speed last year and just makes big plays. I'm sure he goes top 100 but if he slips to day 3 I would give him a look. He's a different body type we don't have. Explosive athlete and of course the bloodlines

What’s the purpose? You have 5 dawgs already. Wicks, Reed, Watson, Doubs, Melton. Plus Dubose and Heath batting in camp plus a deep group of tight ends in Musgrave, Kraft, Sims, and Tyler Davis.

No reason to get a player at a position group already so deep when we have a lot that need help. Even with the plethora of picks we have we have a lot of short term and long term needs to be filled and WR isn’t one of them. It’s not even in the top 10.

Frequently keep 6 WRs, and as much as I’m a Bo Melton fan, he’s not stopping me from drafting anyone.

Sure, but only if he is Donald Driver 2.0

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑

19 Feb 2024 22:50

Backthepack4ever wrote: ↑

19 Feb 2024 20:52

Anybody look into Jerry rices kid Brendan? He's a dawg. Good size clocked a 23mph speed last year and just makes big plays. I'm sure he goes top 100 but if he slips to day 3 I would give him a look. He's a different body type we don't have. Explosive athlete and of course the bloodlines

What’s the purpose? You have 5 dawgs already. Wicks, Reed, Watson, Doubs, Melton. Plus Dubose and Heath batting in camp plus a deep group of tight ends in Musgrave, Kraft, Sims, and Tyler Davis.

No reason to get a player at a position group already so deep when we have a lot that need help. Even with the plethora of picks we have we have a lot of short term and long term needs to be filled and WR isn’t one of them. It’s not even in the top 10.

No disagreement that we have a nice young group of guys. I think the group is strong but the reason you might do this if you think the prospect is better then your squad.

Like I said in the post it's day 3. IF Rice is the highest valued guy on your board it's a mistake to not take him. If your plugging for needs this late and skipping on the best talent your missing. We don't get guys like Brooks last year if that's the case and Brooks was better then Wyatt

Again day 3 and Rice is there. (prob won't be) and GB had him rated high take the guy. He is taller and thicker then heath and way more explosive it's not even close. With Watsons injury history concerns having a big fast guy isn't a bad option. If you think this guy could possibly be a two in the future (better Doubs) you don't pass bc you have guys battling in camp.

Iron sharpens iron. If he pushes out guys bc he is better so be it. That also give value for potential trades.