Packers Huddle

I like the idea of us beating Minny in week 1. If we lose to the Saints, we’re probably 3-1 in the bye.

After that, the toughest part of the season. Could be 6-2 or even 5-3. But that’s okay, as things lighten up just a bit.

Packfntk wrote: ↑

11 May 2020 09:52

Drj820 wrote: ↑

11 May 2020 09:43

Yeah weird feeling for sure. 18 nfl stadiums is awesome!

Yeah, some day we hope to make it to all of them, and they keep building new ones, so the trips will never end. (Shhhh, don't tell our wives).

I haven't been to all that many, but I think of the ones I've gone to, 3 stadiums no longer host NFL teams or exist--Georgia Dome, Texas Stadium, and JFK (still standing, rusting). I have been to two of the new replacement stadiums for those.

I think this is my full list, unless I'm forgetting some:
Georgia Dome (Packers-Falcons, W, Samkon Gado!)
Texas Stadium (Cowboys-Redskins) and AT&T Stadium (Packers-Cowboys, W)
JFK (Redskins-Dolphins) and FedEx Field (Redskins-Packers, L)
MetLife Stadium (Packers-Giants, W, the Jordy game)
M&T Bank Stadium (Packers-Ravens preseason twice, regular season once, L, 'rookie Rodgers looks rough' game)
Lambeau Field, (Packers-Vikings, W)

I've also seen college games at former NFL stadiums Veterans Field (Philly, Army-Navy) and the Colosseum (L.A., USC home games), dunno if that counts as an NFL stadium or not.

Scott4Pack wrote: ↑

11 May 2020 10:26

I like the idea of us beating Minny in week 1. If we lose to the Saints, we’re probably 3-1 in the bye.

After that, the toughest part of the season. Could be 6-2 or even 5-3. But that’s okay, as things lighten up just a bit.

If we're 5-3 at the halfway point, I'll be perfectly content. Obviously, I want to be 8-0, but 5-3 is fine. If it's 4-4 we'll need another Rodgers-R.E.L.A.X. run, which I could see as perfectly likely.

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

11 May 2020 10:39

Packfntk wrote: ↑

11 May 2020 09:52

Drj820 wrote: ↑

11 May 2020 09:43

Yeah weird feeling for sure. 18 nfl stadiums is awesome!

Yeah, some day we hope to make it to all of them, and they keep building new ones, so the trips will never end. (Shhhh, don't tell our wives).

I haven't been to all that many, but I think of the ones I've gone to, 3 stadiums no longer host NFL teams or exist--Georgia Dome, Texas Stadium, and JFK (still standing, rusting). I have been to two of the new replacement stadiums for those.

I think this is my full list, unless I'm forgetting some:
Georgia Dome (Packers-Falcons, W, Samkon Gado!)
Texas Stadium (Cowboys-Redskins) and AT&T Stadium (Packers-Cowboys, W)
JFK (Redskins-Dolphins) and FedEx Field (Redskins-Packers, L)
MetLife Stadium (Packers-Giants, W, the Jordy game)
M&T Bank Stadium (Packers-Ravens preseason twice, regular season once, L, 'rookie Rodgers looks rough' game)
Lambeau Field, (Packers-Vikings, W)

I've also seen college games at former NFL stadiums Veterans Field (Philly, Army-Navy) and the Colosseum (L.A., USC home games), dunno if that counts as an NFL stadium or not.

I have been to a few away games ........... but never had the urge to hit all of the stadiums. It's enough effort to get back to Lambeau once or twice a year, + playoffs if they happen). Old Man Ringo's list is as follows:

Milwaukee County Stadium (Go PACK)
Lambeau Field (Go PACK)
Metropolitan Stadium (Vikings)
Soldier Field - Old and New (Bears)
Seattle Kingdome and new Seattle outdoor stadium whatever it's called (Seahawks)
3-Com Park (49ers)
Foxboro (Patriots)
Sun Devil Stadium (Arizona Cardinals) ... it was 106 Fahrenheit that day and the Packers had to wear their green jerseys)
FedEx Field (Redskins)
M&T Bank Stadium (Ravens)

We're one of only 8 teams to face two opponents off of bye weeks; Tampa, Denver, Giants, Vikings, Dolphins, Chargers & Jags are others.
Also, as far as travel is concerned the Packers, Jags, Seattle and Raiders will be flying the most.

How tough is our schedule? You can't go off of last year, to many things changes, the media always gets it wrong....who usually gets it right though? Vegas, the sharps, that's who. If you average the win totals from a few sports books on every Packer opponent this year and compare it to the rest of the leagues teams you can get a truer indication of what's in store for us. Warren Sharp is his name, he's an analytical brain when it comes to the NFL.

He's consulted for NFL teams on strategy and play-calling, most recently with the Ravens. This is his site, great for fantasy, stats, and really a ton of useful info on all things NFL.
https://www.sharpfootballstats.com/2020 ... edule.html

Welcome back Stevedore!

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

11 May 2020 17:18

Welcome back Stevedore!

Yeah, about Vegas, the green bay packers have a over/under line of 9 wins. After winning 13 last year, I can only assume Vegas has us pegged as a prime regression candidate. I cannot say i disagree. If we do not hit the over though, that would be a very disappointing year.

Drj820 wrote: ↑

12 May 2020 07:50

Yeah, about Vegas, the green bay packers have a over/under line of 9 wins. After winning 13 last year, I can only assume Vegas has us pegged as a prime regression candidate. I cannot say i disagree. If we do not hit the over though, that would be a very disappointing year.

Agreed. I see the Packers as a 10-11 win team this year, but maybe that is because I am a homer. The team did not get worse from 2019 in my eyes, we just won a few games that in past years we haven't. But that is what good teams do, they win those games. I guess only time will tell but I still firmly believe this is a very solid football team.

Packfntk wrote: ↑

12 May 2020 08:15

Drj820 wrote: ↑

12 May 2020 07:50

Yeah, about Vegas, the green bay packers have a over/under line of 9 wins. After winning 13 last year, I can only assume Vegas has us pegged as a prime regression candidate. I cannot say i disagree. If we do not hit the over though, that would be a very disappointing year.

Agreed. I see the Packers as a 10-11 win team this year, but maybe that is because I am a homer. The team did not get worse from 2019 in my eyes, we just won a few games that in past years we haven't. But that is what good teams do, they win those games. I guess only time will tell but I still firmly believe this is a very solid football team.

I can see a 10 win season. Maybe even better, i think that is realistic. Under 10 would be disappointing to me. That said, I am not convinced the team did not get worse. I just do not know enough about the FAs we did bring in to say that. I know Martinez replacement was cheap because people were scared of his injury history, and I know Bulaga was very good last year. I also am not sure we will field a slot corner that is better than Tramon WIlliams. So i still think we can win alot of games, but I think we might have gotten a little worse, so far.

I mean chances of us regressing from a record standpoint from last year's 13-3 is very high because 13-3 is about as good as a record as you can realistically get in the league with those rare exceptions of great teams who go 14-2 or 15-1.

I think MN will take a step back especially early. I think Chicago is a wildcard and Detroit will likely take a step forward. Last year we were undefeated in the division with only the Vikings essentially not coming down to the final play. Let's face it. We could have very easily been swept by Detroit last year. Though we were clearly the better team at Lambeau.

We are pulling the AFC South which likely has two very winnable games and two tougher games.

We are pulling the NFC South which also likely has two very winnable games and two tougher games. Both the tough games are on the road.

We are pulling at SF and hosting Philly for the remaining games.

We have a tough schedule for sure. I would say our reasons for optimism include:
1. Development and progression of Aaron Rodgers in the MLF system. Not going to bad habits.
2. Development and progressions of our investment in the run game.
3. Development and progression of our TEs and H backs in the offense.
4. Devlopment of SOMEONE to take over that WR2 spot.
5. Development and progression of Darnell Savage, Rashan Gary, Kirksey and our young corners.
6. Wrinkle of Swervin' Ervin in the offense and Special Teams.

I would say our reasons for pessimism include:
1. We relied on historical performances from Z. and P. Smith to make our defense and team work.
2. We won last year based on balls bouncing our way and virtually no injuries.
3. Our offense moved because of near echelon play from Aaron Jones and Devante Adams.
4. Mason Crosby was clutch for us making virtually all kicks and a kick he did miss was bailed out due to penalty.
5. A lot of opponenents last year missed FGs against us. MN and KC come to mind immediately.

Drj820 wrote: ↑

12 May 2020 10:39

I can see a 10 win season. Maybe even better, i think that is realistic. Under 10 would be disappointing to me. That said, I am not convinced the team did not get worse. I just do not know enough about the FAs we did bring in to say that. I know Martinez replacement was cheap because people were scared of his injury history, and I know Bulaga was very good last year. I also am not sure we will field a slot corner that is better than Tramon Williams. So i still think we can win alot of games, but I think we might have gotten a little worse, so far.

Yeah, it feels fairly neutral. I think putting Kirksey below Martinez is a pessimistic view, but I understand doing so. I think we all agree that Wagner is a slight downgrade from Bulaga. But the whole list feels pretty neutral.

Full list of changes, to my knowledge...

• Gained Devin Funchess, Lost Geronimo Allison

• Gained Christian Kirksey, Lost Blake Martinez

• Gained Rick Wagner, Lost Brian Bulaga

• Gained Jace Sternberger, Lost Jimmy Graham (counting Sterny missing 3/4 the season on IR)

• Gained Equanimeous St Brown, lost Ryan Grant (counting EQSB as having been on IR)

• Gained Raven Green, Lost Isaiah Campbell (counting Greene being out most of the season)

Additions who might win roster spots at the expense of....

• AJ Dillon... Jamaal Williams? Dexter Williams? Tra Carson?

• Josiah Deguara... Danny Vitale

• Kamal Martin... Oren Burks? BJ Goodson

• Curtis Bolton... Oren Burks? Ty Summers?

• Jon Runyan, Jake Hansen... Cole Madison? Lane Taylor?

• Vernon Scott... Will Redmond?

• Treyvon Hester... Montravis Adams? Tyler Lancaster?

Losses whose replacements... may already exist?

• BJ Goodson... Martin? Bolton?

• Kyler Fackrell... Gary? Ramsey?

• Tramon WIlliams... Sullivan? Hollman? Jackson?

There's room for a fairly good amount of turnover on this roster, and definitely some bottom of the roster competition, at least. The losses, aside from Bulaga, are generally minimal; role players or sub-par players. I guess Tramon, also, but given his age, this was sort of expected and there's no knowing when he falls off.

Is the better or worse? We'll see.

go pak go wrote: ↑

12 May 2020 11:04

I think MN will take a step back especially early.

I dont expect them to take a step back from 10-6. I think 10-6 or 11-5 is probably about right for them.

Drj820 wrote: ↑

12 May 2020 13:07

go pak go wrote: ↑

12 May 2020 11:04

I think MN will take a step back especially early.

I dont expect them to take a step back from 10-6. I think 10-6 or 11-5 is probably about right for them.

I wouldn't be surprised if that is their final record.

But I would be surprised if they are at that level to start the season.

They are relying on a lot of rookies to make immediate impact there during a Covid offseason. I am glad we are pulling them week 1 at their place compared to pulling them week 16 at their place once the rookies have had time to be seasoned.

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

11 May 2020 10:41

Scott4Pack wrote: ↑

11 May 2020 10:26

I like the idea of us beating Minny in week 1. If we lose to the Saints, we’re probably 3-1 in the bye.

After that, the toughest part of the season. Could be 6-2 or even 5-3. But that’s okay, as things lighten up just a bit.

If we're 5-3 at the halfway point, I'll be perfectly content. Obviously, I want to be 8-0, but 5-3 is fine. If it's 4-4 we'll need another Rodgers-R.E.L.A.X. run, which I could see as perfectly likely.

4-4 would actually be fine. Disappointing, but fine. I don't know that Minny will run away with the division if we underperform. Chicago? Not. Detroit, doubtful. But this might be the one year that we actually have a little opportunity to slack that we wouldn't normally have. I just don't see our divisional foes going for a 12 win season or better.

Drj820 wrote: ↑

12 May 2020 13:07

go pak go wrote: ↑

12 May 2020 11:04

I think MN will take a step back especially early.

I dont expect them to take a step back from 10-6. I think 10-6 or 11-5 is probably about right for them.

Ok, let me get all of this straight.

So the Vikings were 10-6 in 2019. They didn't defeat a single playoff team in the regular season, losing twice to the Packers, once to KC (with Matt Moore just like when we played them), and losing to the Seahawks.

They didn't end the year on a hot streak, losing 3 of their final 5 regular season games, including the final two.

They beat the Saints in the wild card round and lost to the 49ers in the second round.

That means the Vikings finished the year 0-2 against the Packers, 1- 5 against playoff teams, and 3-4 in their final 7 games.

Then, this offseason, they lost:
- Stefon Diggs, leading WR
- Trey Wayans, starting CB
- Everson Griffen, aging EDGE
- Xavier Rhodes, struggling starting CB
- David Morgan, blocking TE
- Linval Joseph, aging DT
- Andrew Sendejo, reserve S and ST
- Mackenzie Alexander, reserve CB
- Laquan Treadwell, 1st round WR bust
- Jayron Kearse, reserve S
- Stephen Weatherly, rotational EDGE

And replace them with:
- Michael Pierce, run-stuffing DT (replaces Joseph)
- Anthony Zettle, rotational DL (replaces Griffen? Weatherly?)
- Tajae Sharpe, fifth round WR bust (replaces Treadwell)
- Justin Jefferson, rookie WR (replaces Diggs)
- Jeff Gladney, rookie CB (replaces Rhodes or Wayans)
- Cameron Danzler, rookie CB (replaces the other one)
- Day Three rookies

And I'm supposed to think they're BETTER? More dangerous? A front-runner?

I'm sorry. They either need MAJOR rookie contributions right away (not even just Jefferson and Gladney) or a lot of luck for me to believe that their roster is better this year than last year. Pierce was a nice signing. But that's really it.

Just in the secondary, you had 5 starters (3 CBs, 2 Ss) and 4 reserves (2 CBs, 2 Ss), and you replaced 2 of the 3 starting CBs, 1 of the 2 reserve CBs and both reserve Ss all with rookies... and people are optimistic? Better be some darn good rookies.

Our "terrible" WRs are gonna torch their unprepared CBs in week one and everyone will be like "but the Vikings had such a good draft! what happened?"

The Vikings will be lucky to beat the Bears out for the NFC North's likely wild card playoff spot.

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

17 May 2020 15:26

Our "terrible" WRs are gonna torch their unprepared CBs in week one and everyone will be like "but the Vikings had such a good draft! what happened?"

The Vikings will be lucky to beat the Bears out for the NFC North's likely wild card playoff spot.

Honestly, I can't WAIT to see Mike Hughes and Jeff Gladney take turns getting torched by Davante while Cameron Danzler and Holton Hill try to keep up with our big guys. I'd bet right now they pull a CB for performance during the game.

I can't WAIT to see what Z will do to a rookie OT in Ezra Cleveland who is athletic but needs to gain strength in the NFL. Can you imagine? Truncated offseason, no NFL strength program, already considered soft, and your FIRST NFL matchup is ZaDarius Smith?

My goodness that A+ rookie class is gonna be looking weak by the time we go to bed Sunday night, September 13th

Take a look at the Week 1 NFL schedule.

Opening night is KC vs Texans .

IMHO these will be good Sunday matchups to watch:

vs.

And this SNF game will be hyped like crazy (McCoach back on the sideline ... lets see if a pen is still affixed to his hat):

vs.

Not really a good Sunday matchup ......... but regardless I am afraid this late game game will be hyped as well:

vs.

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

17 May 2020 15:26

The Vikings will be lucky to beat the Bears out for the NFC North's likely wild card playoff spot.

In addition to all of the personnel losses on defense that you listed...
Sheil Kapedia has an article up at The Athletic talking about strength of schedule for this year. He uses the QB ratings he got from the 50 coaches and personnel guys he interviewed - to map out who has the toughest 2020 schedule. And based on quality of QBs on the schedule, the vikings are the lucky winners as having the toughest one of all.

1. Minnesota Vikings

Opponents by QB Tier: T1: 5 | T2: 6 | T3: 2 | T4: 3

Russell Wilson
Aaron Rodgers (2)
Drew Brees
Deshaun Watson

Tom Brady
Matthew Stafford (2)
Matt Ryan
Dak Prescott
Philip Rivers

Ryan Tannehill
Teddy Bridgewater

Foles/Trubisky (2)
Gardner Minshew

The Vikings play a league-high 11 games against quarterbacks in the top two tiers. They face four of the five Tier 1 quarterbacks, including Aaron Rodgers twice, plus the top quarterback from the second tier in Tom Brady. Mahomes is the only Tier 1 quarterback the Vikings do not play.
.

That is funny

Hope Z and the D just destroy them like they did Monday night last year. Make it so our QB play doesn’t even matter. Set the tone for the year.


I am damn ready for this D to turn elite. And like I’m talking top 3 in yards and points. I can’t think of a team that will face as bad of offenses as we will in their 6 division games, other than the Patriots for the gazillionth time.