Packers Huddle

14 years straight the Patriots or Chiefs have been in the AFC Title Game.

First.

NCF wrote: ↑

28 Jan 2025 12:17

14 years straight the Patriots or Chiefs have been in the AFC Title Game.

New England and Kansas City have 19 Conference Title Game appearances and 8 SB rings to show for it. (42% conversion rate from Final 4 to Champion)

Meanwhile the NFC's top teams of SF, Philly, and GB have 20 Conference Title Game appearances but only 2 SB rings to show for it. (10% conversion rate from Final 4 to Champion)

That is a lot of success and dominance between the three NFC teams to have the same amount of hardware combined as the flash in pans of the Giants or Bucs respectively.

More proof that the cakewalk is better than being "battle-tested." NFC is way more competitive, yet has fewer SBs for it.

Labrev wrote: ↑

28 Jan 2025 15:13

More proof that the cakewalk is better than being "battle-tested." NFC is way more competitive, yet has fewer SBs for it.

I’ve always agreed with this as well.

Having the home field advantage in the playoffs is huge. Packer fans poo poo it because they believe the Lambeau mystique is gone. I could care less if it’s gone or not. Not playing on the road in a hostile playoff environment where you have to go to silent counts is the real advantage.

The reason the Packers have fallen short over the years is because they come out with some type of league worst fault or just aren’t truly the best team in the conference despite their record. 2022 you come out at home but are not even league worst, we were as Andy Herman put it, a generationally worst STs unit. You come out at home in 2021 against the Buccs but they were just a better team. They slapped us both times we played them to give up some garbage points to make it close but they weren’t in any danger of losing. 2014 we were home but the 9ers just had a better team. 2012 we had a league worst pass defense.

Super Bowl teams dont get there by having league worst elements to their game.

Crazy. Can't say the Chiefs have been exceptional at drafting since Veech came on board. They are still winning though.

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

29 Jan 2025 08:42

Crazy. Can't say the Chiefs have been exceptional at drafting since Veech came on board. They are still winning though.

Their roster really isn't anything amazing. Mahomes, Jones, that's it. There are better rosters than KC and better GMs than Veach.

But, they have great coaches, a Top-5 QB (who keeps playing like one in the biggest moments), stability in coaching (not constantly losing key guys), easy division/conference, and lots of playoff experience. Turns out, that's just as important if not more than roster talent.

Labrev wrote: ↑

29 Jan 2025 12:20

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

29 Jan 2025 08:42

Crazy. Can't say the Chiefs have been exceptional at drafting since Veech came on board. They are still winning though.

Their roster really isn't anything amazing. Mahomes, Jones, that's it. There are better rosters than KC and better GMs than Veach.

But, they have great coaches, a Top-5 QB (who keeps playing like one in the biggest moments), stability in coaching (not constantly losing key guys), easy division/conference, and lots of playoff experience. Turns out, that's just as important if not more than roster talent.

Strong disagree. They have the best QB in the league. They have the best C in the league. They have arguably the best DT in the league. McDuffie is one of the best CBs in the league. They have two of the leagues better OGs in the league with Thuney and Smith. Travis Kelce is still one of the leagues better TEs despite on the backside of his career. Then you go across the board and they just have a lot of other solid players. Leo Chenal, Nick Bolton, George Karlaftis, Isaiah Pacheco, Justin Reid. They dont have league worst position groups that kill them like the Packers have had in recent championship pushes. Last year we had by far away the worst S group in the league. We saw seen multiple times the Packers have league wide worst LB play. This is the first year in a long time I can say our roster, when healthy, didnt have a league worst issue. The problem was without Jaire this team might have had the worst group of CBs but they were still making it work somehow.

They don't have Ladarius Gunther as their CB#1?

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑

29 Jan 2025 12:58

Strong disagree. They have the best QB in the league. They have the best C in the league. They have arguably the best DT in the league. McDuffie is one of the best CBs in the league. They have two of the leagues better OGs in the league with Thuney and Smith. Travis Kelce is still one of the leagues better TEs despite on the backside of his career. Then you go across the board and they just have a lot of other solid players. Leo Chenal, Nick Bolton, George Karlaftis, Isaiah Pacheco, Justin Reid. They dont have league worst position groups that kill them like the Packers have had in recent championship pushes.

I'll give you McDuffie, but I otherwise stand by my take. Humphrey arguably is the best in the league sure but C is not a super impactful position. Bolton, Pacheco, Reid, etc. are all nice players but not field-tilters IMO, or anyone you have to gameplan around.

KC certainly is a solid all-around team, which is impressive in a sense, but I think the intangibles is more what makes them great.

Labrev wrote: ↑

29 Jan 2025 19:07

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑

29 Jan 2025 12:58

Strong disagree. They have the best QB in the league. They have the best C in the league. They have arguably the best DT in the league. McDuffie is one of the best CBs in the league. They have two of the leagues better OGs in the league with Thuney and Smith. Travis Kelce is still one of the leagues better TEs despite on the backside of his career. Then you go across the board and they just have a lot of other solid players. Leo Chenal, Nick Bolton, George Karlaftis, Isaiah Pacheco, Justin Reid. They dont have league worst position groups that kill them like the Packers have had in recent championship pushes.

I'll give you McDuffie, but I otherwise stand by my take. Humphrey arguably is the best in the league sure but C is not a super impactful position. Bolton, Pacheco, Reid, etc. are all nice players but not field-tilters IMO, or anyone you have to gameplan around.

KC certainly is a solid all-around team, which is impressive in a sense, but I think the intangibles is more what makes them great.

Kelce was 2 of 4 for 19 yards in the AFCCG. The dreaded 50% catch rate. So their star offensive weapon wasn't very impactful and yet they still scored 32 and won. I am confused because I thought it was impossible to win CGs without 2 good receivers.

Why is DK Metcalf such a popular trade candidate for us?? Why wouldn't Seattle want to keep him?


I love the idea of Garrett Wilson personally. He just seems done with NY. Maybe a new coach can buy him in, but he seems miserable.

1 year of a rookie contract, at least you are gettings some value from the cap front. Always hate the idea of giving up draft capital for someone on a fair market contract, when free agency exitsts. But 4th year and 5th year option would let this make sense.

The possibilities of Jaire or Doubs as a player in return, maybe the draft compensation doesn't need to be crazy.

BF004 wrote: ↑

29 Jan 2025 20:05

Why is DK Metcalf such a popular trade candidate for us?? Why wouldn't Seattle want to keep him?


I love the idea of Garrett Wilson personally. He just seems done with NY. Maybe a new coach can buy him in, but he seems miserable.

1 year of a rookie contract, at least you are gettings some value from the cap front. Always hate the idea of giving up draft capital for someone on a fair market contract, when free agency exitsts. But 4th year and 5th year option would let this make sense.

The possibilities of Jaire or Doubs as a player in return, maybe the draft compensation doesn't need to be crazy.

Agree, except don't think Jaire will bring much trade value and Doubs will bring exactly zero trade value. Maybe a team thinks they can make something out of LVN. Maybe Wilson for LVN and a 3rd could work.

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

29 Jan 2025 19:20

Labrev wrote: ↑

29 Jan 2025 19:07

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑

29 Jan 2025 12:58

Strong disagree. They have the best QB in the league. They have the best C in the league. They have arguably the best DT in the league. McDuffie is one of the best CBs in the league. They have two of the leagues better OGs in the league with Thuney and Smith. Travis Kelce is still one of the leagues better TEs despite on the backside of his career. Then you go across the board and they just have a lot of other solid players. Leo Chenal, Nick Bolton, George Karlaftis, Isaiah Pacheco, Justin Reid. They dont have league worst position groups that kill them like the Packers have had in recent championship pushes.

I'll give you McDuffie, but I otherwise stand by my take. Humphrey arguably is the best in the league sure but C is not a super impactful position. Bolton, Pacheco, Reid, etc. are all nice players but not field-tilters IMO, or anyone you have to gameplan around.

KC certainly is a solid all-around team, which is impressive in a sense, but I think the intangibles is more what makes them great.

Kelce was 2 of 4 for 19 yards in the AFCCG. The dreaded 50% catch rate. So their star offensive weapon wasn't very impactful and yet they still scored 32 and won. I am confused because I thought it was impossible to win CGs without 2 good receivers.

as long as the good ones draw double coverage, the other flourish, that's how that stuff works, that's why ya pay the Kelce types big dollars, his type of production demands attention, Worthy had 7 catches and 80+ yrds, Mahomes ran for over 40 yards, thanks to Kelce clearing out those zones

Jaire's recent injury history, inflated or not seeming attitude issue towards team the past 2 seasons, and salary pretty much guarantee he'd not bring much in terms of trade compensation. Jaire the player? heck yeah, people would pay for that. Jaire and the rest that comes with? I wouldn't be surprised if he's still a Packer or we have to cut him if things are really that bad. Maybe a swap for another player in similar situation.

Doubs has zero trade value.

musclestang wrote: ↑

30 Jan 2025 05:37

Jaire's recent injury history, inflated or not seeming attitude issue towards team the past 2 seasons, and salary pretty much guarantee he'd not bring much in terms of trade compensation. Jaire the player? heck yeah, people would pay for that. Jaire and the rest that comes with? I wouldn't be surprised if he's still a Packer or we have to cut him if things are really that bad. Maybe a swap for another player in similar situation.

Doubs has zero trade value.

I really think Jaire has a shot to stick around. If he can play, you can deal with a prima donna. People are banking on us cutting him, so his trade value is minimal. The only tradable player we have for a sizable haul is Malik Willis. People need QBs, they grasp at straws all the time and Willis show cased his potential with us with in 2 weeks.

Cdragon wrote: ↑

30 Jan 2025 06:39

musclestang wrote: ↑

30 Jan 2025 05:37

Jaire's recent injury history, inflated or not seeming attitude issue towards team the past 2 seasons, and salary pretty much guarantee he'd not bring much in terms of trade compensation. Jaire the player? heck yeah, people would pay for that. Jaire and the rest that comes with? I wouldn't be surprised if he's still a Packer or we have to cut him if things are really that bad. Maybe a swap for another player in similar situation.

Doubs has zero trade value.

I really think Jaire has a shot to stick around. If he can play, you can deal with a prima donna. People are banking on us cutting him, so his trade value is minimal. The only tradable player we have for a sizable haul is Malik Willis. People need QBs, they grasp at straws all the time and Willis show cased his potential with us with in 2 weeks.

I think Jaire holds the cards. If he wants out, I think he gets his wish. If he is committed to being here, then I tend to agree with you.

Cdragon wrote: ↑

30 Jan 2025 06:39

musclestang wrote: ↑

30 Jan 2025 05:37

Jaire's recent injury history, inflated or not seeming attitude issue towards team the past 2 seasons, and salary pretty much guarantee he'd not bring much in terms of trade compensation. Jaire the player? heck yeah, people would pay for that. Jaire and the rest that comes with? I wouldn't be surprised if he's still a Packer or we have to cut him if things are really that bad. Maybe a swap for another player in similar situation.

Doubs has zero trade value.

I really think Jaire has a shot to stick around. If he can play, you can deal with a prima donna. People are banking on us cutting him, so his trade value is minimal. The only tradable player we have for a sizable haul is Malik Willis. People need QBs, they grasp at straws all the time and Willis show cased his potential with us with in 2 weeks.

why trade a quality backup after just one season? Willis can win, we have no assurance of that with anyone else should Love miss a game or two.

Guty tried to play down any attitude issues with Alexander, possibly to make him more attractive as trade bait, I think GM's may look at him as a new team resurection type of player, and healthy a true lockdown corner, not saying that will help a lot with compensation of draft picks, but it could go a long way with a player trade.

this will be an interesting off season, we have a few bucks to purchase a player or two

Labrev wrote: ↑

29 Jan 2025 19:07

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑

29 Jan 2025 12:58

Strong disagree. They have the best QB in the league. They have the best C in the league. They have arguably the best DT in the league. McDuffie is one of the best CBs in the league. They have two of the leagues better OGs in the league with Thuney and Smith. Travis Kelce is still one of the leagues better TEs despite on the backside of his career. Then you go across the board and they just have a lot of other solid players. Leo Chenal, Nick Bolton, George Karlaftis, Isaiah Pacheco, Justin Reid. They dont have league worst position groups that kill them like the Packers have had in recent championship pushes.

I'll give you McDuffie, but I otherwise stand by my take. Humphrey arguably is the best in the league sure but C is not a super impactful position. Bolton, Pacheco, Reid, etc. are all nice players but not field-tilters IMO, or anyone you have to gameplan around.

KC certainly is a solid all-around team, which is impressive in a sense, but I think the intangibles is more what makes them great.

If I may interject here. A solid all-around team with a few star players- preferably a star QB, and smart coaches are what a team needs to win a Super Bowl. Most importantly, the team must have no weaknesses.I am convinced that if a team has a weakness at any position group, that weakness invariably will be exposed in the playoffs. So, in summary, I don't think you need a roster littered with field-tilters. You just can't suck anywhere.

Cdragon wrote: ↑

30 Jan 2025 06:39

I really think Jaire has a shot to stick around. If he can play, you can deal with a prima donna. People are banking on us cutting him, so his trade value is minimal. The only tradable player we have for a sizable haul is Malik Willis. People need QBs, they grasp at straws all the time and Willis show cased his potential with us with in 2 weeks.

I also think there's a decent chance we don't know anything, media does media things, and Jaire is still a Packer next year. I'm not saying 90-10 stay vs somewhere else, but at least 40-60. I do think something is under there, just not sure where both sides are when it comes to managing that and moving forward and how much is really there.