Dillon.......keeping defenses honest.

[easyk83]

Funny because I thought they were running too much early on, given the depleted Raven secondary. But as sschind noted, that's part of MLF's MO - keep em guessing. But the run always sets up the pass, so it was weird they didn't run Dillon in Q4. Although Rodgers was pretty much moving the ball at will. It was the D's performance that kept that game close. That's two weeks in a row so hopefully they get back to form.

Id rather take a chance on running against the Ravens defensive front as opposed to having Rodgers drop back 50 times and brave that same defensive front while relying on a bunch of back ups.

 

[Heyjoe4]

I'm fine with keeping the defense guessing but with a lead in the fourth quarter it makes more sense to run the ball occasionally even if the opponent is aware of what's coming.



I honestly don't think that was a factor.

MLF has done this before (getting away from the basics of his game plan). Dillon should have had 4 or 5 carries in Q4.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Id rather take a chance on running against the Ravens defensive front as opposed to having Rodgers drop back 50 times and brave that same defensive front while relying on a bunch of back ups.

Those backups need to open holes in the running game as well for it to work. It was pretty obvious passing the ball worked better than running it against the Ravens but I would still have liked Dillon to get some runs in the fourth quarter.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Those backups need to open holes in the running game as well for it to work. It was pretty obvious passing the ball worked better than running it against the Ravens but I would still have liked Dillon to get some runs in the fourth quarter.

MLF was trying to run early, but finding no luck. And given the injury-ravaged Raven secondary, I was surprised he didn't pass more early. I suppose it still takes a run game to set up passing options and keep the blitz in check. As you note, a lot of that goes back to the O line. The backups simply don't do as good a job of opening running lanes.

I wonder now if Bakh and Myers will be back at all this year. I'd like to see both of them get snaps before the playoffs. But even if it it is in the playoffs, it will be an improvement.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I wonder now if Bakh and Myers will be back at all this year. I'd like to see both of them get snaps before the playoffs. But even if it it is in the playoffs, it will be an improvement.

With Bakhtiari not being able to practice once again I'm pessimistic about his chances of playing this season.

 

[swhitset]

With Bakhtiari not being able to practice once again I'm pessimistic about his chances of playing this season.

Agreed… and unfortunately it highlights why I’m always very hesitant to want the team to pay anyone the kind of money they gave to Bakh shortly before his injury.

 

[gopkrs]

Agreed… and unfortunately it highlights why I’m always very hesitant to want the team to pay anyone the kind of money they gave to Bakh shortly before his injury.

Sometimes you have to but Bakh's was too much imho.

 

[Heyjoe4]

With Bakhtiari not being able to practice once again I'm pessimistic about his chances of playing this season.

Yeah I'm afraid you're right. I don't know where his recovery went wrong. Not sure if he pushed too hard. It seems unlikely the trainers would do that. The meniscus repair was the first (and last) sign things weren't right. A shame because everything else, except STs, is peaking at the right time.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Sometimes you have to but Bakh's was too much imho.

Chalk it up to inflation, increasing NFL revenues and increasing caps. The best linemen are going to be pulling $20 mil/year soon, especially if they front an elite QB. Where does that end? Ticket prices, at least partially. Risky business, as we learned this year the hard way with Bakh.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Agreed… and unfortunately it highlights why I’m always very hesitant to want the team to pay anyone the kind of money they gave to Bakh shortly before his injury.

I think most fans would have been opposed to let Bakhtiari walk away in free agency though. While it took the Packers a huge amount of money to re-sign him that's what it takes at this point to retain an elite left tackle, especially one that hadn't had any significant injury since joining the team.

Unfortunately it didn't that long for that to change once he signed the deal.

 

[swhitset]

I think most fans would have been opposed to let Bakhtiari walk away in free agency though. While it took the Packers a huge amount of money to re-sign him that's what it takes at this point to retain an elite left tackle, especially one that hadn't had any significant injury since joining the team.

Unfortunately it didn't that long for that to change once he signed the deal.

All true… That doesn’t change the fact that I believed the risk to be too high at the time. Left Tackle is important…. but in my opinion not important enough to justify that much money.

 

[Schultz]

So you don't want the Packers to sign Adams?

 

[OldSchool101]

Yeah I'm afraid you're right. I don't know where his recovery went wrong. Not sure if he pushed too hard. It seems unlikely the trainers would do that. The meniscus repair was the first (and last) sign things weren't right. A shame because everything else, except STs, is peaking at the right time.

IDK. My opinion is that they won’t jeopardize his long term health by “rushing him back”. There’s lots of football left. As a #1 seed it’s still near a month from playoffs. If he’s coming back after a minor setback, more likely he appears in a “money” contest. We’re already in the playoffs so I say let him rest.

Where I think the true indicator will be is our first playoff contest and what his status is the week prior (practicing fully etc.. ). They won’t waste a roster spot if he’s not near ready. I’ll be watching his status around that time

 

[Heyjoe4]

So you don't want the Packers to sign Adams?

Good point. Whether it comes to an All Pro LT or an All Pro WR, these guys are gonna cost a lot of money. I mentioned earlier that NFL revenues just keep climbing. It's the most popular spectator sport in the US and draws millions and millions of viewers, and advertisers and $$$. So if a team wants to keep players like Bakh and Adams, they're gonna have to pay up. Just my opinion, but as long as Rodgers stays and plays at an MVP level, the signing of Bakh made sense as will the signing of Adams. At some point teams run out of money. That's why we lost Linsley. We will lose others. They pay the GM and the Director of Operations a lot of money to figure this stuff out.

 

[Heyjoe4]

I think most fans would have been opposed to let Bakhtiari walk away in free agency though. While it took the Packers a huge amount of money to re-sign him that's what it takes at this point to retain an elite left tackle, especially one that hadn't had any significant injury since joining the team.

Unfortunately it didn't that long for that to change once he signed the deal.

I agree. Arguably the best LT in football protecting the blind side of arguably the best QB in football. Ya gotta pay the man. I was fine with it. We'll lose players like Linsley cause ya can't keep everyone. But Bakh? No way they let him walk. It was actually an acceptable risk given his consistency - as you point out. The injury was just awful timing. It's a credit to the GM and the position coaches for how well the OL has held up this year. 11-3 isn't an accident.

 

[sschind]

So you don't want the Packers to sign Adams?

Its coming at a bad time. If we only had a couple of deals to get done and we were in not such a cap hell I'd say its a no brainer, Get him signed. But with all we have going on I'm not so sure. The good news is his year 1 deal might not be so bad as I am expecting a 1 million dollar base salary coupled with whatever bonuses but its still going to be tough fitting him in. Besides, as nice as it is having one of the top WRs in the game I'm not sure it's worth paying for. I'd rather have a top CB than a top WR.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Its coming at a bad time. If we only had a couple of deals to get done and we were in not such a cap hell I'd say its a no brainer, Get him signed. But with all we have going on I'm not so sure. The good news is his year 1 deal might not be so bad as I am expecting a 1 million dollar base salary coupled with whatever bonuses but its still going to be tough fitting him in. Besides, as nice as it is having one of the top WRs in the game I'm not sure it's worth paying for. I'd rather have a top CB than a top WR.

Hard to argue with your logic. I think it's fair to say that it's easier to find a very good WR than a very good CB. Speaking of that, is Alexander a free agent next year? I don't think so. Seems like there is a year left but if so, that's the time to get it done. If the only choice I had was keeping Adams or Alexander, and as much as I like Adams, I'd have to go with Alexander.

Eventually Rodgers is gonna be gone. Maybe as soon as next year, although I doubt it. The Packers can remain competitive even with an average QB if they have a top 3 D. It sure looks like they're close - they need at least one more stud DE and DL. Teams win SBs with elite defensive units. Not as exciting to watch but it gets the job done.

And if/when Rodgers leaves, the O's productivity will drop dramatically, making an elite D that much more important.

 

[swhitset]

So you don't want the Packers to sign Adams?

No I don’t. I love Adams but not at 27 million or more per year.

 

[Heyjoe4]

No I don’t. I love Adams but not at 27 million or more per year.

That would be crazy. And I love Adams, and people will think I'm a heretic, but he's not the best WR in the NFL. Top 5? Indeed. And someone will pay him $23 or $24 mil year with $60-80 mil guaranteed, and that's just too much. I'd rather draft or trade for a WR and use the money to strengthen the DL. And if Rodgers finishes his career, and I think he will now, we'll be fine.

Please don't get me wrong. Adams deserves his pay day and he'll get it. It's just too rich for GB. And look at history. GB has won a lot of games with Adams out. Rodgers is indispensable. Adams is not. Too bad really cause I like the guy and it will be hard to see him in another uniform.

One thing they can do next year is tag him and then trade him. I don't want to see him playing for the Vikes, Bears, or Lions.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

All true… That doesn’t change the fact that I believed the risk to be too high at the time. Left Tackle is important…. but in my opinion not important enough to justify that much money.

The offensive line holding up pretty well without Bakhtiari all season long actually supports your claim.

IDK. My opinion is that they won’t jeopardize his long term health by “rushing him back”. There’s lots of football left. As a #1 seed it’s still near a month from playoffs. If he’s coming back after a minor setback, more likely he appears in a “money” contest. We’re already in the playoffs so I say let him rest.

It seems Bakhtiari suffered a setback for the second time though. As previously mentioned I'm not optimistic about him playing this season.

Besides, as nice as it is having one of the top WRs in the game I'm not sure it's worth paying for. I'd rather have a top CB than a top WR.

The Packers have Alexander and Stokes under contract for next season as their top cornerback duo. If they lose Adams they don't have a #1 receiver on the roster.

Therefore I think re-signing him is more important than adding another CB.

Hard to argue with your logic. I think it's fair to say that it's easier to find a very good WR than a very good CB. Speaking of that, is Alexander a free agent next year? I don't think so. Seems like there is a year left but if so, that's the time to get it done. If the only choice I had was keeping Adams or Alexander, and as much as I like Adams, I'd have to go with Alexander.

Eventually Rodgers is gonna be gone. Maybe as soon as next year, although I doubt it. The Packers can remain competitive even with an average QB if they have a top 3 D. It sure looks like they're close - they need at least one more stud DE and DL. Teams win SBs with elite defensive units. Not as exciting to watch but it gets the job done.

And if/when Rodgers leaves, the O's productivity will drop dramatically, making an elite D that much more important.

Alexander is under contract for next season and the Packers can actually save up to $9.6 million in cap space for 2022 by extending him.

It will be tough to fit Adams under the cap but there's a way to get it done (low base salary paired with a huge signing bonus prorated over five years).

Unfortunately the Packers defense isn't an elite unit capable of carrying a team with average quarterback play.

I'd rather draft or trade for a WR and use the money to strengthen the DL.

I understand it would take a lot of money to keep Adams but it's close to impossible to adequately replace one of the best wide receivers in the game.

The Packers might get by without him as long as Rodgers is around but if Love is the team's starting quarterback next year it's necessary to have a legit #1 WR.

One thing they can do next year is tag him and then trade him. I don't want to see him playing for the Vikes, Bears, or Lions.

With other teams being aware of the Packers' cap sitaution it's probable the team won't be able to receive fair compensation in return for Adams if they decide to tag him.

 

[Mondio]

If Rodgers is still here I think there is a good chance Adams is too. If he is not neither is Adams. I think it’s a both or none situation.

 

[swhitset]

If Rodgers is still here I think there is a good chance Adams is too. If he is not neither is Adams. I think it’s a both or none situation.

that is my guess as well.

 

[AmishMafia]

If Rodgers is still here I think there is a good chance Adams is too. If he is not neither is Adams. I think it’s a both or none situation.

I can't see how we can afford both. Not without losing other key players and hurting the team. I think what is special about Adams is Rodgers. The understanding between the two makes them both better. I wouldn't sign Adams if Rodgers is gone.

 

[PackAttack12]

That would be crazy. And I love Adams, and people will think I'm a heretic, but he's not the best WR in the NFL.

The connection with Rodgers though makes his value and production level with the Packers extremely valuable. With how he and Rodgers are on the same wavelength pretty much every time, Adams performs like the best wide receiver in football and that's all that matters.

If Rodgers is still here I think there is a good chance Adams is too. If he is not neither is Adams. I think it’s a both or none situation.

I think you're spot on. Rodgers won't sign an extension if they don't extend Adams as well.

I can't see how we can afford both. Not without losing other key players and hurting the team. I think what is special about Adams is Rodgers. The understanding between the two makes them both better. I wouldn't sign Adams if Rodgers is gone.

I think both can be afforded if they are both extended, but I agree with your take about not signing Adams if Rodgers is gone.

 

[Heyjoe4]

The offensive line holding up pretty well without Bakhtiari all season long actually supports your claim.



It seems Bakhtiari suffered a setback for the second time though. As previously mentioned I'm not optimistic about him playing this season.





The Packers have Alexander and Stokes under contract for next season as their top cornerback duo. If they lose Adams they don't have a #1 receiver on the roster.

Therefore I think re-signing him is more important than adding another CB.



Alexander is under contract for next season and the Packers can actually save up to $9.6 million in cap space for 2022 by extending him.

It will be tough to fit Adams under the cap but there's a way to get it done (low base salary paired with a huge signing bonus prorated over five years).

Unfortunately the Packers defense isn't an elite unit capable of carrying a team with average quarterback play.



I understand it would take a lot of money to keep Adams but it's close to impossible to adequately replace one of the best wide receivers in the game.

The Packers might get by without him as long as Rodgers is around but if Love is the team's starting quarterback next year it's necessary to have a legit #1 WR.




With other teams being aware of the Packers' cap sitaution it's probable the team won't be able to receive fair compensation in return for Adams if they decide to tag him.

Thanks for the info on Alexander. That's encouraging, at least for next year and for possibly getting a deal done with Adams. After this season, I really think Rodgers is going to stay. Rodgers/Adams is arguably one of the best QB/WR tandems in football. Now if Rodgers leaves and Love is the guy, yeah they're gonna need a legit #1 WR. I just don't see that happening. And I hope Rodgers doesn't squeeze GB for more money. He deserves it, but would he rather have another ring or more $$$?

Another subject - There has been some conversation about what the Packers do with Douglas when Alexander returns. Isn't that answered by benching King? He won't be back next year anyway. The question is who plays slot and if Alexander becomes the "star" player in that D wouldn't he play slot? Or is he better on the wideout? I don't know the answer to those questions. At least it's a good problem to have after so many years of lousy secondary play.