Tearing it Down

[AKCheese]

I ask myself what would have happened to Rodgers in 2008 if Favre had not made that rapid fire decision to announce his retirement. Would the Packers have moved on with him? One area that I see lacking in Rodgers is that he does not appear to inspire enough of the players on his team when the going gets tough. Yes, he tries. I recall in 2005 how the salary cap and Thompson decimated the Packer roster. Favre was still out there playing every snap like he was in the SB. No quit in him. Even down by 20 points in the last 2 minutes he was out there hollering to his mates to hurry and get to the line. Players see that. Especially young ones.

Favre was/is flawed but special

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I disagree with you. We have not even seen Love play.

That's the whole point. The Packers should in no way feel confident about exercising Love's fifth year option, guaranteeing to pay him $20 million in 2024 at this point because they haven't seen him play enough.

AR is definitely past his prime now and he just needs an ego check for sure

Rodgers is less than a year removed from being a two time consecutive MVP. I have a hard time believing he's past his prime.

 

[PackerDNA]

While with the weaknesses on this team and it's performance, they may not have a choice but to tear it down and rebuild due to how much is needed and their cap and contract situations.
However, I don't think that they will. To admit that they botched the whole thing and start over I don't know is a palatable option for them.
Look for them to do everything they can to push the cap pain back for another year and try to make one more run.

 

[PackerDNA]

That's the whole point. The Packers should in no way feel confident about exercising Love's fifth year option, guaranteeing to pay him $20 million in 2024 at this point because they haven't seen him play enough.



Rodgers is less than a year removed from being a two time consecutive MVP. I have a hard time believing he's past his prime.

I agree about Rodgers. I've been reading that his thumb is broken. That would explain a lot on many of his throws. He's badly missed more throws this season than probably the last five seasons combined. A guy known for his lethal accuracy suddenly can't throw a football any better than me? I don't buy it. I'm betting the thumb is a much bigger problem than he or anyone else wants to talk about

 

[Wi. Mike now in Florida]

I agree about Rodgers. I've been reading that his thumb is broken. That would explain a lot on many of his throws. He's badly missed more throws this season than probably the last five seasons combined. A guy known for his lethal accuracy suddenly can't throw a football any better than me? I don't buy it. I'm betting the thumb is a much bigger problem than he or anyone else wants to talk about

I wondered what the NFL says, (if anything) on how bad an injury has to be to keep a player off the field?
If there isn't anything, then that would explain Rodger's thumb.

 

[OldSchool101]

At the current rate. It’s likely GB is out of the playoff hunt (for all practical purposes) if they lose to Philly on the road. Looking around there are an abundance of NFC teams a mile ahead of our record. We should be statistically eliminated in 2-3 weeks.

That leaves 3-4 contests. I’d like to see Love for 1-2 Quarters minimum and then have him Start the last 2-3 contests. We have nothing to lose and it’s time to see where he’s at in live game action.

That said. If #12 plays and suffers a season ending injury with 3-4 meaningless contests remaining? That would qualify for the reward for total ineptitude.

 

[OldSchool101]

Jones had six receptions for only 20 yards against the Titans. Seems that didn't work either.

Oops. You forgot something.
I just checked your math and looked for myself. Our RB room accounted for 7 catches for 30 yards receiving or a respectable 4.3 per catch.
I don’t think that qualifies as “didn’t work” nor was that a focus of our problems in this contest.

 

[Mondio]

So the rbs were involved in the range people are saying they need to be.

 

[AKCheese]

MULTIPLE games I saw last year Rogers would miss throws and the announcer would say “wow you never see Rogers do that” but he did it time after time. Maybe his thumb is a factor but he IS past his prime

 

[longtimefan]

MULTIPLE games I saw last year Rogers would miss throws and the announcer would say “wow you never see Rogers do that” but he did it time after time. Maybe his thumb is a factor but he IS past his prime

I and a few others said this 2 years ago

 

[David Ciembronowicz]

The Packers loaded up for the 2022 season even more so once Davante chose not to come back...at literally every position except for WR. You cannot afford to load up with premiere talent everywhere. This defense should be special...however had we resigned Davante, there is a good freaking chance the trickle down affect of that would have again left us with a limited defense and EVERYONE is complaining yet again that our defensive weakness illustrates Gute inability to build a winning team.

Many fans simply cannot live in an unfiltered view of things.

Uh, don't think they loaded up at OL either; this has continued to be a problem throughout the year and will through the last 6 games.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

While with the weaknesses on this team and it's performance, they may not have a choice but to tear it down and rebuild due to how much is needed and their cap and contract situations.

I truly don't believe the Packers need to improve the team that much to be a legit contender. It might take some major changes on the coaching staff to make it work though. The situation regarding the cap can be worked out if they want to.

I agree about Rodgers. I've been reading that his thumb is broken. That would explain a lot on many of his throws. He's badly missed more throws this season than probably the last five seasons combined. A guy known for his lethal accuracy suddenly can't throw a football any better than me? I don't buy it. I'm betting the thumb is a much bigger problem than he or anyone else wants to talk about

If it's true that Rodgers thumb is broken and the Packers have decided it's better to play him that would be all you need to know about Love.

I wondered what the NFL says, (if anything) on how bad an injury has to be to keep a player off the field?
If there isn't anything, then that would explain Rodger's thumb.

The NFL doesn't have any say in who is kept off the field aside of a player having a concussion.

That leaves 3-4 contests. I’d like to see Love for 1-2 Quarters minimum and then have him Start the last 2-3 contests. We have nothing to lose and it’s time to see where he’s at in live game action.

Once the Packers are eliminated from playoff contention I want Love to play every single snap for the rest of the season.

I just checked your math and looked for myself. Our RB room accounted for 7 catches for 30 yards receiving or a respectable 4.3 per catch.
I don’t think that qualifies as “didn’t work” nor was that a focus of our problems in this contest.

In what world is 4.3 yards per reception a respectable number??? Dillon and Jones entered the Titans game averaging 6.54 yards per catch. Even that number isn't great by any means as Dillon ranks 24th and Jones 29th among 35 running backs with at least 17 catches (Dillon's number). Their numbers against the Titans would rank dead last among that group.

MULTIPLE games I saw last year Rogers would miss throws and the announcer would say “wow you never see Rogers do that” but he did it time after time. Maybe his thumb is a factor but he IS past his prime

Did you miss that Rodgers won the MVP award last season???

 

[tynimiller]

Uh, don't think they loaded up at OL either; this has continued to be a problem throughout the year and will through the last 6 games.

How is drafting THREE not loading up? You load up with players in two ways - giving them money or picking them in the draft. We spent more draft equity on OL and WR than any other room in GB.

 

[Magooch]

How is drafting THREE not loading up? You load up with players in two ways - giving them money or picking them in the draft. We spent more draft equity on OL and WR than any other room in GB.

Think it's more a question of quality rather than quantity at that point - not just the number of players "invested" into a specific position but rather the value of said investment.

Just taking a quick look at relative draft value (Rich Hill) the pick of Quay Walker was valued at 253 points. Christian Watson, Romeo Doubs, Samori Toure, Sean Rhyan, Zach Tom, and Rasheed Walker *combined* for a points value of 258. Ergo our #22 pick at DE was more or less as much "Draft equity" invested in one single position than 6 picks spread across WR and OL.
And of course that does not include Devonte Wyatt (1-28 / 209 pts) either. On the whole the investment in players for the defense absolutely dwarfs the value invested in WR/OL - 474 to 258.

And it's not like we are "loading up" by paying out huge amounts to those positions either. We are (per OTC.com) 24th in WR spending and 25th in OL spending (and even including Rodgers' contract we are 15th in offensive spending on the whole) while 12th in total defensive spending.

So while it may technically be true that we invested more heavily in those positions than any other single group this season - at least by measure of the number of players added at a given position - it's certainly not where we've chosen to invest most heavily in terms of both money and draft capital *value*.

 

[OldSchool101]

Once the Packers are eliminated from playoff contention I want Love to play every single snap for the rest of the season

I knew you'd come around! (whistling Hallelujah!) You really wanted Love all along! Just admit it!

In what world is 4.3 yards per reception a respectable number???

4.3 per catch against that Defense would've been better than the 3 per carry we had. Also, it's hard to judge an entire RB group by 7 catches. There is a distinct possibility that using Dillon more (call it 6 catches also) would've resulted in closer per average to that number you mentioned. It seems they keyed on #33 and I don't think that is some big surprise there

 

[tynimiller]

Think it's more a question of quality rather than quantity at that point - not just the number of players "invested" into a specific position but rather the value of said investment.

Just taking a quick look at relative draft value (Rich Hill) the pick of Quay Walker was valued at 253 points. Christian Watson, Romeo Doubs, Samori Toure, Sean Rhyan, Zach Tom, and Rasheed Walker *combined* for a points value of 258. Ergo our #22 pick at DE was more or less as much "Draft equity" invested in one single position than 6 picks spread across WR and OL.
And of course that does not include Devonte Wyatt (1-28 / 209 pts) either. On the whole the investment in players for the defense absolutely dwarfs the value invested in WR/OL - 474 to 258.

And it's not like we are "loading up" by paying out huge amounts to those positions either. We are (per OTC.com) 24th in WR spending and 25th in OL spending (and even including Rodgers' contract we are 15th in offensive spending on the whole) while 12th in total defensive spending.

So while it may technically be true that we invested more heavily in those positions than any other single group this season - at least by measure of the number of players added at a given position - it's certainly not where we've chosen to invest most heavily in terms of both money and draft capital *value*.

It is basic economics however, this isn't Madden. You will forever and always have positional groups which rank lower on the spending part of things than others. You simply cannot be the big spender in all spots...isn't how it works.

Presently according to just 2022 Cap Hits (of course things shift as you talk overall deals):

QB - we are 5th most money at the spot ($31.9M)
RB/FB - 15th ($7.7M
WR - 21st ($13.2M)
TE - 9th ($9.1M)
OL - 19th ($25.2M)
DL - 17th ($24.5M)
LB - 10th ($22.3M
DB - 11th ($27.2M)

2023 currently we are top 10 spending at four spots. Tops at RB (Jones' contract balloon makes this make sense) and 3rd at DBs

 

[tynimiller]

And it's not like we are "loading up" by paying out huge amounts to those positions either. We are (per OTC.com) 24th in WR spending and 25th in OL spending (and even including Rodgers' contract we are 15th in offensive spending on the whole) while 12th in total defensive spending.

So while it may technically be true that we invested more heavily in those positions than any other single group this season - at least by measure of the number of players added at a given position - it's certainly not where we've chosen to invest most heavily in terms of both money and draft capital *value*.

Beyond like 20-40 players a draft, there is zero guarantees. I know that is something many don't want to hear but it is true. Yes, your scouting refinement and ability to hit is better the higher up the draft you go, but it is nothing to overlook when a team spends 6 picks on just two positional groups. That's some serious logs to the fire, albeit as with ANY draft logs that you have no knowledge if seasoned and will burn fast or if still green and are going to take some time in the fire before you see them really take off.

 

[AKCheese]

Yup Rogers won an MVP last year. Great individual honor - congrats. Did you see him lay an egg against SF? (And against Tampa Bay the year prior for that matter). Now he’s just playing out the string. He’s not only screwed the Packers (which THEY let happen), he’s also screwed himself (if he truly has any interest in actually playing football at an elite level again). The guy is a headcase, estranged from his family, engaged and disengaged how many times now? Taking wierdo drugs, pulling drama ego powertrip BS. Flapping his yap on nutjob radio. This is a slow motion train wreck the only question is when do either Rogers or GB push PLAY and get it over with so we can start picking through the rubble and get the train back on the tracks.

 

[OldSchool101]

Yup Rogers won an MVP last year. Great individual honor - congrats. Did you see him lay an egg against SF? (And against Tampa Bay the year prior for that matter). Now he’s just playing out the string. He’s not only screwed the Packers (which THEY let happen), he’s also screwed himself (if he truly has any interest in actually playing football at an elite level again). The guy is a headcase, estranged from his family, engaged and disengaged how many times now? Taking wierdo drugs, pulling drama ego powertrip BS. Flapping his yap on nutjob radio. This is a slow motion train wreck the only question is when do either Rogers or GB push PLAY and get it over with so we can start picking through the rubble and get the train back on the tracks.

I see the chances of us winning a SB with Rodgers inside the next 2 seasons about relative to us making a Wild Card Playoff run and getting to the NFC game this season. I'm not saying it's impossible, but it's highly unlikely. I'm not sure how much more I can take of the same old same old. We are in complete disarray and anyone not recognizing that fact is fooling themselves. I'll take my chances going into a completely different direction and starting a rebuild. Do it now while we can bring on a top 2-3 College QB prospect and 3-4 more studs to replace the key old and aging players that need to go yesterday. Be respectful but let's take 2 steps backwards and move on and get out of this funk we've all been in. Give Love his chance to redeem some capital that was spent on him, we've waited this long, let's see if he's improved or go get us another Stud QB in the draft. We don't get a top 5-10 selection very often, this is our time.

Also let's stop the Barry experiment, we've seen what he can do with good talent

 

[Magooch]

It is basic economics however, this isn't Madden. You will forever and always have positional groups which rank lower on the spending part of things than others. You simply cannot be the big spender in all spots...isn't how it works.

Presently according to just 2022 Cap Hits (of course things shift as you talk overall deals):

QB - we are 5th most money at the spot ($31.9M)
RB/FB - 15th ($7.7M
WR - 21st ($13.2M)
TE - 9th ($9.1M)
OL - 19th ($25.2M)
DL - 17th ($24.5M)
LB - 10th ($22.3M
DB - 11th ($27.2M)

2023 currently we are top 10 spending at four spots. Tops at RB (Jones' contract balloon makes this make sense) and 3rd at DBs

Of course you can't be a big spender in every single position (well, sort of) but the point is addressing your initial claim that "you load up on players by giving them money or picking them in the draft". We have not "loaded up" on the aforementioned positions/position groups (WR/OL) by spending big in that area, that's for sure...

Which leads to the second option presented:

Beyond like 20-40 players a draft, there is zero guarantees. I know that is something many don't want to hear but it is true. Yes, your scouting refinement and ability to hit is better the higher up the draft you go, but it is nothing to overlook when a team spends 6 picks on just two positional groups.

And the bolded portion is more or less making my point for me. You are saying "We loaded up on that position by drafting heavy towards it"...while at the same time admitting that the majority (5 or 6 out of 6 picks) were "zero guarantee" picks. We have not spent heavily on these position groups, nor have we invested heavily by means of draft pick value (no "sure things") at either of these position groups, either. Our version of "loading up" these position seems to be defined not by spending heavily on them nor by investing high-value draft capital but rather by investing in *quantity* and hoping that some of it pans out.

I guess it would probably be more accurate to add the following clarification then:

There are three ways to "load up" on a position group.
One is to spend big cash on it. Two is to invest high-value draft capital. And three is to spend minimally (both in cash and pick value) on an assortment of cheaper prospects and see if one (or more) of them develop for you.

And if we're talking in respect to this most recent offseason we certainly did not do (1) or (2).

That's some serious logs to the fire, albeit as with ANY draft logs that you have no knowledge if seasoned and will burn fast or if still green and are going to take some time in the fire before you see them really take off.

Well, or it could also be that those logs are rotted out or waterlogged and will never catch fire in any appreciable way, but I get what you're saying

 

[tynimiller]

Of course you can't be a big spender in every single position (well, sort of) but the point is addressing your initial claim that "you load up on players by giving them money or picking them in the draft". We have not "loaded up" on the aforementioned positions/position groups (WR/OL) by spending big in that area, that's for sure...

Which leads to the second option presented:



And the bolded portion is more or less making my point for me. You are saying "We loaded up on that position by drafting heavy towards it"...while at the same time admitting that the majority (5 or 6 out of 6 picks) were "zero guarantee" picks. We have not spent heavily on these position groups, nor have we invested heavily by means of draft pick value (no "sure things") at either of these position groups, either. Our version of "loading up" these position seems to be defined not by spending heavily on them nor by investing high-value draft capital but rather by investing in *quantity* and hoping that some of it pans out.

I guess it would probably be more accurate to add the following clarification then:

There are three ways to "load up" on a position group.
One is to spend big cash on it. Two is to invest high-value draft capital. And three is to spend minimally (both in cash and pick value) on an assortment of cheaper prospects and see if one (or more) of them develop for you.

And if we're talking in respect to this most recent offseason we certainly did not do (1) or (2).


Well, or it could also be that those logs are rotted out or waterlogged and will never catch fire in any appreciable way, but I get what you're saying

Oh contrare to the first claim, Bakh has been one of the perrennial highest paid Tackles for a few years now, his injury doesn't change the fact we spend, and spend big time on the line. I also envision we may become the team with a Top 5 guard salary too when Jenkins' is signed. We spend money there without question, and Billy Turner signing showed not just developed players are fair game but we will go out if right player/deal and pay for a starter through FA.


If you don't pick a position early and that position needs filling you have to double or triple up later to hit. Similar to the logic of how when we needed WRs we drafted three the year MVS was one of them....arguably MVS was a mild hit - we need a better hit but still, odds are you'll do decent. Likewise this year we needed a WR, we tripled up and as of right now appear to have done well and many feel like either Romeo or Christian is going to become something special...even if both can become complimentary WR1Bs together that is special.

Also Watson was a high draft capital pick up, took two second rounders to grab him and he was two picks away from being a first rounder and was a Top 50 pick and Top 50 prospect, some had him in their top 25 prospect sheets (to be clear I was not one of them personally).

I understand like Poker, they have not invested like you believe they should have or on the exact players or position you believe they should have, but we cannot just avoid what has transpired, contracts we have written, draft equity we have spent.

 

[Magooch]

Oh contrare to the first claim, Bakh has been one of the perrennial highest paid Tackles for a few years now, his injury doesn't change the fact we spend, and spend big time on the line. I also envision we may become the team with a Top 5 guard salary too when Jenkins' is signed. We spend money there without question, and Billy Turner signing showed not just developed players are fair game but we will go out if right player/deal and pay for a starter through FA.


If you don't pick a position early and that position needs filling you have to double or triple up later to hit. Similar to the logic of how when we needed WRs we drafted three the year MVS was one of them....arguably MVS was a mild hit - we need a better hit but still, odds are you'll do decent. Likewise this year we needed a WR, we tripled up and as of right now appear to have done well and many feel like either Romeo or Christian is going to become something special...even if both can become complimentary WR1Bs together that is special.

Also Watson was a high draft capital pick up, took two second rounders to grab him and he was two picks away from being a first rounder and was a Top 50 pick and Top 50 prospect, some had him in their top 25 prospect sheets (to be clear I was not one of them personally).

I understand like Poker, they have not invested like you believe they should have or on the exact players or position you believe they should have, but we cannot just avoid what has transpired, contracts we have written, draft equity we have spent.

I'm repeating myself but...I don't think I'm the one ignoring that.

Keep in mind that your original post itself claimed "The Packers loaded up for the 2022 season even more so once Davante chose not to come back...at literally every position except for WR."

In 2022 we are 25th in OL spending. The draft capital we spent on all three offensive linemen we drafted in the 2022 draft carried a value equivalent to roughly that of one mid-3rd round pick (approx. pick ~75). And unless I've missed something, we spent precisely $0m on OL in free agency this offseason.

I guess maybe we just fundamentally disagree on how to define "loading up" but I would not consider spending 0 in free agency and picks 92,
140, and 249 in the draft to be "loading up" on a position when it comes to the 2022 season, as initially stated.

(Similarly I would not consider replacing Adams, MVS, ESB, etc with one 2nd round pick and 1.85m in free agency on a single WR to be "loading up" at that position either, but you already said previously that we didn't load up at WR... so you are arguing with yourself at this point on that one, lol)

 

[milani]

I knew you'd come around! (whistling Hallelujah!) You really wanted Love all along! Just admit it!

4.3 per catch against that Defense would've been better than the 3 per carry we had. Also, it's hard to judge an entire RB group by 7 catches. There is a distinct possibility that using Dillon more (call it 6 catches also) would've resulted in closer per average to that number you mentioned. It seems they keyed on #33 and I don't think that is some big surprise there

They key on Jones more now than any RB we have had since Ahman Green.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

4.3 per catch against that Defense would've been better than the 3 per carry we had. Also, it's hard to judge an entire RB group by 7 catches. There is a distinct possibility that using Dillon more (call it 6 catches also) would've resulted in closer per average to that number you mentioned. It seems they keyed on #33 and I don't think that is some big surprise there

If you want to make a fair comparison to the running game you need to include the one incompletion when targeting Jones as well, resulting in the average yards per attempt going down to 3.75 yards. Once again, that isn't impressive by any means and definitely doesn't justify advocating to suggest an increased number of targets for the running backs.

Yup Rogers won an MVP last year. Great individual honor - congrats. Did you see him lay an egg against SF? (And against Tampa Bay the year prior for that matter).

There's no doubt Rodgers played a bad game vs. the Niners but without the special teams having been a train wreck it would have been good enough to win it. He outplayed Brady in the NFCCG in 2020 but the team lost because of giving up 14 points in a short span before and after halftime. Yet you can't focus on anyone else than Rodgers because they didn't score on three attempts from the 8-yard line. It's actually pretty sad.

I see the chances of us winning a SB with Rodgers inside the next 2 seasons about relative to us making a Wild Card Playoff run and getting to the NFC game this season. I'm not saying it's impossible, but it's highly unlikely.

As I have mentioned repeatedly I don't think that's true at all. In my opinion the Packers are only some pieces away from being a legit contender as long as Rodgers is around.

Oh contrare to the first claim, Bakh has been one of the perrennial highest paid Tackles for a few years now, his injury doesn't change the fact we spend, and spend big time on the line. I also envision we may become the team with a Top 5 guard salary too when Jenkins' is signed. We spend money there without question, and Billy Turner signing showed not just developed players are fair game but we will go out if right player/deal and pay for a starter through FA.

If you don't pick a position early and that position needs filling you have to double or triple up later to hit. Similar to the logic of how when we needed WRs we drafted three the year MVS was one of them....arguably MVS was a mild hit - we need a better hit but still, odds are you'll do decent. Likewise this year we needed a WR, we tripled up and as of right now appear to have done well and many feel like either Romeo or Christian is going to become something special...even if both can become complimentary WR1Bs together that is special.

Also Watson was a high draft capital pick up, took two second rounders to grab him and he was two picks away from being a first rounder and was a Top 50 pick and Top 50 prospect, some had him in their top 25 prospect sheets (to be clear I was not one of them personally).

I understand like Poker, they have not invested like you believe they should have or on the exact players or position you believe they should have, but we cannot just avoid what has transpired, contracts we have written, draft equity we have spent.

I agree with @Magooch that the Packers have hardly invested a lot of capital on offensive linemen and wide receivers over the past few years. Them re-signing Bakhtiari to a huge deal is the only exception. Other than that they mostly ignored those positions in free agency or early in the draft expecting Rodgers to work magic with the talent he has been surrounded with.

While it's nice to spend several day three picks on those positions the probability of either of those working out is small, something you admitted to be true as well.

I agree that them trading up to select Watson this season should be considered as a significant move though.

 

[OldSchool101]

If you want to make a fair comparison to the running game you need to include the one incompletion when targeting Jones as well, resulting in the average yards per attempt going down to 3.75 yards. Once again, that isn't impressive by any means and definitely doesn't justify advocating to suggest an increased number of targets for the running backs.

I'll let Zach respond this time... Zach? are you still there? oh there you are!

Why haven't Packers RBs been more productive as receivers in 2022?

www.msn.com