Training Camp 2019 notes

[PackFan2]

It's so sad seeing car accidents that could've been prevented. My dad (ex military man) always told me to imagine my car as a 3,000+lb missile when I started driving. Sure, my girl teases me for driving ''safe" but idrc. Everyone, it's not worth rushing and driving sporadically just because you might be a minute late. A car can be replaced, you can't. <3 I love this forum.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Benson's accident could've easily happen if he was driving a car.

Equating auto and cycle risks is simply wrong. On a per-miles-driven basis, fatal cyclist accidents are 35 times greater than with autos. Common sense alone would tell you that the abundant protections in a auto vs. merely a helmet and leathers heavily stacks the odds against a cyclist.

More than half of auto fatalities fall to people not wearing their shoulder harnes. If everybody availed themselves of that simple protecion the car/cycle disparity would be even greater.

By the way, I said I have no pity for Benson or anybody else who engages in risky behaviors. Their families? I said nothing about that. Expressing sympathy from a distance to people you don't know, never will and who may not even exist is gratuitous. That's the kind of thing best left to do-nothing politician sound bites. Are you going to pay Benson's wife's mortgage? Did he even have a wife? Such expressions of sympathy make the sympathizer feel good, but it does nothing for the sympathized.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Wow, that is surprising actually. That guy in the Bel Air didn't make it I am afraid.

Why is that surprising? Contemporary vehicles are specifically designed to prevent death and serious injury. Decades of research, testing and engineering ("science") have been dedicated to incremental improvements in safety. It is not some pointless occupation dictated by the nanny state.

Besides the way modern autos are design to crumple to absorb shock, there's the shoulder harness and airbags. Further, note how the Bel Air's dash and steering wheel are pushed back into the driver's torso whereas it doesn't budge in the Malibu. It is a little known fact that many modern autos are designed to release the motor from the mounts with a downward thrust in a frontal crash. That Malibu dummy might have broken legs, but the head and chest are protected. Some vehicles now have leg airbags to mitigate even those injuries.

Then we have safety recalls. In researching three row SUVs recently, I noticed Subaru recalled early production Ascents for missing welds in one of the pillars. I think it was the B pillar where side impact protection was compromised. Those buyers got a replacment vehicle!

The NHSTA wasn't created until 1966, the birth of highway safety study and regulation. In 1968, seat belts became mandatory by federal regulation. In 1959, Detroit was selling style, features and performance.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Why is that surprising? Contemporary vehicles are specifically designed to prevent death and serious injury. Decades of research, testing and engineering ("science") have been dedicated to incremental improvements in safety. It is not some pointless occupation dictated by the nanny state.

Besides the way modern autos are design to crumple to absorb shock, there's the shoulder harness and airbags. Further, note how the Bel Air's dash and steering wheel are pushed back into the driver's torso whereas it doesn't budge in the Malibu. It is a little known fact that many modern autos are designed to release the motor from the mounts with a downward thrust in a frontal crash. That Malibu dummy might have broken legs, but the head and chest are protected. Some vehicles now have leg airbags to mitigate those injuries.

Then we have safety recalls. In researching three row SUVs recently, I noticed Subaru recalled early production Ascents for missing welds in one of the pillars. I think it was the B pillar where side impact protection was compromised. Those buyers got a replacment vehicle!

The NHSTA wasn't created until 1966, the birth of highway safety study and regulation. In 1968, seat belts became mandatory by federal regulation. In 1959, Detroit was selling style, features and performance.

It was surprising, because I figured when an egg (new cars) collided with a hammer (old cars) the eggs would be obliterated. But as you said and the more I read, only the shell of the egg is totaled, its job is to protect the yolk. As I said earlier, I saw the results of a 64 Chrysler barely side swiping a Prius, nobody was hurt, the Prius was considered totaled and the Chrysler barely a dent.

 

[HardRightEdge]

It was surprising, because I figured when an egg (new cars) collided with a hammer (old cars) the eggs would be obliterated. But as you said and the more I read, only the shell of the egg is totaled, its job is to protect the yolk. As I said earlier, I saw the results of a 64 Chrysler barely side swiping a Prius, nobody was hurt, the Prius was considered totaled and the Chrysler barely a dent.

Well, I can imagine that in certain impacts at certain speeds the old Detroit iron might win. But it's kinda like the guy who will tell you his life was saved by being thrown from his vehicle when he wasn't wearing a seat belt. That may be true in some percentage of incidents, but for the preponderance of accidents you're best protected inside the vehicle. The odds say it is foolish to drive without wearing your shoulder harness and it is more likely you will die driving a 1964 Chrysler than a Prius. Besides, the Chrysler might have had just a dent but the driver might have had whiplash or bounced his head off the steering wheel.

The '64 Imperial is way cool, though, in white with the black top:

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

But it can't top the '64 Continental convertible with the suicide doors even if it is a death trap:

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[HardRightEdge]

Once again, it sounds like the Packer offense is totally struggling without #12 on the field for practice today.

Rob Demovsky
@RobDemovsky
·
25m

As @BillHuberSI
just said as Crazy Train was playing, this practice has gone off the rails. One of the worst offensive practices Ray Nitschke Field — or any field — has ever seen.

So, in a phrase, this practice was a train wreck. Or maybe a car crash?

 

[Zartan]

Once again, it sounds like the Packer offense is totally struggling without #12 on the field for practice today.

Rob Demovsky
@RobDemovsky
·
25m

As @BillHuberSI
just said as Crazy Train was playing, this practice has gone off the rails. One of the worst offensive practices Ray Nitschke Field — or any field — has ever seen.

So Im guessing that's the last time Lafleur will play Crazy Train then...

 

[Do7]

Equating auto and cycle risks is simply wrong. On a per-miles-driven basis, fatal cyclist accidents are 35 times greater than with autos. Common sense alone would tell you that the abundant protections in a auto vs. merely a helmet and leathers heavily stacks the odds against a cyclist.

More than half of auto fatalities fall to people not wearing their shoulder harnes. If everybody availed themselves of that simple protecion the car/cycle disparity would be even greater.

By the way, I said I have no pity for Benson or anybody else who engages in risky behaviors. Their families? I said nothing about that. Expressing sympathy from a distance to people you don't know, never will and who may not even exist is gratuitous. That's the kind of thing best left to do-nothing politician sound bites. Are you going to pay Benson's wife's mortgage? Did he even have a wife? Such expressions of sympathy make the sympathizer feel good, but it does nothing for the sympathized.

Totally missing the point. Accidents happen. Driving transportation in general is a huge risk, whether it be car, train, plane, and accidents happen, even IF you take precautionary measures. Who's to say Benson wasn't careful and yet he still died? The fact you have no sympathy simply because you don't necessarily see the need of riding a motorcycle when it was an accident makes you sound like a complete insensitive jerk with all due respect. If he had done something that warranted his own death such as run into oncoming traffic or something as blatantly stupid like that then I could understand that. But having no sympathy simply because he rode a motorcycle? Do you hear yourself right now? The dude was freaking 36 and now he's dead.

 

[Mondio]

It sounds insensitive, but I understand what he's saying. Not that I'll think" eh, he deserved to die", but more along the lines of "those are the risks you take". I used to ride, almost entirely offroad. It's probably safer. I'd never ride on the road these days. I know many people that still do and I don't know why. ALmost all have stories about being lucky to be alive and have a friend who's been killed, passenger killed or life drastically altered because of it. Not sure why anybody puts themselves at that risk anymore. I used to put 100 miles or more on a bicycle on the roads weekly too. Heck, I'm nervous cutting my grass. we have almost 800 feet that borders a 45MPH zone. NOBODY moves over, slows down, nothing. When I have to cut that outside strip and my back is to traffic I just pray nobody is going to jump the curb and take me out. So many actually cross the fog line towards me and are within a foot of the curb when they zoom past me. Not sure if they're trying to do that or just not paying any attention at all.

anyway, bake to cycles, a patient's wife, vegetable at 42 years of age. happened 3 weeks ago a half mile from their house. straight road, good visibility and a car turned left into their neighbors driveway right in front of them. The dumb ***'s comment to the police, "I had my blinker on"

He swerved to avoid her, but still got taken out. He's busted up, his wife would probably be better off dead. These stories aren't uncommon anymore at all. Just 2 blocks from our house, teenager from a nearby town, pulled out infront of a motorcycle, she killed him. Had a helicopter landing 2 blocks from my house to try and save him. I'll take the 3000lb+ of metal around me to protect from the masses. They're idiots.

 

[Do7]

It sounds insensitive, but I understand what he's saying. Not that I'll think" eh, he deserved to die", but more along the lines of "those are the risks you take". I used to ride, almost entirely offroad. It's probably safer. I'd never ride on the road these days. I know many people that still do and I don't know why. ALmost all have stories about being lucky to be alive and have a friend who's been killed, passenger killed or life drastically altered because of it. Not sure why anybody puts themselves at that risk anymore. I used to put 100 miles or more on a bicycle on the roads weekly too. Heck, I'm nervous cutting my grass. we have almost 800 feet that borders a 45MPH zone. NOBODY moves over, slows down, nothing. When I have to cut that outside strip and my back is to traffic I just pray nobody is going to jump the curb and take me out. So many actually cross the fog line towards me and are within a foot of the curb when they zoom past me. Not sure if they're trying to do that or just not paying any attention at all.

anyway, bake to cycles, a patient's wife, vegetable at 42 years of age. happened 3 weeks ago a half mile from their house. straight road, good visibility and a car turned left into their neighbors driveway right in front of them. The dumb ***'s comment to the police, "I had my blinker on"

He swerved to avoid her, but still got taken out. He's busted up, his wife would probably be better off dead. These stories aren't uncommon anymore at all. Just 2 blocks from our house, teenager from a nearby town, pulled out infront of a motorcycle, she killed him. Had a helicopter landing 2 blocks from my house to try and save him. I'll take the 3000lb+ of metal around me to protect from the masses. They're idiots.

And like I just finished explaining while riding a motorcycle is a risk in of itself, riding ANY mode of transportation involves risk. It doesn't matter if what it is, there is NO guarantee you'll survive when you enter a "screaming metal deathtrap" as some would call it. A person at 36 years old died in an ACCIDENT. ACCIDENTS can happen with ANY VEHICLE. Now does Motorcycles have a higher risk than a car? Absolutely, but a car or a truck or SUV has its own risks. Who's to say he would've survived if he had been in a car, truck, SUV. As I've mentioned before I've had loved ones who I've lost in those damn things, and I pray to God to help deliver me to my destination every time I drive my Rav4 or Civic because I know there are many factors that can happen that's out of my control and today could possibly be my last. I like you guys, and he may have meant it that way, but it definitely came off as insensitive and tasteless with all due respect. Idc if you guys don't agree with people riding motorcycles, or engaging in other behaviors that have a higher degree in risks, someone died. Again if he had done something stupid like run a stop sign into an oncoming vehicle or wasn't paying attention THEN I could understand having little sympathy. But say some **** such as having no sympathy to the person that died, and to call someone an idiot over something like that? Dude that's low.

Let me also say this. Yes you are entitled to your opinion and I do respect your opinion, but once it is freely expressed it is allowed to be criticized by anyone. So I respectfully disagree with you guys' outlook on the matter.

That is all.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I agree with Mondio and HRE on this one and think you might be taking this way out of context Do7. I can't tell you how you should feel, so I am not saying you are being over emotional for your own well being, its how you react and that is your business. But to impose that onto other people and say that they aren't reacting correcting simply because their reactions aren't inline with yours is out of line IMO.

How do you think ER Doctors, Morticians, people doing autopsies react to most deaths?

Everyday people die for whatever reasons, most of these people none of us know personally. Do I feel bad for the person and their family, sure. How bad do I feel for people I don't know? I guess it depends on the circumstances, but as HRE points out, its just a human reaction to death when a complete stranger dies, its not a personal attachment.

Every death that occurs could probably be put on a scale of 1-1000 in the way that it happened. With 1 being a 110 year old dying peacefully in their sleep and 1000 being *insert any graphic horrid murder here*. How one person reacts to each death is going to vary as well and dependent on how they process things.

In the case of Cedric Benson, very sad and needless death, but possibly one that could have been avoided had controllable circumstances been different. By saying that it could have been avoided, isn't said with insensitivity to him or his family, its just pointing out a fact.

 

[Mondio]

I don't care if people ride cycles, I always try to be aware of them to keep us all safe. We all have different levels of accepting risk for a million different reasons that make complete sense to some, and none to others.

I do feel badly in a sense that i know what loss of life too soon is like. I don't think empathy is a wasted emotion though it may seem like it to some. I've never met Cedric or millions of others that meet and early end, but I do understand the feelings their loved ones are going thru and it does make me feel for them. I know it does them no good, they likely have no idea, but in some way i'm sure it shapes how we interact with those we do know and love.

 

[Do7]

I agree with Mondio and HRE on this one and think you might be taking this way out of context Do7. I can't tell you how you should feel, so I am not saying you are being over emotional for your own well being, its how you react and that is your business. But to impose that onto other people and say that they aren't reacting correcting simply because their reactions aren't inline with yours is out of line IMO.

How do you think ER Doctors, Morticians, people doing autopsies react to most deaths?

Everyday people die for whatever reasons, most of these people none of us know personally. Do I feel bad for the person and their family, sure. How bad do I feel for people I don't know? I guess it depends on the circumstances, but as HRE points out, its just a human reaction to death when a complete stranger dies, its not a personal attachment.

Every death that occurs could probably be put on a scale of 1-1000 in the way that it happened. With 1 being a 110 year old dying peacefully in their sleep and 1000 being *insert any graphic horrid murder here*. How one person reacts to each death is going to vary as well and dependent on how they process things.

In the case of Cedric Benson, very sad and needless death, but possibly one that could have been avoided had controllable circumstances been different. By saying that it could have been avoided, isn't said with insensitivity to him or his family, its just pointing out a fact.

First off I'm not imposing, but merely saying how I felt it was insensitive to say such a thing after such a tragedy. I even stated that they are entitled to their opinion, while I strongly disagree, so I don't see your point. It's clear they feel one way about it while I feel differently. You don't have to agree with me, just like I don't have to agree with them. Let me ask this, if this happened to a someone you knew and some random guy said they brought it on themselves wouldn't you be upset? If no, then more power to you, because there are just some things you should keep to yourself due to the sensitivity of the situation. I merely said that I THOUGHT what they said was insensitive and in poor taste over something as trivial as that.

And how do you know it could've been prevented had he not rode on a motorcycle? Saying **** like he brought this on himself because he rode on a motorcycle? Like what guarantee do you know that he would've survived if he was in a car? My issue is while that may be how they feel, it wasn't necessary for them to say such a thing. What baffles me is that how this is going over you guys' heads as this was an accident and accidents can occur with any mode of transportation. You may not agree with people riding motorcycles and whatnot but to say you have no sympathy for them when an accident occurs just sounds like a **** move if you ask me, whether they brought it on themselves or not.

It's like @Poppa San and I said, any 36 year old killed in an accident deserves sympathy. I don't see how this is going over your head dude. If you think I'm overreacting, fine. I just don't see the need for stuff like that to be said.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

First off I'm not imposing, but merely saying how I felt it was insensitive to say such a thing after such a tragedy. I even stated that they are entitled to their opinion, while I strongly disagree, so I don't see your point. It's clear they feel one way about it while I feel differently. You don't have to agree with me, just like I don't have to agree with them. Let me ask this, if this happened to a someone you knew and some random guy said they brought it on themselves wouldn't you be upset? If no, then more power to you, because there are just some things you should keep to yourself due to the sensitivity of the situation. I merely said that I THOUGHT what they said was insensitive and in poor taste over something as trivial as that.

And how do you know it could've been prevented had he not rode on a motorcycle? Saying **** like he brought this on himself because he rode on a motorcycle? Like what guarantee do you know that he would've survived if he was in a car? My issue is while that may be how they feel, it wasn't necessary for them to say such a thing. What baffles me is that how this is going over you guys' heads as this was an accident and accidents can occur with any mode of transportation. You may not agree with people riding motorcycles and whatnot but to say you have no sympathy for them when an accident occurs just sounds like a **** move if you ask me, whether they brought it on themselves or not.

It's like @Poppa San and I said, any 36 year old killed in an accident deserves sympathy. I don't see how this is going over your head dude. If you think I'm overreacting, fine. I just don't see the need for stuff like that to be said.

Of course I have sympathy for his family, but pointing out that motorcycles are a very unsafe way to travel might come off as unsympathetic to you when discussing this, but its a cold hard fact. Would I walk up to his widow at his funeral and point that out? No.

However, if discussing it prevents just one death, then I will continue to discuss it, with or without your blessing.

 

[Do7]

Of course I have sympathy for his family, but pointing out that motorcycles are a very unsafe way to travel might come off as unsympathetic to you when discussing this, but its a cold hard fact. Would I walk up to his widow at his funeral and point that out? No.

However, if discussing it prevents just one death, then I will continue to discuss it, with or without your blessing.

I never said nor did I imply that you needed my blessing so I don't get what point you're trying to make there. It's clear we aren't going to see eye to eye about this. It just baffles my mind in regards to how I understand that motorcycles have a higher degree of risks to them in comparison to other vehicles, and yet you guys can't seem to grasp that there is no guarantee that he would've survived had he been driving a car. It was an accident, and regardless of whatever method he traveled in, he died in an untimely manner and there is no guarantee that he would've survived even in a different mode of transportation, and for people to say they have no pity for him just rubs me the wrong way. It was untimely and tragic, and in my estimation that deserves sympathy in of itself.

But at this point I'm beating a dead horse on this matter, for the sake of argument. I'll just agree to disagree with how you guys see this, I for one feel sympathy to not just his family and loved ones, but for him as well as I'm certain he wouldn't have wanted to go out this way, and again who's to say he would've survived had he been in a car. Nobody knows.

RIP Cedric.

 

[Poppa San]

Let's steer this back on topic and pick up the Cedric Benson tangent here.

 

[PackFan2]

Heard JMon dropped acouple of passes in camp and Dex Williams got sidelined for missing an assignment (didn't help he dropped a red zone pass that was wide open on that play too).

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Heard JMon dropped acouple of passes in camp and Dex Williams got sidelined for missing an assignment (didn't help he dropped a red zone pass that was wide open on that play too).

I just don't see Moore making the final 53. If the Packers still think he has potential and its just one more year of seasoning, they might want to put him on ice and sneak him to the PS. If he starts making plays in these final 2 games and they cut him, another team might just grab him.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I just don't see Moore making the final 53. If the Packers still think he has potential and its just one more year of seasoning, they might want to put him on ice and sneak him to the PS. If he starts making plays in these final 2 games and they cut him, another team might just grab him.

With Moore not being able to catch the ball it's all but guaranteed he won't make the roster. It might be smart to put him on the practice squad for a season although I'm not convinced he will ever be able to significantly reduce the drops.

 

[Mondio]

I dont' think he makes it either. Talent is there, i'd give him a shot at the PS, but from what it sounds like and the little i've seen, he may be working at it, but it's not translating to better hands so far.

 

[gbgary]

I just don't see Moore making the final 53. If the Packers still think he has potential and its just one more year of seasoning, they might want to put him on ice and sneak him to the PS. If he starts making plays in these final 2 games and they cut him, another team might just grab him.

agreed. i think he's had plenty of time and he's done nothing. shephard's done more in his first partial camp than moore's done in over a year. time to move on.

 

[The Spotted Cow]

agreed. i think he's had plenty of time and he's done nothing. shephard's done more in his first partial camp than moore's done in over a year. time to move on.

Shephard is definitely intriguing to me. MIght add a different element on offense.

 

[HardRightEdge]

With Moore not being able to catch the ball it's all but guaranteed he won't make the roster. It might be smart to put him on the practice squad for a season although I'm not convinced he will ever be able to significantly reduce the drops.

It has become very difficult to make the case for Moore. Demovsky's note from yesterday is telling:

"For all the times that J'Mon Moore has dropped passes this camp — like yesterday when he dropped two — it would be unfair to let pass one of the best catches he's made – or anyone has made – this camp. During one of the full-speed team periods, Moore made a leaping 30-yard touchdown grab over safety Natrell Jamerson on a deep ball from Tim Boyle."

From what we have seen (and heard), Moore's drops and bobbles come on balls with velocity, not so much on a 30 yard lofted ball. Unfortunately, that's a dog that don't hunt in the NFL. The only question is whether Gutekunst will throw in the towel on his own 4th. round pick or if he holds out hope Moore can be "fixed".

As for the practice squad, if I'm Moore I take any other PS offer for a fresh start. If the Packers offered more than the PS minimum for him to stick around, if I'm him I move on regardless.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

As for the practice squad, if I'm Moore I take any other PS offer for a fresh start.

Been thinking about that too, ever since I wrote he would be an easy slide to the PS and I tend to agree with you. A fresh start with a new team, might be the best way to clear his head and start with a clean slate.

I don't think his NFL career will come to an end when the Packers cut him and I am quite confident they will, barring a miraculous turn around in his ability to hang on to anything or everything thrown at him or a slew of injuries in the next 10 days.

 

[HardRightEdge]

I don't think his NFL career will come to an end....

That's an easy call if the Packers cut Moore. Somebody will want to take a look at him on a PS.

WRs #6 and #7 (if they go 7 deep) don't make the game day roster anyway even with an injury unless that guy has a high special teams value, Davis or Shepherd as returner in particular. Could Moore get that #7 spot if the Packers see some reason to believe the drops can be fixed? It's not likely, especially how deep he was buried in the depth chart in this last preseason game, but there is a non-zero probability. The guy gets separation, adjusts to deep balls, competitive on the jump ball, not small things.

Here's one possible scenario:

Adams-Allison-MVS-Kumerow

Shepherd beats out Davis for the return job as is the game day #5 which knocks Davis off the game day roster. Practice is one thing, with LaFluer saying some kind words about Davis when he was actually able to practice. He's practicing now and we should expect him to get some targets in the next two weeks. So, what happens if Davis looks like the WR we've seen in the past in these last two preseason games indicating his upside as a WR is reached at a fairly low level? His his injury history makes him unreliable. Gutekunst tried to trade him when he didn't even have a plausible punt return replacement. Davis is not yet safe.

If they go with 7 WRs, that would leave two spots open for St. Brown, Lazard and Moore. I see things not to like in those first two names. The odds are long for Moore, longer yet if they go with 6 WRs, but without a microphone in the coaches room I wouldn't count him out just yet. Let's see what the last two preseason games show us which one would assume is the coaches' viewpoint.