Jump to content

rbens06

Veteran Members
  • Content Count

    1,078
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by rbens06

  1. I still dont think Love getting all the QB1 reps this offseason does much for or against Rodgers. Looking beyond this season the amount of reps he is getting at QB1 is not the determinate on what is good/bad for Rodgers, it is what Love does with the reps. If you are saying Guty will blindly turn to Love regardless of how he looks/develops with these reps then there I would disagree. Yes, Guty picked Love, and apparently was "hot" on Love, as he was with other guys too, but that doesn't mean he will blindly turn to him without proper analysis and input from his coaching staff. I.e. if Love tak
  2. Two things 1. This assumes Love shows the progress to give the Packers that confidence. By all accounts it appears the arrow is still pointing up, but what if Love takes all the reps and it makes the Pack uneasy on what they got?--This would be more favorable to Rodgers then, in some regards 2. Rodgers is entrenched as the starter when/if he comes back this year, so it doesnt hurt him this year. If it hurts his chances of staying beyond this season, Rodgers probably doesnt care about that because if there is any truth to the rumor he wants to be traded now then in a year he would wel
  3. Not to get into the details of the trade and if it is realistic and one I would or would not do etc. but just to note/reference there would be significant cap rolled over from 2021, which in part makes Sullivan of significant value for GB to trade from a salary perspective, if you did this trade: Rodgers 16M + Adams 13.1M + Tonyan 3.384M + Sullivan 2.133M - Jeudy 1.3M - Fant 1.6M - Surtain 3.7M would instantly give us 28M and some change for 2021 that we would likely roll over, less like you said the veteran quarterback signed. You only need to factor in the base salary for Jeudy and Fan
  4. I should clarify; the Packers explored to converting his salary to a bonus and that likely would need Rodgers to sign off since the salary becomes a "signing bonus". However, the 6.8 bonus they paid him could have been converted without his signing off from everything I have seen. I think that readiness and such is all part of that conversation; draft experts in the media said Love isn't ready, but GB might think he is closer than most and could play early, i.e. sit a year and be ready, but they could also be in agreement with the media experts and think 2-3 years of sitting is best and
  5. That too would be really short sighted, can a good GM up to this point for a hand picked GM by a QB that has limited time left. I originally felt the same call his bluff and let him retire and force him to live with that. Now if it gets to a point where you can’t repair the situation at all, I’m all for trading him and getting what I hope is a haul—seen deals that include 3 1st, other picks and players. Doesn’t do much for us now but puts Love on spot. If Love comes in and plays well we have a lot of premium picks to surround Love with. If he doesn’t we have the ammo to move up for a
  6. I agree it probably wouldn’t have helped much if any, but there is a chance that could’ve cleared the air let him know that you’re still our guy and we want you here for the long haul etc.—like you said likely doesn’t change where we are today. Thing is GB didn’t have to ask for anything on his contract that was a curiosity of GB’s part. If GB wanted to convert the money they could have. I know there are finer details like Rodgers might have to sign that but GB could’ve converted that. I can’t blame any of the cap crunch on Rodger or GB; like you said Covid created that cap crunch and had
  7. Agree! Except o think it’s just becoming public now. I think it’s been ugly so to speak for some time or very slow and frustrating from Rodgers perspective and so it’s just becoming public now, but agree! Completely agree! I think having the conversation with Rodgers after could’ve helped, if he didn’t do that, to let him know hey this is where he was ranked and we had an opportunity to get him and acted quickly. That’s the biggest if that Gute can’t even control. By all accounts over the past several months every key person involved has publicly stated Rodgers is our guy for
  8. This is the tough part for me too, I'd love Newsome and think that would be the pick, but I like the mid round corner depth in this draft.
  9. Hate that much trading back and not picking up a first next year. I would need to see more details on the trades, but seeing as a second next year is more equivalent to a third this year, and the teams we are getting them from (TB and Seattle) likely mean later seconds I dont like the value in trading back. If we got some future firsts ok we can really set ourselves up, but 3 extra seconds and not picking until 74 doesnt do it for me.
  10. I go back and forth on Jenkins. Like you said a nasty OL and that combo of Runyon (assuming he continues to develop and earns a spot) and Jenkins (assuming he can handle RT) would be a much different demeanor on that side of the line. I am just not sold he is a going to be a OT long term. I would not be upset with the pick, just unsure on where he plays and how that fits with our make up right now. Tufele I think could be a solid rusher for us. Someone that can be a good two down lineman rusher next to Clark. Grimes fits the mold and is intriguing. I like Hawkins to offer that juic
  11. I like the first three picks, but am not a fan of Carman. First, I dont think he will be there at that point; second, I dont like the style/fit here. The last half of the draft is not bad and think hits on a lot of the depth positions we need and there are some guys there with some developmental prospect. I think those first 3 will be solid picks though and if they all hit and become solid contributors then its a plus draft.
  12. If it played out like this I would be ok with it, but not thrilled, especially seeing the picks right after some of ours. I'm fine with that trade down and think Samuel there is an ok pick, but like others said would rather see us take Bateman or one of the OTs in the late first. I dont like the second or third round, but they do hit needs so not terrible. I am not a fan of Hudson that early, I think there are good pieces to develop with him, but just dont love that pick in the second. St. Brown makes sense from a position standpoint and in the third its not bad value, but I just am not
  13. I can see teams seeing 4 positions from him, I think he is a heavy footed RT though that would not fit for us and would be average at best their. Interior OC he might not have the quickness to snap and step so my concern would be an OG that is not suited for our style, I mentioned in another comment, but getting a guy because we might change to power running in two years is not worth it to me. Dillion also could be just a role guy in two years too so too much unknown to draft a guy that doesnt fit right now.
  14. Agree with you style wise for sure, but I think some teams might try him as an interior swing to get value....guard I am guessing most are doing so in the anticipation that either Jenkins slides in to center and/or upgrade Patrick with Bahk (when healthy) and Turner on at OT. I think interior swing guys are solid picks seeing we still need an OC, Patrick was ok, but upgradeable and outside of Runyon we dont know what we have with the other two RCs from last year. Agree I dont see him making it past Indy (and to me MN unless others fall)
  15. That is what I envisioned when you have Holland there, but seeing we still have Sullivan, Amos, Savage, I dont see the need for it, but I think he could upgrade over Sullivan long term so I understand the pick. I think that is possible, but then we have Cleveland for 2 years in a system that doesnt really fit his style and so that is something I am not a fan of, especially with the guys on the roster too.
  16. I think this is pretty solid, some guys that might be boom or bust, but their talent levels are high. Top 4 picks are pretty solid in my opinion and I am one that is in favor of the Wade pick. I understand the concerns, and all are justifiable, but he flashed early in his career too (which could have been a byproduct of having talented players around him). I just am intrigued by his slot play, that hybrid role, and his height/weight/speed combo. In the 4th I am willing to take the chance with.
  17. This would be a solid draft if it happened. Some have already stated, but I dont think Meinerz lasts to the fourth, but if he did value would be good. Cox I think would be a solid pick and instant upgrade in the middle. I think Slayton can be a very good clogger for us and free up Clark. Cosmi I just dont have excitement for. I think there are some middle round guys that can offer us similar value for our team needs and I am not sold on him.
  18. Draft wise I would like Farley, Little I think would be a nice grab to get, I like Brown and Slayton in the later round. Overall not something I would hate!
  19. Would like Darrisaw if he fell, but I dont see that happening. Holland is meh for me, I like his talent, but not his fit with our DBs; could offer some slot play/allow Savage to play in the slot more and would give us a good 3 safety look, but just dont see the need for that in the second. Cleveland I dont like the fit for our OL. I like the potential Brown and Ihmir Smith-Marsette have.
  20. I actually think the Pack are more willing to look past injuries than most teams and they do their due diligent when it comes to injuries and I dont think the Pack necessarily remove anyone just because of injuries; I mean Gary and King both had injury concerns pop up and we took them both........Simmons also had a ton of other off the field issues that more likely removed him from boards than the injury.
  21. I agree with the above too, but note too we technically have Funchess back too on a cheap deal; his contract tolls, so although he was coming off an injured season and now is out another whole season he is a complete mystery. Not that he was an elite level talent, but a big bodied receiver that played ok in that number 2/boarderline 1 role in Carolina. I'm not going to bank on him, but still another piece that plays into the puzzle, but I agree a reload even if it is later picks just to get fresh bodies in.
  22. I think this is the most important thing to remember. Even look at the WR Gute has drafted, they are all taller WR, not necessarily big framed, but taller WR; that Cobb type physique has not been a trend with Gute, but too he really hasn't brought in a ton of new blood to WR so hard to say he doesnt like that type of WR too. I would be for a guy like Samuel or Ross if available, even a guy like Austin as it is a different type of WR, but that does not appear to be the direction of the WR core. I can't fault them that if that style doesnt fit the scheme then why go for it, but just a diff
  23. I totally agree with you I don't think they would be looking to move anyone either; I just prefer a guy like Kirk over Butler based on what our WR group looks like right now.
  24. I think that is the biggest part that hurts, we missed on Robinson, which I can understand being cautious and not offering as much as he got as he was coming off a torn ACL and so there was a huge risk in there for signing him. He never regains form and you are stuck with that contract for 3 years. Good thing is he is up again and only 28 so we have another crack at getting him if we want to! Good point on Sanders, likely did propel them into that spot, but as you noted too it takes two sides to make a deal. Could be the Broncos simply were asking too much when we called and then closer t
  25. I agree with this to some extent. Last year we did have three young guys that had promise, Geronimo was nothing special, but still hope he could have taken another step in his game. I don't fault him for not trading in season for either of the two as we don't know the Jets compensation request for Anderson and if you were not confident in re-signing him you wouldn't give a high pick up. Sanders, hindsight, would have been nice to have for a 5th, but at the time we were winning albeit with some lackluster passing games, but still winning, so I understand not messing with that, but for a 5th I w
×
×
  • Create New...