Jump to content

{Family Ghost}

Veteran Members
  • Content Count

    7,352
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,344 All-Pro

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Think the opposite of the 2020 Green Bay Packers draft strategy.
  2. I keep hearing that Rodgers just wants the Packers to be tied to him past 2021. As it is now he's kind of viewed as a lame duck because the Packers can bail on him for a 17 million dollar dead cap hit. He just turned in an MVP season and you'd think the Packers would be game to keep him on board past 2021, but they seem to want to straddle the fence and see how things go. I get it, but I think the Packers still need to be doing more to give this team a real shot at winning the big one. In some ways I think Packers lack of a true money bags owner holds us back. It just doesn't seem we take
  3. I don't know if I'd extend him either, but I sure as hell would rework that deal to free up cap and get in position to strike when some vets hit the market again. It's my understanding that the Packers could have freed up millions without needing Rodgers permission.
  4. Pick # 1 (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) Pick # 2 (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) Pick # 3 (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) Pick # 4 (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) Pick # 5 (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) Pick # 6 (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) Pick # 7 (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) Pick # 8 (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) Pick # 9 (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) Pick # 10 (A) (B) (C) (D) (E)
  5. If he looks like crap they will extend Rodgers and hope Love can grow into a quality backup, and then down the line grow into a something more. If he's Mahomes the Packers will deal Rodgers after 2021.
  6. I like the player, but didn't think it was the right time to select the heir. The Packers screwed it up by two years. 2022 was the time to get the heir to Rodgers. There is a good chance Love's rookie deal will be mostly completed before he ever sees the field, and that is one of the biggest benefits to having a QB on a rookie deal. Sure, Rodgers was a mere mortal for a few seasons before his MVP performance last year, but he still wasn't a player anyone would want to replace. They would be nutso to get rid of Rodgers at this point.
  7. Rodgers was pretty good right away, but he wasn't exactly a clutch qb early on. Took him a while to find the winning touch late in games.
  8. Maybe a little over the top here, but the pompous responses from time to time kind of grind my gears as well.
  9. Yeah .. not a big fan of letting all of these DT's slip by. The Packers absolutely have to improve next to Clark. Also, not real thrilled with bringing King back .. wanted to see an upgrade there and also one over Sullivan. Top Qb's will feast on those jokers.
  10. Not much once we trade Rodgers away next year.
  11. Don't get your hopes up. We will get none of them and not like it very much.
  12. Dumping Ervin for Patterson would be a big upgrade. Cordarrell can do that gadget stuff and also provide a better alternative as a backup RB. Adding Patterson would also signal that the Packers want to get better on teams.
  13. We're ranked dead last almost every year in special teams. I'd say it's safe to say that they are wrong.
×
×
  • Create New...