DeShone Kizer

[pollino14]

49 minutes ago, TheBitzMan said:

The only thing Kizer is, is an upgrade at backup QB. Any one who thinks Rodgers and his agent are worried about Kizer lessening his contract or MM using Kizer's mini camp practice as leverage in negotiations really has no idea how this stuff plays out. 

Pay that man his money...

Seriously. He’s earned it, and will continue to earn it . 

[packfanfb]

2 minutes ago, vegas492 said:

1.  I'm unsure just how accurate of a statement that is...many times there are underneath guys waiving their hands at Rodgers wanting the ball.  No one around them.  And Rodgers keeps holding it.  I'd say maybe 2 times out of 10 he holds the ball because no one is open yet.  8 times out of 10 he does that to buy time to create a larger play downfield.  And yah, that ratio needs to come back down.

2.  Very much agree with you.   

He definitely could check down more, no argument there. But we've been talking for years about our poor offensive scheme and guys not getting open for Rodgers. It's a very real problem that isn't going to go away unless (1) you stop simply running iso routes and scheme guys open or (2) bring in enough horses who can win one-on-one on a consistent basis. We had that in 2011 so the game plan worked, but in the years since, as guys have left (Jennings) and others got older (Jones/Nelson) and we only pretty much added one other threat (Adams), we've seen those problems be much more consistent the last few years. 

[Leader]

Okay. Got it all now @Green19

 

[Green19]

No worries @Leader. GB didn’t bring in Kizer to gain leverage over Rodgers. They have it all already. They will negotiate with him in good faith though because it’s a business and Rodgers is good for it, they know that. As well as they know the going rate for QBs.

Kizer was brought in because of Hundley and this front office’s opinion of him as a prospect. And as far as the deal that got him here... QB prospects are worth crazy amounts of draft captial. GB bought low on a prospect they apparently loved. If he hits it won’t matter if Randall was the second coming of Deion Sanders, because the positional value is far too great.

[vegas492]

22 minutes ago, packfanfb said:

He definitely could check down more, no argument there. But we've been talking for years about our poor offensive scheme and guys not getting open for Rodgers. It's a very real problem that isn't going to go away unless (1) you stop simply running iso routes and scheme guys open or (2) bring in enough horses who can win one-on-one on a consistent basis. We had that in 2011 so the game plan worked, but in the years since, as guys have left (Jennings) and others got older (Jones/Nelson) and we only pretty much added one other threat (Adams), we've seen those problems be much more consistent the last few years. 

Very much agree.

You notice how much more open Adams got when he flipped to flanker last year?  Seemed like a new man over there to me.  Being a little farther back from the line really helped him.

[Patriotplayer90]

59 minutes ago, vegas492 said:

1.  I'm unsure just how accurate of a statement that is...many times there are underneath guys waiving their hands at Rodgers wanting the ball.  No one around them.  And Rodgers keeps holding it.  I'd say maybe 2 times out of 10 he holds the ball because no one is open yet.  8 times out of 10 he does that to buy time to create a larger play downfield.  And yah, that ratio needs to come back down.

2.  Very much agree with you.   

That's a huge exaggeration.  When our offense was struggling so much in 2015, I saw some analysis with still shots of the plays that we were running, and how the defense basically was able to play it perfectly and give him absolutely nothing.  We have to trust that Rodgers sees more than we do from our Tecmo Bowl camera view with no shot of the eyes of the defenders.

[St Vince]

When Mac said out of his mouth that if Kizer would've came out of this QB class he would be amongst the elite group who went top 10. Sorry when you make a statement like that you're saying Kizer can be a legit starter in this league. That sounds like a leverage statement me.

 

[badgers0821]

On 5/6/2018 at 9:08 PM, NormSizedMidget said:

This isn't 1992. You don't even need a "SS" anymore.

That statement is just not true...but I see you like to argue for the sake of arguing so I'll leave it at that.

[Blink]

I think the much more simpler explanation is that he made those comments to boost Kizers confidence after what how badly he was handled in Cleveland.

Honestly I have high hopes that after a few years Kizer can turn into something, but it’s laughable to think his acquisition holds any leverage over Rodgers in any way what so ever.

Rodgers and the Packers both know he’s the best quarterback in football.  If we don’t pay him what he’s worth somebody else will, there’s really nothing to gain and everything to lose if the two sides fail to come to a fair agreement.

[badgers0821]

16 minutes ago, St Vince said:

When Mac said out of his mouth that if Kizer would've came out of this QB class he would be amongst the elite group who went top 10. Sorry when you make a statement like that you're saying Kizer can be a legit starter in this league. That sounds like a leverage statement me.

 

I think that was more of a knock on this years class than anything else.

[vegas492]

24 minutes ago, Patriotplayer90 said:

That's a huge exaggeration.  When our offense was struggling so much in 2015, I saw some analysis with still shots of the plays that we were running, and how the defense basically was able to play it perfectly and give him absolutely nothing.  We have to trust that Rodgers sees more than we do from our Tecmo Bowl camera view with no shot of the eyes of the defenders.

If you search hard enough, there are screen shots of RB's waiving their hands at Rodgers, wide open underneath, as he continues to buy time to throw downfield.  It is not exaggerated.  That is Aaron's one weakness, the inability to take check downs.  If he can do that 4-5 times a game, we keep drives going, he stays cleaner and we are a much more dangerous team.

[Golfman]

2 hours ago, NormSizedMidget said:

Mike Daniels farewell tweet praised Randall's off season work FWIW. 

I guess the irony is he didn't praise his gameday work. 

[Green19]

30 minutes ago, St Vince said:

When Mac said out of his mouth that if Kizer would've came out of this QB class he would be amongst the elite group who went top 10. Sorry when you make a statement like that you're saying Kizer can be a legit starter in this league. That sounds like a leverage statement me.

 

Or... crazy thought here, he believes Kizer is that. And he is basing it off the research he and the scouting department did these last 2 years on quarterback prospects.

Just because some feel Kizer sucks doesn’t mean everyone feels that way.

There is no leverage needed. Kizer is in GB because GB needs more talent everywhere... even  depth at QB.

[Norm]

1 hour ago, badgers0821 said:

That statement is just not true...but I see you like to argue for the sake of arguing so I'll leave it at that.

I see you're a sensitive little baby who can't be disagreed with. Randall could have been a starting safety candidate with hhcd. If you disagree, whatever. But it's true. You don't have to have that guy anymore, depending on how you play. Go look at the team that just won the super bowl.  Their "strong safety" was a corner and then free safety. But I just like to argue so nothing I say is valid

My statement is not true so they didn't have a ex corner playing strong safety.

[Norm]

57 minutes ago, Golfman said:

I guess the irony is he didn't praise his gameday work. 

Fair enough but Ray was citing poor prep. Just throwing that out there.