Jump to content

NFL considering Bears vs Packers for 2019 kickoff game


malagabears

Recommended Posts

https://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journal/Issues/2019/02/11/Media/Bears-Packers.aspx

The NFL is leaning toward having Chicago host the season’s first game as part of its 100th season celebration, allowing it to showcase the league’s oldest rivalry. The Bears and Packers first played in 1921 and have faced each other 198 times.NBC will carry the Thursday night game, which, like other NFL season openers, will feature entertainment outside Soldier Field.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/13/2019 at 12:17 PM, beardown3231 said:

His point is that he hopes the Bears don't start the season 0-1 thanks to the Packers once again

Even if you guys do you will bounce back and most likely take the division again unless you get hit with a bunch of injuries.  We Packers fans hope this new staff will invigorate Rodgers and our offense won't be so anemic like it has been the past couple of seasons.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Packers are an interesting case study.

We always assumed they were a well run team, but their personnel decisions really went downhill in the late stages of Ted Thompson were super inconsistent. Even last season they made big spends on Jimmy Graham and Mo Wilkerson with little return, the big Perry contract looks bad.

I wonder if they can string a couple of strong offseasons together and get something out of the end of Rodgers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/14/2019 at 11:47 AM, Pugger said:

Even if you guys do you will bounce back and most likely take the division again unless you get hit with a bunch of injuries.  We Packers fans hope this new staff will invigorate Rodgers and our offense won't be so anemic like it has been the past couple of seasons.

 

 

23 hours ago, WindyCity said:

The Packers are an interesting case study.

We always assumed they were a well run team, but their personnel decisions really went downhill in the late stages of Ted Thompson were super inconsistent. Even last season they made big spends on Jimmy Graham and Mo Wilkerson with little return, the big Perry contract looks bad.

I wonder if they can string a couple of strong offseasons together and get something out of the end of Rodgers.

The scary thing about NFCN is barring injury they are all know who their 2019 QB is going to be and it won't be a rookie or 2nd year player.  

That can make for rapid and unexpected improvement with addition of a few impact players.  

Bears are basically who they are personnel wise.  They had equivalent of two major offseasons in 2018 with FA signings and Mack and Miller trades.  Their improvement will come with familiarity of system, many good first year players becoming second year players and hopefully health.  Not new additions of big name players.  

Good news is they don't have a lot of holes and they do have more than their fair share of impact players.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

After a report earlier this week that the two early holiday games would include Bears-Lions and Dolphins-Cowboys, ...

Watch Bears go to London, a Sunday Night game and then Thanksgiving game.

Schedule could be a real X factor for injuries.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, dll2000 said:

Watch Bears go to London, a Sunday Night game and then Thanksgiving game.

Schedule could be a real X factor for injuries.  

I know you're just joking but that would never happen. All teams that play in London automatically get a bye the week after.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/14/2019 at 1:10 PM, WindyCity said:

The Packers are an interesting case study.

We always assumed they were a well run team, but their personnel decisions really went downhill in the late stages of Ted Thompson were super inconsistent. Even last season they made big spends on Jimmy Graham and Mo Wilkerson with little return, the big Perry contract looks bad.

I wonder if they can string a couple of strong offseasons together and get something out of the end of Rodgers.

Graham wasn't what we thought he'd be.  We never should have drafted Perry.  I wasn't a big fan then and definitely not one now.  He just can't stay healthy.  Wilkerson was playing pretty well until he got hurt.  I wouldn't be opposed to resigning him for the vet minimum this spring.  

We Packers fans are hoping to build up the roster and make another run before Rodgers retires.  If he plays until he is 40 we have 4/5 more seasons with him at the helm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Pugger said:

 

We Packers fans are hoping to build up the roster and make another run before Rodgers retires.  If he plays until he is 40 we have 4/5 more seasons with him at the helm.

Of course.  But keep in mind Rodgers is a guy that likes to use his athletic ability to extend plays versus a Brady who isn't relying on his athleticism because he never had it.  It's much easier for Brady to have extended his career than it is for Rodgers.

Age comes for athletism at some point and every year you recover from injuries that much slower. 

We are of course hoping he hits that wall sooner rather than later.  

Ideally you play 8-8, 9-7 ball for next couple  years and have to move on from Rodgers without a top draft pick to replace him with.  Forcing a major trade up or gambling on a 3rd choice at future QB.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Pugger said:

Graham wasn't what we thought he'd be.  We never should have drafted Perry.  I wasn't a big fan then and definitely not one now.  He just can't stay healthy.  Wilkerson was playing pretty well until he got hurt.  I wouldn't be opposed to resigning him for the vet minimum this spring.  

We Packers fans are hoping to build up the roster and make another run before Rodgers retires.  If he plays until he is 40 we have 4/5 more seasons with him at the helm.

Obviously Graham didn't quite work out (or hasn't so far), but I don't think Gutekunst thought he'd be an All-Pro type guy, like a lot of Packers fans apparently did.

I thought the Perry re-signing was a good move--as you simply can't predict being injury plagued. They'll move on now, and be better off for it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, dll2000 said:

Of course.  But keep in mind Rodgers is a guy that likes to use his athletic ability to extend plays versus a Brady who isn't relying on his athleticism because he never had it.  It's much easier for Brady to have extended his career than it is for Rodgers.

Age comes for athletism at some point and every year you recover from injuries that much slower. 

We are of course hoping he hits that wall sooner rather than later.  

Ideally you play 8-8, 9-7 ball for next couple  years and have to move on from Rodgers without a top draft pick to replace him with.  Forcing a major trade up or gambling on a 3rd choice at future QB.  

Yes it would be nice to get a top pick and eventually we'll have to replace AR but unless he gets a major injury I don't see why he can't play 4/5 more years.  At one time 40 was old for a QB but no so much today.   However, I don't want us to play .500 ball the next couple of years just to get his replacement.  He isn't ready to sent out to pasture just yet.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...