Cheech Posted August 4, 2019 Share Posted August 4, 2019 I love the fact that Nick Foles did what he did as a backup. He's an awesome guy who deserved everything he got. But I hate that we have that as an example of what backup QB's should/could be. Half of the starters in the NFL suck. Some of them are getting paid 20m and we'd complain about their performance if they were our #2. I think Gute has done a really nice job of getting 3 guys with arm talent and potential. I mean, we're not looking at Graham Harrell, Ingle Martin, Vince Young, or Seneca Wallace levels of incompetence here. I honestly don't think we'll see a capable backup in GB until Rodgers' heir apparent is drafted in the first or 2nd round of the 2021 draft. It's going to take significant investment and I'd rather that go to a position of need while the window is open. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packerraymond Posted August 4, 2019 Share Posted August 4, 2019 Just now, Outpost31 said: And why can't you seem to admit that Kizer was broken when traded for? Josh Rosen was a top ten pick and a year after was traded for a second round pick. Everybody in the NFL knows that wrecked quarterbacks have lower value. The trade was terrible. In principle and in practice. Just like everything (except MVS/ESB), all the evidence is pointing to me being right again and you're telling me the Earth is flat. Being traded for 2018 Damarious Randall isn't lowered value? Lol the guy walked off the field and quit during a game like 5 weeks into that season. The last 4 weeks of him playing about as well as he played early in his rookie year probably got his value back to the point where he was able to be used to get a QB. If I would've been able to see the future and know how much of an absolute trainwreck 2018 Mac would be (ironic I'm talking to probably the biggest preseason supporter of 2018 Mac) than yes I'd agree it was a stupid trade to make. However at the time everyone saw Mac as a QB guru and figured we'd be getting a 2nd rounder for Kizer within 2 years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packerraymond Posted August 4, 2019 Share Posted August 4, 2019 I still find it funny we trade Randall and everyone loses their mind, we trade the same guy in HHCD, for the same value (bout a 4th Rd pick all said and done) everyone is pretty much saying "don't let the door hit you where the good Lord split you" on his way out the door. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reaper Posted August 4, 2019 Share Posted August 4, 2019 4 minutes ago, Cheech said: I love the fact that Nick Foles did what he did as a backup. He's an awesome guy who deserved everything he got. But I hate that we have that as an example of what backup QB's should/could be. Half of the starters in the NFL suck. Some of them are getting paid 20m and we'd complain about their performance if they were our #2. I think Gute has done a really nice job of getting 3 guys with arm talent and potential. I mean, we're not looking at Graham Harrell, Ingle Martin, Vince Young, or Seneca Wallace levels of incompetence here. I honestly don't think we'll see a capable backup in GB until Rodgers' heir apparent is drafted in the first or 2nd round of the 2021 draft. It's going to take significant investment and I'd rather that go to a position of need while the window is open. I tend to agree with this; the expectations of what a QB2 is or should be are ridiculous. For me I just want a guy who will not lose a game for us, keep us in a game and let the playmakers make plays. We could conceivably win a game or two 10-7 or 14-17 with this defense if the QB2 had to play and didnt lose the games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacReady Posted August 4, 2019 Share Posted August 4, 2019 Just now, Packerraymond said: Being traded for 2018 Damarious Randall isn't lowered value? Lol the guy walked off the field and quit during a game like 5 weeks into that season. The last 4 weeks of him playing about as well as he played early in his rookie year probably got his value back to the point where he was able to be used to get a QB. This is baseless lies. https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/packers-damarious-randall-reportedly-left-stadium-after-argument-with-coaches/ Randall got sent to the locker and left after the game was over. He came back the very next week and had a pick six that led to a win over the Cowboys. You don't quit on your team and then be let back the next week if you leave the stadium. He didn't walk off the field. He had an argument with a coach (on a staff that got fired after the year) and was sent to the locker room. You can't change history to fit your argument. https://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2017092800/2017/REG4/bears@packers ^This was the play that started it. Morgan signals to Randall, and then after the play is over Randall is upset. You tell me what you think happened there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packerraymond Posted August 4, 2019 Share Posted August 4, 2019 6 minutes ago, Outpost31 said: This is baseless lies. https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/packers-damarious-randall-reportedly-left-stadium-after-argument-with-coaches/ Randall got sent to the locker and left after the game was over. He came back the very next week and had a pick six that led to a win over the Cowboys. You don't quit on your team and then be let back the next week if you leave the stadium. He didn't walk off the field. He had an argument with a coach (on a staff that got fired after the year) and was sent to the locker room. You can't change history to fit your argument. https://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2017092800/2017/REG4/bears@packers ^This was the play that started it. Morgan signals to Randall, and then after the play is over Randall is upset. You tell me what you think happened there. I've seen one Packer player do this in my years of fandom, hard to believe someone wasted a minute of their life typing that out to defend it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snackattack Posted August 4, 2019 Share Posted August 4, 2019 14 minutes ago, Outpost31 said: Josh Rosen was a top ten pick and a year after was traded for a second round pick. Everybody in the NFL knows that wrecked quarterbacks have lower value. Yeah but someone traded that second round pick for rosen, meaning he had that value. If we gave up a second, third, or even fourth round pick for kizer we would be idiots. But we didnt. We traded away a guy who we werent keeping beyond the upcoming season and we improved our fourth round position. It was absolutely a sound trade in principal. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snackattack Posted August 4, 2019 Share Posted August 4, 2019 (edited) Furthering the point that randall would be gone after another season, kizer could be kept for three more seasons. If the staff thought they could develop kizer into something worthwhile, this was a big factor in the trade imo. Pretty sure we werent looking to pay a ton of money for a backup qb, so we needed to find a team interested in trading a rookie qb. The trade made sense for both teams at the time. Cleveland is getting the better value out of it based on how the players have performed. Doesnt mean it was a stupid trade Edited August 4, 2019 by snackattack Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norm Posted August 4, 2019 Share Posted August 4, 2019 1 hour ago, Packerraymond said: I'd trade a safety in his last year with the team for a promising QB again, and again. I'm not letting the fact he went from Hue Jackson to lame duck Mac and is probably ruined forever alter my thought that it's an uptick in positional value if your coaching staff does it's job. Randall had 0 chance of being re-signed. He had no allies in the building. Sadly the coaching staff dumpster fire Mac has for the QBs last year was about on par with being led by Hue Jackson. Kizer would have sucked with to years of Lord LaFluer too. He's just bad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norm Posted August 4, 2019 Share Posted August 4, 2019 1 hour ago, Outpost31 said: Lol. Still trying to convince himself that was a good trade. Surprised you didn't say, "Kizer has only one less turnover than Randall since the trade." And by the way, it was not his last year. Saying that is absurd. We had a fifth year option, we got a new DC, we got a new head coach and we've gotten rid of every single veteran that probably had a hand in wanting Randall gone. Probably because Randall actually spoke up when people didn't do their job or sucked and people who don't do their job or sucked didn't like that. You do not suck into 10 interceptions and 2 defensive touchdowns in three years. Period. Arguing that trading a DB with 10 interceptions and 2 touchdowns in three years for a QB who had 22 touchdowns and 11 interceptions when you already have a franchise QB is among the most absurd trades I have seen in all my life following the NFL. To try to convince yourself otherwise is ridiculous, especially considering how the trade worked out. I'm also astounded at the level of pride involved in being incapable of saying, "The trade sucked." The Packers got: *Vince Biegel *Deangelo Yancey *A completion percentage of 47.6, 187 yards passing for an average of 4.5 yards per attempt, 2 interceptions and a fumble lost. Not being able to say, "The trade sucked and was stupid and will be the worst move of Gute's career," makes me look like a levelheaded and mild mannered person. Lame duck Mac and lame duck lame duck lame duck blah blah. Horrible trade. Most people outside of GB knew then and they all know and admit it now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted August 4, 2019 Share Posted August 4, 2019 (edited) 13 minutes ago, Norm said: Lame duck Mac and lame duck lame duck lame duck blah blah. Horrible trade. Most people outside of GB knew then and they all know and admit it now Apparently thats not the case, but if you need to annoint yourself with "being right" for some reason - please do so and be done with it. Please. I cant tell which I'm more tired of reading - the "hows and whys" of DR's dismissal - or those that need to "be right" for some unknown reason. Do it. Classify yourself right and move on. Close the book and put it up on the shelf to collect dust. Edited August 4, 2019 by Leader 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norm Posted August 4, 2019 Share Posted August 4, 2019 (edited) 30 minutes ago, Leader said: Apparently thats not the case I don't want to be that d bag but if I go make a thread asking about the trade in the main section and we exclude GB fans, NOBODY is gone to defend it. Nobody. Maybe one rabid Kizer fan. I have no idea why anyone would pretend otherwise. So yes, it is the case and I am right. It sucked then and it sucks now. So tired of everyone being like babies about it. Rarely do I try to be "right" about things or care. I only care when people have to be stupidly stubborn trying to justify a bad trade instead of just going, yeah we missed on that one. Edit: inb4 everyone in the main section is dummmmmmm Edited August 4, 2019 by Norm 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skibrett15 Posted August 4, 2019 Share Posted August 4, 2019 randall is a better player than HHCD. Dumping HHCD was also not ideal, but losing randall was worse. Randall had legit M2M skills vs the move TE and slot WR similar to antrel rolle. HHCD was a center field player with good not great athleticism. So you lost HHCD and you added savage and amos. I don't think you can play all 3 of savage/amos/hhcd. But randall could play on the field with those 2 easily in a nickle D. Losing Randall is the reason Tramon is on this team getting worked by average WRs. HHCD knew he wasn't going to be paid to stay in GB, and basically shut down his physicality on the field as a result. Basically a "business decision" gone wrong. Trading an expiring deal for a 4th rounder was pretty pretty good. Trading Randall with 2 years left for a bum QB wasn't as good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shanedorf Posted August 4, 2019 Share Posted August 4, 2019 Esty Afew Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norm Posted August 4, 2019 Share Posted August 4, 2019 7 minutes ago, skibrett15 said: randall is a better player than HHCD. Dumping HHCD was also not ideal, but losing randall was worse. Randall had legit M2M skills vs the move TE and slot WR similar to antrel rolle. HHCD was a center field player with good not great athleticism. So you lost HHCD and you added savage and amos. I don't think you can play all 3 of savage/amos/hhcd. But randall could play on the field with those 2 easily in a nickle D. Losing Randall is the reason Tramon is on this team getting worked by average WRs. HHCD knew he wasn't going to be paid to stay in GB, and basically shut down his physicality on the field as a result. Basically a "business decision" gone wrong. Trading an expiring deal for a 4th rounder was pretty pretty good. Trading Randall with 2 years left for a bum QB wasn't as good. And it helps that hhcd still sucked after he left lol. To be perfectly transparent here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.