1.26 - Jordan Love [QB; Utah State] - QB1

[minnypackerfan]

18 hours ago, {Family Ghost} said:

Why would the Packers forget the picks .. they've invested millions in this guy and he has value to other teams.  Get as much as you can get.  No reason they can't get a solid return while also placing him with a team he is good with. 

I'd love to get trade value if we can and if we can get Rodgers to cooperate.  But what happens if he wants to stay but you know Love is the future and capable of being a good starter?  The Packers management should own the fact they probably made a mistake signing him to that contract that gives him nearly total control over his future. These are the consequences to that type of contract.  If he wants to stay you have to trade him to a team he wants to play for so he'll get to name is destination.  The resulting draft picks in that type of trade are not going to amount to much.

[MacReady]

2 hours ago, Arthur Penske said:

If he's a good and clutch QB, he'll be expesnive.

Not necessarily.

If the dude’s a 3,500, 20, 10 QB but is consistently a clutch performer in big games/playoff games, he’s the long term answer.

If not, we trade him before giving him the current QB market.

[Packerraymond]

8 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

Not necessarily.

If the dude’s a 3,500, 20, 10 QB but is consistently a clutch performer in big games/playoff games, he’s the long term answer.

If not, we trade him before giving him the current QB market.

Average when the teams are easy, elite when the teams are hard. Those QB's hangout with Nessy and Bigfoot I hear. 

[MacReady]

10 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

Average when the teams are easy, elite when the teams are hard. Those QB's hangout with Nessy and Bigfoot I hear. 

I didn’t say elite against good teams, I said clutch.

Brady’s first three years as a starter he was not good. He was average at best. He won three Super Bowls.

Then he didn’t win any for ten years when he was elite.

[Packerraymond]

7 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

I didn’t say elite against good teams, I said clutch.

Brady’s first three years as a starter he was not good. He was average at best. He won three Super Bowls.

Then he didn’t win any for ten years when he was elite.

That was also an era where you could maul WR's in the secondary, so Brady only needed to put up 17 PPG. If our defense can hold teams to 17 PPG over our next 9 playoff games, I will never disagree with another one of your statements ever again I'd be so elated. They are more likely to give up 71 PPG than 17 sadly. 

[MacReady]

6 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

That was also an era where you could maul WR's in the secondary, so Brady only needed to put up 17 PPG. If our defense can hold teams to 17 PPG over our next 9 playoff games, I will never disagree with another one of your statements ever again I'd be so elated. They are more likely to give up 71 PPG than 17 sadly. 

Can have that defense if not paying that QB.

Also, chupacabras are real. They’re not mystical and are just animals, but they are real, and I’ve seen one.

They look like bald coyotes, or coyotes with mange, but they’re neither of those because they are bigger and meaner.

[Packerraymond]

3 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

Can have that defense if not paying that QB.

Also, chupacabras are real. They’re not mystical and are just animals, but they are real, and I’ve seen one.

They look like bald coyotes, or coyotes with mange, but they’re neither of those because they are bigger and meaner.

We're paying our defense the 2nd most cash in the NFL at 136m, 3rd is at 126m, one team in the league within 10m of us.

Sorry man, when it comes to elite defense and the Green Bay Packers, you're more likely to walk in a meadow of chupacabras eating unicorns than see an elite D here. 

I'd rather just go back to having an elite offense and having false faith that our defense can string just 3 solid performances together please. 

[Laces Out]

Yep, saw that cap hit earlier and was stunned. 2nd most expensive D in the league, and frankly I'd like to see a draft capital chart too, wouldn't shock me if they were #1... And this is the ****ing return.

 

Some while back a post on the main boards was made showing if Denver's offense mearly put up something like 18.3 points per game they'd be a one loss team.... I wonder what that number looks like this season for GB, as well as the past decade of playoff exits. 

Edited November 29, 2022 by Laces Out

[MacReady]

7 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

We're paying our defense the 2nd most cash in the NFL at 136m, 3rd is at 126m, one team in the league within 10m of us.

Sorry man, when it comes to elite defense and the Green Bay Packers, you're more likely to walk in a meadow of chupacabras eating unicorns than see an elite D here. 

I'd rather just go back to having an elite offense and having false faith that our defense can string just 3 solid performances together please. 

The defense will come.

It might not be during LaFleur’s time, but it’ll come.

[MacReady]

2 minutes ago, Laces Out said:

Yep, saw that cap hit earlier and was stunned. 2nd most expensive D in the league, and frankly I'd like to see a draft capital chart too, wouldn't shock me if they were #1... And this is the ****ing return.

 

Some while back a post on the main boards was made showing if Denver's offense mearly put up something like 18.3 points per game they'd be a one loss team.... I wonder what that number looks like this season for GB, as well as the past decade of playoff exits. 

What does the O in OTA stand for?

[Mr. Fussnputz]

1 minute ago, Outpost31 said:

What does the O in OTA stand for?

OTTAHERE

[AlexGreen#20]

10 minutes ago, Laces Out said:

Yep, saw that cap hit earlier and was stunned. 2nd most expensive D in the league, and frankly I'd like to see a draft capital chart too, wouldn't shock me if they were #1... And this is the ****ing return.

 

Some while back a post on the main boards was made showing if Denver's offense mearly put up something like 18.3 points per game they'd be a one loss team.... I wonder what that number looks like this season for GB, as well as the past decade of playoff exits. 

What does the O in OTA stand for?

[CWood21]

8 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

What does the O in OTA stand for?

Optional?

[HokieHigh]

6 hours ago, NFLGURU said:

Both Rodgers and Love will likely be here next year (2023).  The Packers have to decide by next May 2023 if they want Love for 2024.

I doubt they pick up that 5th year option, but can still negotiate with him for a different deal.  

The fork in the road is 2024.  They can't afford both QBs.  Love will have whatever playing time he gets the rest of the season, and next year to make his case.  If the Packers don't pick up his option in May, the ball is in his court in 2024.

hard to guess why love would want to stay in GB for 2024 based on assurance that he is the guy in 2025. but maybe i guess

[Norm]

1 hour ago, CWood21 said:

Optional?

Louder for those in the back!