Leader Posted January 2, 2021 Share Posted January 2, 2021 39 minutes ago, Kepler said: Perhaps we should all go ultra nerd avatars to ensure the win Last year's "avatar-fest" failed us miserably. Why would we want to repeat it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Refugee Posted January 2, 2021 Share Posted January 2, 2021 5 hours ago, Tperk said: Wonder if this will mean less AJD because his pass protection isn't quite as good as Jones or Williams? With Williams likely back in the line up, he probably won’t get as many as last week. The thing is, all he’s done is produce with his touches and obviously was on fire last week. I think you keep JWill in there on big 3rd downs but AJD is a threat and will keep the defense off balance until they prove they can stop him. I think his pass pro will improve and nothing suggests he’s not up to par. It’s just a Williams and even Jones have proven they can do it at a high level. I do think we’ll see more 12 personnel than usual. We were very productive with it last week. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smetana34 Posted January 3, 2021 Share Posted January 3, 2021 Next years schedule is daunting enough as it is, hopefully he can make a quick recovery. We're going to need him Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikemike778 Posted January 3, 2021 Share Posted January 3, 2021 15 hours ago, Joe said: idk...not sure it's a guarantee but if we can pull it off along with keeping King, Jones, and Williams I'm all for it. We were already discussing OT options, but this may have just intensified that discussion both on this forum, and in the Packer FO. I'm not sure more focus will be running the ball this week with Hicks back in the line-up for Chicago and multiple rookies starting at DB for the Bears. This could be one of those games where you see a lot of bunch formations in passing situations. We can pull off a Linsley contract but it means you go without elsewhere. Having two big third contracts at OL isn't a good idea. As well as the money tied up in the position you have an ageing line that is more vulnerable to constant niggles - more players likely to miss games means its harder to keep continuity during the season if you have to keep shuffling. For the stud LT, you pretty much have to do it. Centre you shouldn't need to pay the big third contract and have probably got your succession planning wrong if you do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brit Pack Posted January 3, 2021 Share Posted January 3, 2021 Imagine we had waited a few weeks or till the end of the season to do Bakh's contract. What would we be paying out instead on a new deal or a deal for the 2021 season? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Posted January 3, 2021 Share Posted January 3, 2021 4 hours ago, mikemike778 said: We can pull off a Linsley contract 1. but it means you go without elsewhere. 2. Having two big third contracts at OL isn't a good idea. As well as the money tied up in the position you have an ageing line that is more vulnerable to constant 3. niggles - more players likely to miss games means its harder to keep continuity during the season if you have to keep shuffling. 4 For the stud LT, you pretty much have to do it. Centre you shouldn't need to pay the big third contract and have probably got your succession planning wrong if you do. 1. We've seen where going without elsewhere has crippled us. There's no excuse for not developing a back-up plan for every position on the team, which is why there have been a few head-scratchers over the last few drafts regardless of who the GM was. 2. Are you only saying that simply because Bakh got hurt? 3. I'm unfamiliar with that word, please inform. 4. Bakh is the stud LT so are you trying to say that Linsley's going to get a lot of money? Seems like you're contradicting yourself here... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikemike778 Posted January 3, 2021 Share Posted January 3, 2021 7 hours ago, Joe said: 1. We've seen where going without elsewhere has crippled us. There's no excuse for not developing a back-up plan for every position on the team, which is why there have been a few head-scratchers over the last few drafts regardless of who the GM was. 2. Are you only saying that simply because Bakh got hurt? 3. I'm unfamiliar with that word, please inform. 4. Bakh is the stud LT so are you trying to say that Linsley's going to get a lot of money? Seems like you're contradicting yourself here... 1. That's my point (I think). We need Linsley's more elsewhere. We've got interior OL development guys - the big win here is for them to be become starters so you don't need risky 3rd contracts on someone like Linsley and can use the money more effectively. 2. No - generally I'm against big third contracts at any time and said that consistently. I would always want to put money in second contracts above third contracts where possible. Obviously QB is an exception. A stud LT is also an exception. Even if we hadn't paid Bak, I wouldn't have been keen on a big third contract for a C. After paying Bak its a definite no for me. 3. Regular minor (or not so minor) injuries. 4. If Linsley would sign a nice very team-friendly 1 or 2 year contract then great that's fine for me. I don't think he would though in which case, I would wish him good luck with his next team 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gopackgo972 Posted January 4, 2021 Share Posted January 4, 2021 1 sack last night and Rodgers was able to do whatever he wanted. I think the OL is gonna be fine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packerraymond Posted January 4, 2021 Share Posted January 4, 2021 28 minutes ago, YaddaHolla said: 1 sack last night and Rodgers was able to do whatever he wanted. I think the OL is gonna be fine. Unless you keep the cursed Devito avatar from last year's failed playoffs. Then they won't be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vegas492 Posted January 4, 2021 Share Posted January 4, 2021 Really, this should be our motto for the offseason. "We got yah, Bakh." Something like that. If this were a Mac offense, we'd be crippled. But it isn't. MLF will use scheme to help those tackles. We will be okay. It will be next man up, as it has been all year on the o-line. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cpdaly23 Posted January 5, 2021 Share Posted January 5, 2021 What’s the timeline these days for offensive lineman and ACL recoveries? Fair to assume he will start season on PUP or is there and chance he’s good to go in early September? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted January 5, 2021 Share Posted January 5, 2021 Just now, Cpdaly23 said: What’s the timeline these days for offensive lineman and ACL recoveries? Fair to assume he will start season on PUP or is there and chance he’s good to go in early September? Word is that best recovery is not to assume activity (or return) for 9 months following surgery. At that point, the potential for reinjury is the least - so, IMO - thats the way to go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packfanfb Posted January 5, 2021 Share Posted January 5, 2021 17 minutes ago, Cpdaly23 said: What’s the timeline these days for offensive lineman and ACL recoveries? Fair to assume he will start season on PUP or is there and chance he’s good to go in early September? Depends on whether the league keeps the 3-game IR rule (hopefully they do because I like it). If necessary, Packers could actually activate Bakh at the end of camp (removing him from the PUP list) and then IR him. Then he could return after the first 3 weeks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasquatch Posted January 5, 2021 Share Posted January 5, 2021 Get that man under the knife now (if he hasn’t already), and by the best folks in the business. If we’re lucky, he’ll be back in the lineup by October, sooner if things go really, really well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Posted January 5, 2021 Share Posted January 5, 2021 On 1/3/2021 at 4:33 PM, mikemike778 said: If Linsley would sign a nice very team-friendly 1 or 2 year contract then great that's fine for me. I don't think he would though in which case, I would wish him good luck with his next team. that's my hope. 2 year deal for $22 mil or something like that. 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.