Jump to content

Packers all in vs Rams ALLLLLL INNNNN


HeresAGuy

Recommended Posts

On 2/15/2022 at 11:17 AM, StatKing said:

MVS wasn't as big of a loss as Tonyan in my opinion. We basically got no production from that position once Tonyan went down. Big dog is too old to consistently get open and the rest of the guys behind them are fringe roster guys. A large part of our offensive dominance in 2020 was Tonyan opening up the middle of the field for everyone else, something we have lacked consistently since Finley got hurt.

Oh definitely Tonyan was the bigger loss.  Almost automatic in the red zone and a TD machine for sure.  Stark contrast to god awful Deguara.

 

But I do rate MVS's absence as highly notable as our big play and deep ball production was hurting without him.  Gotta think if that was him who caught the deep ball on that play instead of Aaron Jones no way that safety catches him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, eh3034 said:

I for the most part agree, and I'm a big Trey Lance fan considering the "homerism" factor lol, I think SF has some buyers remorse on him, and if so they should not hesitate to make the move for Rodgers.  I definitely feel like this past season they were a QB away from a championship, and the rest of the NFC is seemingly crumbling around them, so the opportunity is there for the taking if they don't think Lance is the guy.  Sure it would be painful, but if you get 2-3 year commitment from Rodgers, then I think they should go for it.

I'm not sure what suggests to you that the 49ers are having buyers' remorse with regards to Trey Lance.  I thought he looked substantially better against the Texans then he did the Cardinals.  Either way, I think the point is moot because the 49ers lack the draft picks to make a Rodgers trade.  They don't have FRPs for the next two years as part of the Trey Lance trade.

10 hours ago, eh3034 said:

Regarding Tampa, I don't believe they are a playoff caliber team anymore.  Look at everything they are losing, plus their cap situation.  They are pretty much only returning Evans, Brate, and their OTs to that entire offense.  They'll struggle to be a .500 team.  Pittsburgh I feel the same way about, they are stuck in "no man's land" right now in that they aren't a championship team, but won't rebuild, so they are in "forever .500" mode.  Rodgers makes them a lot better, yes, but not better than Ten, Cincy, KC, or Buf, making it not really a desirable destination for Rodgers IMO.  Tennessee works but seemingly it has already been confirmed that he is not going there.  Philly would be interesting because the NFC is going to be so weak next year.  Philly should have the cap space to land him, and the draft capital to where they would still have picks to improve the team while still acquiring him.  That's a very interesting scenario to consider.  If I'm on board with SF trading Lance, I shouldn't scoff at Philly trading Hurts in a similar scenario.

You're also looking at this without a legitimate starting QB.  Right now, their QB room consists of Kyle Trask so unless you were really high on him coming out of Florida then it's probably not a real great outlook.  Same thing with Pittsburgh.  I'm not sure you're going to find a championship-ready team for Rodgers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, coachbuns said:

Not enough comp for Rodgers.  A 1,2,2 this year - a 1 and 2 next year plus a player or two would be adequate. 

Oh, I agree.  I was just illustrating how giving 3 early choices this year would still leave them with a bunch of picks including another 2 and 3.  Some teams giving that up would be completely chopping the top side of their draft.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, CWood21 said:

I'm not sure what suggests to you that the 49ers are having buyers' remorse with regards to Trey Lance.  I thought he looked substantially better against the Texans then he did the Cardinals.  Either way, I think the point is moot because the 49ers lack the draft picks to make a Rodgers trade.  They don't have FRPs for the next two years as part of the Trey Lance trade.

You're also looking at this without a legitimate starting QB.  Right now, their QB room consists of Kyle Trask so unless you were really high on him coming out of Florida then it's probably not a real great outlook.  Same thing with Pittsburgh.  I'm not sure you're going to find a championship-ready team for Rodgers.

The only championship ready teams for Rodgers IMO are staying in GB, or going to SF or Tennessee.  Philly is intriguing, but to me there is no other situation in the league that Rodgers can jump into and make them instantly championship contenders.  Also perhaps it is a regional thing, but all of the people I talk football with in person agrees with me that SF seems to just hate Lance, so if they could make a trade for Rodgers happen I think they would.  SF wouldn't need to send massive draft capital if they were sending Lance to GB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, eh3034 said:

The only championship ready teams for Rodgers IMO are staying in GB, or going to SF or Tennessee.  Philly is intriguing, but to me there is no other situation in the league that Rodgers can jump into and make them instantly championship contenders.  Also perhaps it is a regional thing, but all of the people I talk football with in person agrees with me that SF seems to just hate Lance, so if they could make a trade for Rodgers happen I think they would.  SF wouldn't need to send massive draft capital if they were sending Lance to GB.

Why would we want a guy who's original drafting team gave up on in less than a year, in lieu of picks, when we have the guy we selected to be our future QB on the roster? SF has no chance of happening. Rodgers will be traded to Denver, Pitt, LV or Washington if he doesn't stay in GB. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Packerraymond said:

Why would we want a guy who's original drafting team gave up on in less than a year, in lieu of picks, when we have the guy we selected to be our future QB on the roster? SF has no chance of happening. Rodgers will be traded to Denver, Pitt, LV or Washington if he doesn't stay in GB. 

Agree to disagree.  Love is not your future QB, and if you believe so then we'll never be on the same page so I'm just going to leave the thread.

Edited by eh3034
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, eh3034 said:

Agree to disagree.  Love is not your future QB, and if you believe so then we'll never be on the same page so I'm just going to leave the thread.

Probably best to then, teams fan bases typically believe the QB that they draft in round 1 will be the one they give the shot at the starting nod to. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, eh3034 said:

The only championship ready teams for Rodgers IMO are staying in GB, or going to SF or Tennessee.  Philly is intriguing, but to me there is no other situation in the league that Rodgers can jump into and make them instantly championship contenders.  Also perhaps it is a regional thing, but all of the people I talk football with in person agrees with me that SF seems to just hate Lance, so if they could make a trade for Rodgers happen I think they would.  SF wouldn't need to send massive draft capital if they were sending Lance to GB.

What has Trey Lance shown that he's worth what the 49ers invested in him?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/17/2022 at 12:23 AM, coachbuns said:

Not enough comp for Rodgers.  A 1,2,2 this year - a 1 and 2 next year plus a player or two would be adequate. 

Take away the 'player or two' and it would still be an excellent deal. Take away the 2nd next year (leaving the Packers with an extra 2x 1sts and 2x 2nds) and it would still be a decent deal. Of course it depends on who the deal is done with, but considering you quoted 2x 2nds this year, I'm assuming you are thinking Denver. Their picks are high enough for that to be a good deal. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, OneTwoSixFive said:

Take away the 'player or two' and it would still be an excellent deal. Take away the 2nd next year (leaving the Packers with an extra 2x 1sts and 2x 2nds) and it would still be a decent deal. Of course it depends on who the deal is done with, but considering you quoted 2x 2nds this year, I'm assuming you are thinking Denver. Their picks are high enough for that to be a good deal. 

Yah, I agree ... just getting greedy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/16/2022 at 6:23 PM, coachbuns said:

Not enough comp for Rodgers.  A 1,2,2 this year - a 1 and 2 next year plus a player or two would be adequate. 

I think you're overestimating Rodgers' value here.  The Broncos wouldn't empty their cabinets for Rodgers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...