Week 3: Packers @ Tampa Bay Bucs - PG: Packers WIN 14-12, Move to 2-1!

[Sandy]

I'm going to start using "max-capacity" to describe my every-day life.

Man, just took a max-capacity **** at work. 

[craig]

1 hour ago, vegas492 said:

....Now...if we want more scoring?  Two things have to happen, outside of having a lesser opponent.  

1) The offensive line needs to gel and become a much better overall unit, run and pass blocking.  And that could realistically happen.

2) We need to acquire an offensive weapon.  Forget rookie development, that will be a constant.  What we need is another true WR threat.  Be it OBJ, Fuller...insert name of vet WR here.  Or, we need to trade for someone.  I'd throw Claypool out there as a name.  Sure he's a pain in the neck sometimes, but he's BIG, he's fast and he's physical.  And he's on a team that could be out of it soon, after drafting a WR in the second round and after paying one of their own WR's.

I guess that TE could even be another weapon.  Ours are probably league average or maybe even a tick under league average.

"the offensive line needs to gel and become a much better overall unit, run and pass blocking.  And that could realistically happen." 

Barring injury, yes, I think that is completely realistic.  To be expected, it should gel and get a lot better, significantly so.  Full-game Bakhti at LT.  Myers and Newman have potential, and probability, to get better.  Jenkins should get better at RT, a position he's played little. Maybe MLF/Stenno decide that Elton-Nijman could make it even better.  Better line play enables improved running, improved passing, and greater freedom in play-calling.    

"Forget rookie development, that will be a constant.". 

Barring injury, Doubs/Watkins and their usage/effectiveness and could/should improve a lot.  Doubs and Rodgers will get better together.  I expect Watkins back soon, and expect he will add possibilities.  Max-potential is that both get lots better.  And in max-potential dream-world, perhaps Watkins is back by late October, and blocks and plays well? 

Development of rookie WR and o-line may intersect.  As Rodgers builds trust, some different play-calls may happen.  As trust in line builds, maybe you run occasional successful longer-developing plays?  If the line gets better, maybe the running game works better even against good defenses?  

I'm hopeful that all the best from this offense is still in front of us.  

If Gute trades for a receiver, I'll be supportive.  But, learning a new offense and getting in sync with Rodgers takes time.  It may be that the rookies settling in, and Watkins coming back, might happen in less time than it would take to acquire an outside guy and get him settled in?  I'm willing to trust Gute on that decision, and to hope that the existing WR can improve fast enough to support a strong playoff contender.  

Obviously hope and max-potential is easy to wish for.  Reality often takes different turns.  

[HokieHigh]

1 hour ago, Sandy said:

I'm going to start using "max-capacity" to describe my every-day life.

Man, just took a max-capacity **** at work. 

for you or the toilet

[PossibleCabbage]

17 minutes ago, HokieHigh said:

for you or the toilet

One hopes it's the toilet, since the large intestine is like 1.5m long and there was a guy in China a couple years back that had 13kg of fecal matter removed from his colon.  So you can hold a lot.

[oldmansmell]

On 9/26/2022 at 12:20 PM, SpeightTheVillain said:

The thing about MLF is his coaching style leads to a bunch of close games but whatever this board has to say about "turtling up," the facts are that he is extremely good at winning them - going 16 - 5 with GB over his career. 

 

This is mostly because the things that MLF excels at, aren't necessarily sexy - but are important in close games. The Packers have been in the top ten for least penalized team, least penalty yards, and net penalty yards per game since he took over as coach. They have also been in the top 5 for least turnovers. I can already hear people screaming "that's Rodgers," but they have also been in the top ten two out of three seasons for fumbles as well (11th in 2021). 

 

It may not be the way we want to watch the game - but MLF wins close games all the time. It is kinda his thing at this point. 

I highly doubt this is down to coaching (especially given the new CBA stuff). honestly McCarthy did a very good job in terms of these stats as well. That's a front office win all day, no-one is coaching you to mess up more than the other teams. 

Now MLF still IMO hasn't outcoached a single dude on his tree; we've won some of those games but he got outcoached in most games against SF including the divisional round and Definitely week 1 - (as a caveat) the Rams are about to be exposed imo in terms of a lack of talent, so I think we just outmatch them.  

[Sandy]

12 hours ago, PossibleCabbage said:

One hopes it's the toilet, since the large intestine is like 1.5m long and there was a guy in China a couple years back that had 13kg of fecal matter removed from his colon.  So you can hold a lot.

But it was humid and I was in Florida, so I was pretty much at max-capacity considering the conditions.

[vegas492]

13 hours ago, craig said:

"the offensive line needs to gel and become a much better overall unit, run and pass blocking.  And that could realistically happen." 

Barring injury, yes, I think that is completely realistic.  To be expected, it should gel and get a lot better, significantly so.  Full-game Bakhti at LT.  Myers and Newman have potential, and probability, to get better.  Jenkins should get better at RT, a position he's played little. Maybe MLF/Stenno decide that Elton-Nijman could make it even better.  Better line play enables improved running, improved passing, and greater freedom in play-calling.    

"Forget rookie development, that will be a constant.". 

Barring injury, Doubs/Watkins and their usage/effectiveness and could/should improve a lot.  Doubs and Rodgers will get better together.  I expect Watkins back soon, and expect he will add possibilities.  Max-potential is that both get lots better.  And in max-potential dream-world, perhaps Watkins is back by late October, and blocks and plays well? 

Development of rookie WR and o-line may intersect.  As Rodgers builds trust, some different play-calls may happen.  As trust in line builds, maybe you run occasional successful longer-developing plays?  If the line gets better, maybe the running game works better even against good defenses?  

I'm hopeful that all the best from this offense is still in front of us.  

If Gute trades for a receiver, I'll be supportive.  But, learning a new offense and getting in sync with Rodgers takes time.  It may be that the rookies settling in, and Watkins coming back, might happen in less time than it would take to acquire an outside guy and get him settled in?  I'm willing to trust Gute on that decision, and to hope that the existing WR can improve fast enough to support a strong playoff contender.  

Obviously hope and max-potential is easy to wish for.  Reality often takes different turns.  

The reality is that Watkins is already on IR, so he's out a minimum of the next 3 games.  Then he'll play in 2 games and end up injured again.  You simply cannot count on that guy to stay on the field.

Which is why I say that if we really want to make a run at this thing, GB needs to find another weapon for the offense.  I'd prefer a guy like Claypool who is young, cheap and fits our scheme over a vet with issues like Fuller (or someone else).  

[Sandy]

15 minutes ago, vegas492 said:

The reality is that Watkins is already on IR, so he's out a minimum of the next 3 games.  Then he'll play in 2 games and end up injured again.  You simply cannot count on that guy to stay on the field.

Which is why I say that if we really want to make a run at this thing, GB needs to find another weapon for the offense.  I'd prefer a guy like Claypool who is young, cheap and fits our scheme over a vet with issues like Fuller (or someone else).  

Give me OBJ over any of them - assuming he'd even consider GB. We'll be fine in the regular season, if he comes back in November, up to speed in December, then you might have a really effective player in January.

[vegas492]

26 minutes ago, Sandy said:

Give me OBJ over any of them - assuming he'd even consider GB. We'll be fine in the regular season, if he comes back in November, up to speed in December, then you might have a really effective player in January.

Yah, I'd take him, but that knee has to check out.

I'd still love Claypool, he's young and cheap.  He could be a guy to give a second contract to.  Or we rent him and take the comp pick back if he leaves.

I'd be pretty excited about a WR for 2023 that has Lazard, Claypool, Doubs and Watson.

[Old Guy]

1 minute ago, vegas492 said:

Yah, I'd take him, but that knee has to check out.

I'd still love Claypool, he's young and cheap.  He could be a guy to give a second contract to.  Or we rent him and take the comp pick back if he leaves.

I'd be pretty excited about a WR for 2023 that has Lazard, Claypool, Doubs and Watson.

I assume Lazard is going to put up numbers worthy of a contract a well-paid #2 WR would get. Maybe not Christian Kirk dollars but not far off. 

Do you think we can/will afford that deal for Lazard?

[vegas492]

1 minute ago, Old Guy said:

I assume Lazard is going to put up numbers worthy of a contract a well-paid #2 WR would get. Maybe not Christian Kirk dollars but not far off. 

Do you think we can/will afford that deal for Lazard?

Yes and yes.

He's very, very valuable in this offense.  The offer he gets from us will make other fans' heads' spin.  But we will pay him for his "dirty" work.  Not just for catching passes.

[{Family Ghost}]

19 minutes ago, vegas492 said:

Yah, I'd take him, but that knee has to check out.

I'd still love Claypool, he's young and cheap.  He could be a guy to give a second contract to.  Or we rent him and take the comp pick back if he leaves.

I'd be pretty excited about a WR for 2023 that has Lazard, Claypool, Doubs and Watson.

I get the idea that Claypool is a bit of a an idiot.  I'm not sure he's what the Packers want to be bringing in.

[vegas492]

16 minutes ago, {Family Ghost} said:

I get the idea that Claypool is a bit of a an idiot.  I'm not sure he's what the Packers want to be bringing in.

Idiot may be an overstatement, but I'd certainly 100% agree with immature.

Still, I'd take that for the talent on a rental and see if it works for us.  He's got the size and speed that we like and he's still young.  I view his upside as being worth the risk.

[{Family Ghost}]

20 minutes ago, vegas492 said:

Idiot may be an overstatement, but I'd certainly 100% agree with immature.

Still, I'd take that for the talent on a rental and see if it works for us.  He's got the size and speed that we like and he's still young.  I view his upside as being worth the risk.

If the Packers are cool with it then I'm cool with it.

[Refugee]

1 hour ago, vegas492 said:

Idiot may be an overstatement, but I'd certainly 100% agree with immature.

Still, I'd take that for the talent on a rental and see if it works for us.  He's got the size and speed that we like and he's still young.  I view his upside as being worth the risk.

Mid season mercenaries I agree you can ignore some issues as long as we’re not talking AB levels of crazy. If you get them in the building and they fit with the team concept, you talk extension. Even if they don’t fit, hopefully you still have Andre Rison catching SB TDs for you. The young guys will still get a chance to grow and hopefully Sammy Watkins can come back and help for the stretch, but I’m not giving him a long term deal.