2018 Green Bay Packers Training Camp: Rodgers Extension Reportedly Done

[OldSchoolSnapper]

I don't think it can be said enough about the importance of this draft. It can either set the Packers up for another nice run in the later parts of Rodgers career OR it can set the wheels in motion for a lot of other things to happen with this franchise. Pressure is on in Green Bay, not that it hasn't been for awhile.

 

Agreed. I don't necessarily think the Packers are in a rebuild, but they are in drastic need of a restock, as last year proved that their depth at some positions (QB, TE, CB, WR and OLB) is among the worst in the league. When you have players that have proven to be injury-prone as your starters at those position, it is absolutely imperative that you have strong depth available. That's why it wouldn't surprise me to see the #14 pick parlayed into a lower 1st rounder along with an additional 1st or a 2nd.

 

IMO, the Packers really need to be in a rebuild, but they are in denial and instead making desperation heaves hoping to catch lightning in a bottle. Besides Adams, Rodgers and maybe one of the RBs, the rest of the roster pretty garbage. You have a few guys who can play as always, but this roster is a mess and it's Ted Thompson's fault. Jimmy Graham screams declining vet, and Tramon Williams as anything besides a 4th corner at this point is kind of a joke.

 

I don't think Damarious Randall was anything above mediocre but to trade him for the worst QB in the league when you have NOTHING at CB...What are they doing?

 

I hope I'm wrong but I think this season it's going to blow up in their face. They were bad last year but had the Rodgers excuse. I don't see them winning more than 9 games, possibly fewer, and I think Gute fires McCarthy and brings in his own guy, which he probably wants to do now but can't.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

I don't think it can be said enough about the importance of this draft. It can either set the Packers up for another nice run in the later parts of Rodgers career OR it can set the wheels in motion for a lot of other things to happen with this franchise. Pressure is on in Green Bay, not that it hasn't been for awhile.

 

Agreed. I don't necessarily think the Packers are in a rebuild, but they are in drastic need of a restock, as last year proved that their depth at some positions (QB, TE, CB, WR and OLB) is among the worst in the league. When you have players that have proven to be injury-prone as your starters at those position, it is absolutely imperative that you have strong depth available. That's why it wouldn't surprise me to see the #14 pick parlayed into a lower 1st rounder along with an additional 1st or a 2nd.

 

IMO, the Packers really need to be in a rebuild, but they are in denial and instead making desperation heaves hoping to catch lightning in a bottle. Besides Adams, Rodgers and maybe one of the RBs, the rest of the roster pretty garbage. You have a few guys who can play as always, but this roster is a mess and it's Ted Thompson's fault. Jimmy Graham screams declining vet, and Tramon Williams as anything besides a 4th corner at this point is kind of a joke.

 

I don't think Damarious Randall was anything above mediocre but to trade him for the worst QB in the league when you have NOTHING at CB...What are they doing?

 

I hope I'm wrong but I think this season it's going to blow up in their face. They were bad last year but had the Rodgers excuse. I don't see them winning more than 9 games, possibly fewer, and I think Gute fires McCarthy and brings in his own guy, which he probably wants to do now but can't.

 

Wow, that is lot to digest. I'll just say I'm much more optimistic on their chances. I'll say Seattle grossly misused Graham, and he still put up nice numbers. Williams was brought in as a wily vet who can mentor the young guys. Anything they get out of him on the field will be gravy. He was terrific last year for the Cardinals, though, so it isn't a total shot in the dark. Some guys just have the ability to keep playing at a high level as they age.

 

I do agree that the lack of depth is 100% Thompson's fault. I disagree that they don't have talent, though. Bahktiari, Taylor and Linsley are very good O-linemen, and the D-line with Daniels, Clark, Wilkerson and Lowery should be excellent. Martinez is a nice ILB, and King showed a lot of promise last year. There is a solid base to work from, but a lot of unknowns as well.

[MrTPlush]

Rebuild? Aaron Rodgers alone could carry a team to a super bowl. If we had some average QB...I would agree. However, it doesn't take much addition and luck to go deep with Aaron Rodgers. They are not in denial.

[pacopete4]

A total rebuild is so silly, sorry, but silly. You don’t rebuild with Rodgers.

[FVBrewerFan]

I think the truth is somewhere in between. I do believe in the past they fooled themselves into thinking they were better than they were. For example, thinking Daniels, Clark, Wilkerson and Lowery should be excellent? Excellent? I would settle for that group being above average, and that's not even a given. Just an example, but I think the same thing held true for the WR group last season.

 

New GM and DC can't change everything overnight. And yes, I would have rather see them just hire a new Head Coach and get on with it. But with Aaron Rodgers at QB you don't want to tear it down to nothing and rebuild. In fact, the way the salary cap works in the NFL they really couldn't have done that anyhow.

 

They've made improvement, there's still the draft, camp casualties, etc. Plenty of time to improve the roster even more. But I do agree I'm not wildly optimistic about this season. All I ask for is to improve the roster from the 2-53 best players and I think they're doing that.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

A total rebuild is so silly, sorry, but silly. You don’t rebuild with Rodgers.

 

Except it's not. I believe Rodgers is better than Favre but a Favre-led team did go 4-12 once.

 

This coming season reminds me a lot of that one. Brought in some old guys, team was much worse than they thought, and they basically blew it up the next season.

 

With Rodgers, the "rebuild" can be fast. A season or two. But I am not optimistic at all about this squad. The defense will be horrible again and the offense is obviously better with Rodgers. But this is a one man show.

 

I wouldn't read too much into Williams numbers last year. He played half a year in a way better defense alongside a stud corner. None of that applies here. Check out his metrics in Cleveland. Not very good.

 

One of the more annoying things is that the fans seem to thing King proved he can play. He didn't show a thing, really. He graded out at 50 on PFF and got hurt. That guy is as big a wild card as anyone.

[pacopete4]

Go look at the 2005 roster and you’ll see why it was 4-12. This roster isn’t anywhere near that.

[Brewer Fever]

Let me get this straight, you're expecting a 4-6 win type season from the Packers with a healthy Aaron Rodgers in 2018?

 

My goodness

[OldSchoolSnapper]

It's lazy nonsense to say that in hindsight. Going into that season they were projected to cakewalk their division again. It wasn't until week 1 when they put up 3 on the Lions that people thought there might be a problem.

 

They had released their two guards, but besides that it was mostly the same guys they'd been successful with for a few years.

 

This supposesly great roster look pretty horrendous last year when one guy went down. I'm not saying there aren't some good players, I'm saying there is too much junk, fans overrate marginal players, and fans also NEVER account for regression.

 

The team has put too much burden on #12 for too long and now it's catching up. Gute may fix it but it won't be a one season job. And that's why I think we're in for an ugly transitional year and McCarthy's last.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

Let me get this straight, you're expecting a 4-6 win type season from the Packers with a healthy Aaron Rodgers in 2018?

 

My goodness

 

I made it pretty clear what I expect. 8-9 wins and terrible defense.

[Brewer Fever]

Let me get this straight, you're expecting a 4-6 win type season from the Packers with a healthy Aaron Rodgers in 2018?

 

My goodness

 

I made it pretty clear what I expect. 8-9 wins and terrible defense.

 

You're all over the place. Your most recent forecast called for a season similar to the 4-12 season they had with a healthy Favre. In a previous post you call for 9 wins at most. That's as clear as mud. Sorry I can sift through all of your hyperbole.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

Let me get this straight, you're expecting a 4-6 win type season from the Packers with a healthy Aaron Rodgers in 2018?

 

My goodness

 

I made it pretty clear what I expect. 8-9 wins and terrible defense.

 

You're all over the place. Your most recent forecast called for a season similar to the 4-12 season they had with a healthy Favre. In a previous post you call for 9 wins at most. That's as clear as mud. Sorry I can sift through all of your hyperbole.

 

Looks like I struck a nerve critizing the precious Packers.

 

In my first post, I said 8-9 wins. Someone said rebuilding with Rodgers is silly, to which I replied that it isn't, and brought up 2005. I didn't say and never said that they'd win 4 games. You put that in my mouth. Then I repeated that they'd win 8-9 games.

 

Try reading instead of just reacting.

 

Not sure why it's so far fetched that the Packers might be bad. They won more than 10 games once in five years. There's plenty of evidence they are a mediocre team held up by one player.

[PeaveyFury]

For example, thinking Daniels, Clark, Wilkerson and Lowery should be excellent? Excellent? I would settle for that group being above average, and that's not even a given.

 

Daniels AND Clark graded out as excellent (Yes, excellent) d-linemen last year. I suppose the above assumption does require assuming that Wilkerson rebounds somewhat under Pettine, but I don't think that's crazy.

[nate82]

Looks like I struck a nerve critizing the precious Packers.

 

In my first post, I said 8-9 wins. Someone said rebuilding with Rodgers is silly, to which I replied that it isn't, and brought up 2005. I didn't say and never said that they'd win 4 games. You put that in my mouth. Then I repeated that they'd win 8-9 games.

 

Try reading instead of just reacting.

 

Not sure why it's so far fetched that the Packers might be bad. They won more than 10 games once in five years. There's plenty of evidence they are a mediocre team held up by one player.

 

8-9 wins sounds about right and could go lower if there are any injuries to the Packers secondary or offensive line.

[pacopete4]

Calling this years defense terrible before our new coordinator even gets a chance to coach em up is where I'm out on this conversation.

[PeaveyFury]

So we're predicting the season record before the draft even takes place? Come on, guys.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

For example, thinking Daniels, Clark, Wilkerson and Lowery should be excellent? Excellent? I would settle for that group being above average, and that's not even a given.

 

Daniels AND Clark graded out as excellent (Yes, excellent) d-linemen last year. I suppose the above assumption does require assuming that Wilkerson rebounds somewhat under Pettine, but I don't think that's crazy.

 

They graded as high quality, not elite, which I assume you meant instead of excellent. Beside the point as interior DL is the defense's smallest problem.

 

They have no edge rushing and zero playmakers in the secondary. The strength of their defense is easily negated because your QB has 7 seconds to throw into peewee pass coverage.

[nate82]

So we're predicting the season record before the draft even takes place? Come on, guys.

 

As the Packers roster currently stands they look to be a 10-6 team. Rookies are hard to judge what kind of an impact they will have. Sometimes the best rookie drafted is someone from the later rounds so the draft to me doesn't even move the needle all that much.

 

Predicting their record now sounds very fair to me and anything between 8-10 wins is about where the Packers overall talent is at. The Packers are an offensive heavy team with holes in their defensive secondary new coaches or not the talent is not all that great in the secondary and one or two injuries and you are looking at a team that is going to struggle against the pass.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

Calling this years defense terrible before our new coordinator even gets a chance to coach em up is where I'm out on this conversation.

 

Yeah because it's totally unrealistic to think that a defensive coordinator in his first year with a roster that's 90% inherited won't save the day overnight.

 

I'm out of the conversation where people can't honestly assess the teams shortcomings. People have always been the worst at this when it comes to the Packers. They haven't played good defense for YEARS.

 

Is it more reasonable to think the defense is going to be good or that it most likely won't be great?

[pacopete4]

Calling this years defense terrible before our new coordinator even gets a chance to coach em up is where I'm out on this conversation.

 

Yeah because it's totally unrealistic to think that a defensive coordinator in his first year with a roster that's 90% inherited won't save the day overnight.

 

I'm out of the conversation where people can't honestly assess the teams shortcomings. People have always been the worst at this when it comes to the Packers. They haven't played good defense for YEARS.

 

Is it more reasonable to think the defense is going to be good or that it most likely won't be great?

 

I'll let a few games play itself out before I make any judgement on a new coach, with a new scheme. You don't think that there could be a lot of talent that wasn't being used properly? Or that a lack of quality communication or miscommunication led to a lot of the errors on defense? There are plenty of factors for why defense has been a weak spot for the Packers as of late other than just thinking they are all lousy players and have no chance at being good. It is pretty foolish thinking. And that is not being a homer, that is a realistic approach to judging the pro athletes. They can succeed and fail in many different systems. Maybe Pettine will have the appropriate one for their set of players, maybe he wont, but only time will tell. Not some grumpy, glass half full, poster.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

I'm open to the possibility that Capers was a dinosaur and maybe this guy is the answer. But I think it's unlikely and hope my gut feeling is wrong.

 

Gute and Pettine may fix things but I do not expect them to do it with one off-season and Thompson's dumpster fire.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

I never get this. I never will.

 

Pointing out weaknesses and critizing the management of the team is not glass half full or grumpy. It's being a realist.

[pacopete4]

I never get this. I never will.

 

Pointing out weaknesses and critizing the management of the team is not glass half full or grumpy. It's being a realist.

I never get it either because being negative about something doesn't always make you a "realist".

[OldSchoolSnapper]

Expecting a defense that's been terrible for years to be terrible again with mostly the same players is a realistic expectation.

 

That makes you a realist.

 

Packers fans don't live in reality. They never have. You aren't allowed to point out even very obvious holes on the team.

 

Pretending that my view of the defense and management isn't warranted is laughable. You act like I'm the only guy saying this stuff.

[pacopete4]

The defense won't even be the same players up and down. Nor the same coaching staff. So yes, pretending to have "insight" on what this defense will or won't be is pretty laughable to me.