2019 Green Bay Packers Season Thread

[Point Beer Is Best]

Following another great game from the Smiths last night, I went back and dug up this critical writeup of their signings from ESPN.com:

 

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/26152205/barnwell-2019-nfl-free-agency-trade-grades-tracking-every-big-signing-move

 

Does anyone ever go back and hold these 'experts' accountable for their takes? The Smiths have been astoundingly good moves for the Packers thus far, and have helped this defense go from laughable to solid enough to win a lot of football games. This really was a vital offseason for the Packers, and the early returns have been glowing.

 

This part of the article made me laugh:

 

They [smiths] both benefited from playing alongside excellent talent and rarely saw double-teams.

 

It's almost like he doesn't understand that by signing them both, Gutey recreated the same environment to set them up to thrive. The Packers in 2018, even without marquee EDGE players, produced significant pressure on the QB in Pettine's scheme. Now armed with better talent, they're actually hitting home and finishing off with sacks.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

He wasn't trying to predict the future.

 

Isn't that exactly what he was trying to do when evaluating the value of the players' future performance relative to the dollars that would be paid to them in the future, though?

 

Speaking just towards the Packers signings, not exactly. I think he was more going for the notion we overpaid greatly based on comparable contracts and their production to that point.

 

I'm not saying it is the world greatest article etc....but it had some thought put into it at least. Which is getting very rare.

 

What are the comparable contracts, though? The only one he cites in the Packers write-ups is Trey Flowers, who really hasn't done a whole lot of anything with the Lions so far, after putting up consistently ehh numbers with the Patriots. I understand the skepticism with ZaDarius because his overall stats have been underwhelming, but Preston signed a pretty affordable contract and had been pretty productive for the Redskins.

 

In the end, though, he gave the Raiders an A- for their acquisition of Antonio Brown. An A-! Even novice fans of the NFL saw that move had all sorts of red flags.

[homer]

Packers hoping Sternberger can come back in week 9.

[HiAndTight]

He wasn't trying to predict the future.

 

Isn't that exactly what he was trying to do when evaluating the value of the players' future performance relative to the dollars that would be paid to them in the future, though?

 

Speaking just towards the Packers signings, not exactly. I think he was more going for the notion we overpaid greatly based on comparable contracts and their production to that point.

 

I'm not saying it is the world greatest article etc....but it had some thought put into it at least. Which is getting very rare.

 

 

I agree...and I think he was right. I think we wanted to jump out and make sure we got two good pass rushers and we probably overpaid a bit in terms of total dollars. I like Za'Darius Smith, but thought Preston Smith was kinda reaching his ceiling. And I am very happy to be wrong.

And of course as Packers fans, we start hearing about the number of pressures they got and some of those other stats that are frankly more important to me than sacks and I was getting more and more excited to sign them. But it did feel like a lot for two guys who looked like merely good starters.

 

It's given Gary time to develop without getting bashed too much and it's changed the whole defense.

 

For the record, I also thought Turner was overpaid(still think that one) and Amos was signed for a really fair deal for a smart, reliable but not elite safety.

 

 

Also, not on point, but how is Tramon Williams still doing what he's doing? He's been incredible this year. I just feel like someone needs to say that. He looks like he's playing with better anticipation than he did the first time around and nearly as fast/quick. That's been amazing as well as we've had to move some pieces around. But I think the fact that they wanted to keep Tramon at CB when Savage and Greene went down tells you they don't believe they have someone else who can cover quite like Tramon can after the two outside guys.

[PeaveyFury]

The Packers did sign veteran WR Ryan Grant today. No, not that Ryan Grant.

[HiAndTight]

The Packers did sign veteran WR Ryan Grant today. No, not that Ryan Grant.

 

 

Yeah, I saw that this afternoon. Makes me wish we'd have kept Davis.

 

 

I really do hope they don't scrap Shepard after that game or Rodgers doesn't lose trust in him. The muffed punt was bad, but it happens with young guys. The pick though, that's just a bad break. Shepard's a guy who appears as though he can get open early in routes.

 

Grant's been around for a while, but he's not very good at anything. Definitely not the type of move some people were calling for.

[homer]

I think Grant is fine for a slot guy which is something they really need. I doubt he sets the world on fire but he can be useful.

[nodakfan17]

Wow, the Packers will catch a huge break going into Arrowhead withought having to face Patrick Mahomes. Now they just can’t drop Sunday’s game in Oakland and waste their opportunity to go 7-1.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

Wow, the Packers will catch a huge break going into Arrowhead withought having to face Patrick Mahomes. Now they just can’t drop Sunday’s game in Oakland and waste their opportunity to go 7-1.

 

Sunday's game is at Lambeau.

[adambr2]

Strangely, I feel fairly optimistic about @Chiefs, but not that optimistic about @Chargers.

 

I can't figure the Chargers out. I don't understand how they aren't better.

[adambr2]

Minnesota is really starting to put things together and look dangerous.

 

The good news is, they already have two division losses, and our one loss is to a non common opponent so we are in really good shape for taking the tiebreaker even if we don't win in Minnesota.

 

I'm not a big believer in the Bears. I don't know how long they can hang around with that offense.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

Our loss is to Philly who Minnesota beat last week.

 

I think it will be very hard for the Packers to win in Minnesota. So they just gotta keep their foot on the gas.

[adambr2]

Yea, my mistake, I forgot the NFC East is our division matchup for the North this year.

 

Still, they're in good shape. Beat the Bears at Lambeau and just split the Minnesota/Detroit road games and you're guaranteed the division tiebreaker over anyone.

[nodakfan17]

We probably have to root for the Cowboys tonight since the Eagles would hold the tie-breaker over the Packers. I hate the thought.

[adambr2]

Mapping out the rest of the season:

 

I see one more loss before the bye. All 3 are winnable games, but I'll play the odds and say they drop one. So 8-2 into the bye.

 

@49ers, @Giants, I think they go 1-1 in these games and I think it could easily be beating the 9ers and losing in New York.

 

Redskins, easy win, and I say they beat the Bears at Lambeau. That leaves @Minnesota and @Detroit and I'll call another split there.

 

So, 12-4. Division champs, #2 seed and first round bye.

[nodakfan17]

It’s hard to believe they’ve already matched last season’s win total 7 weeks in to the season.

[brewcrewdue80]

I feel like Rodgers' accuracy in the last three games is as good or better than its ever been. When was the last time you seen him miss his target on a throw that wasnt a throw away?

[FVBrewerFan]

Mapping out the rest of the season:

 

I see one more loss before the bye. All 3 are winnable games, but I'll play the odds and say they drop one. So 8-2 into the bye.

 

@49ers, @Giants, I think they go 1-1 in these games and I think it could easily be beating the 9ers and losing in New York.

 

Redskins, easy win, and I say they beat the Bears at Lambeau. That leaves @Minnesota and @Detroit and I'll call another split there.

 

So, 12-4. Division champs, #2 seed and first round bye.

 

I don't think 12-4 gets them a #2 seed. Niners and Saints both look like 13-3 teams to me.

[wildcat83]

Mapping out the rest of the season:

 

I see one more loss before the bye. All 3 are winnable games, but I'll play the odds and say they drop one. So 8-2 into the bye.

 

@49ers, @Giants, I think they go 1-1 in these games and I think it could easily be beating the 9ers and losing in New York.

 

Redskins, easy win, and I say they beat the Bears at Lambeau. That leaves @Minnesota and @Detroit and I'll call another split there.

 

So, 12-4. Division champs, #2 seed and first round bye.

 

I don't think 12-4 gets them a #2 seed. Niners and Saints both look like 13-3 teams to me.

 

49ers schedule gets a lot tougher in the second half. I think they end up with at least 4 losses. The Saints on the other hand seem pretty well off schedule wise.

[HarveysWBs]

Za’Darius Smith was booked for speeding and possession of marijuana on Sept. 29th, according to multiple reports, including the Journal Sentinel. Rashan Gary and Kingsley Keke were also in the car at the time but were not cited. The incident was, by all accounts, uneventful and did not involve any suspicion of driving under the influence. As such, no criminal charges are expected, but NFL discipline can’t be ruled out once the case officially concludes.

[HiAndTight]

I feel like Rodgers' accuracy in the last three games is as good or better than its ever been. When was the last time you seen him miss his target on a throw that wasnt a throw away?

 

 

I don't think it's as good as it was from...~09 to 15, but it's a lot better than the last couple years. He hit MVS again on that deep post, but just like the one vs the Beers, if he puts more on it, MVS probably scores easily.

 

But he's throwing the ball great again. Hell, even when Rodgers was "struggling," he was still at worst the 4th or 5th best QB in the NFL. It just looked like a massive drop off because he played at a level I don't think anyone else ever has.

[HiAndTight]

Mapping out the rest of the season:

 

I see one more loss before the bye. All 3 are winnable games, but I'll play the odds and say they drop one. So 8-2 into the bye.

 

@49ers, @Giants, I think they go 1-1 in these games and I think it could easily be beating the 9ers and losing in New York.

 

Redskins, easy win, and I say they beat the Bears at Lambeau. That leaves @Minnesota and @Detroit and I'll call another split there.

 

So, 12-4. Division champs, #2 seed and first round bye.

 

 

This is fun...and easier through 8 games, but it's really kinda shocking that this team is sitting at 7-1 at this point. I really thought they would struggle through the brutal schedule they had over the first half of the season. We SHOULD be able to win the next two games and push that to 9-1. Of course given how close NFL teams are, we could lose either(though I really have a hard time seeing us lose to the Giants...I think a second straight trip to the West Coast is a more likely loss).

 

After that, those 3 division games are toss up's, the SF game is a toss up. The Redskins should be a win.

 

I'll say 13-3....but to be honest, this doesn't seem like a real 13-3 team to me.

 

 

On the bright side, only two guys on the injury report as of now, Adams and Tonyan. Obviously they will get Adams worked into the offense, but I'd rather see him just sit through the bye TBH. He's too important. And Tonyan, I think they really need to work him into the offense the 2nd half of the season. He's such an athletic TE and he's got great hands. Not saying he's ever gonna be Kittle, but he could really be a game changer for our offense with the matchup problems he creates.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

I'll say 13-3....but to be honest, this doesn't seem like a real 13-3 team to me.

 

Not to pick on you, as I believe you know why this team is playing well and is among the class of the NFC, but this sort of statement drives me a little nuts. It's a "Packers Twitter" type statement ... a place that is populated with so many "Yeah, but" fans that are just so insufferable at times. the team wins, plays well, and yet all they want to focus on are the perceived negatives like "the tackling was bad" or "they threw all those balls to the RBS, therefore all the WRs are terrible". It's a bunch of broad negative generalizations that, while might have some truth to them, are being blown out of proportion.

 

This team is 7-1 because they are playing well enough to be 7-1. They've beat a bunch of good teams because they are a good team. If they go 13-3, it's because they were good enough to go 13-3. This schedule is no Patriots-like slouch.

[MrTPlush]

Packers are going to earn it to be 13-3 if that’s what they end up at. They still have dates with the 49ers, Panthers, Lions road game, Vikings road game, and the Bears/Chargers won’t exactly be pushovers on paper.

 

Pretty impressive if they only lose two more games. Even if they end up being the two good teams 49ers/Vikings.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

I'll say 13-3....but to be honest, this doesn't seem like a real 13-3 team to me.

 

Not to pick on you, as I believe you know why this team is playing well and is among the class of the NFC, but this sort of statement drives me a little nuts. It's a "Packers Twitter" type statement ... a place that is populated with so many "Yeah, but" fans that are just so insufferable at times. the team wins, plays well, and yet all they want to focus on are the perceived negatives like "the tackling was bad" or "they threw all those balls to the RBS, therefore all the WRs are terrible". It's a bunch of broad negative generalizations that, while might have some truth to them, are being blown out of proportion.

 

This team is 7-1 because they are playing well enough to be 7-1. They've beat a bunch of good teams because they are a good team. If they go 13-3, it's because they were good enough to go 13-3. This schedule is no Patriots-like slouch.

 

Idk, sort of agree with it. This team feels a lot like the one in 2007 that was 13-3. That team was good, but it went 6-10 the next year after the QB transition. I had a feeling of "Are we really this good?" the entire season. Of course, a lot of the same guys won the Super Bowl a couple years later.

 

So, I think the Packers are a good team, trending upward as a franchise, but I think this season has been a combination of that and getting lucky in a lot of very key moments, and playing a very favorable schedule that isn't exactly easy, but hasn't been hard, has been timed to their advantage as far as where and when they're playing certain teams.

 

It's hard to pick out games on the schedule I expect them to lose. @Minnesota and @SF are the two, and of course there could be others, but not sure there's one more they really should lose.

 

If they really start pounding teams, even crappy ones, down the stretch, then I'd buy in a bit more. A complete 38-7 drubbing would help with that a bit. But at this point there's no reason to think they can't at least be in the NFCCG this season.