Packer 2021 Team Discussion 2.0

[homer]

Packers fined $300k and Rodgers and Lazard each fined $14,650.

 

 

I'll be curious to see if Kirk Cousins and Carson Wentz do their post game pressers via zoom this week.

[PeaveyFury]

I do find it funny that the NFL said the fine was for a 'couple of isolated incidents where Rodgers wasn't wearing a mask in team facilities'. Yeah, right. He's out in front of the media mask-less each week, but he's wearing a mask all day every day otherwise behind the scenes other than a 'couple of incidents'?

 

I mean, Rodgers is taking heat because he lied, and the NFL probably should be too. That's a blatantly false narrative, which is mostly to cover their own willful 'ignorance'.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

The NFL is fully aware of its fan base so taking a super hard-line stance would probably be bad for business. I have to believe they know that and handled this as such. The NBA fanbase for example is a completely different one.

[patrickgpe]

Packers fined $300k and Rodgers and Lazard each fined $14,650.

 

 

I'll be curious to see if Kirk Cousins and Carson Wentz do their post game pressers via zoom this week.

there was a thread of lost of draft picks or lowered draft position for future violations, so I am sure they will be on their best behavior for the rest of the season. I am actually surprised the NFL was so easy on the packers.

[MrTPlush]

I'm sure they care in as much as it hurts the public perception and viewership and product sales.

 

I'm sure they'd just as soon rather have not had this incident go down the way it did. there's always the perception that stars like Rodgers and Brady get preferential treatment and things like this don't help.

 

Ironically in this case I would argue he got the exact opposite. The only reason he is in trouble and being punished is because Rodgers will get the attention that the NFL then needs to defend so they don't look bad. I mean Lazard probably doesn't get fined if not for Rodgers...because people just don't care about Lazard players. You can't tell me Rodgers is the first guy to break protocol...it is just no one else was worthy of generating a bunch of attention over it. Even Rodgers wasn't in trouble until a media problem existed.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

Rodgers brought the spotlight on himself with his answer to the vaccine question in August. The whole story is much smaller without him doing that. If he'd said no, I'm getting the vaccine, it's just not a big deal. The news would still play the "he put himself before the team" angle, but without the lie there is no drama to the story.

 

Anyone who lied was probably going to be a major story, it's just that nobody is asking Lazard if he's vaccinated.

[PeaveyFury]

Yep. It's a story because of how he personally bungled the thing. No one really talks about Cousins anymore after he just owned it.

[CheezWizHed]

I could resurrect my post where I analyzed the SB winners (and losers) for the last 20 years, but I won't bother. The spoiler is that QBs on their rookie contract comprise a minority percentage of SB winning and losing teams. And most QBs in the last 20 years that won the SB on their rookie contract won it on the final year of it (off the top of my head, only Wilson and Brady won prior to the final year and only 6 rookie contract QB winners in total - Brady twice).

 

The point is that even QBs that are initially "ready" take time to actually develop into SB winners.

 

This is a little misleading because Tom Brady and Peyton Manning have won like half of these games, so you're not really comparing apples to apples. Manning won two. A lot of these guys were just repeat winners with long careers in the league. 6 is still quite a few over time frame when you figure a lot of the veteran QBs that they're up against are generational HOF quarterbacks, Brees, Brady, Rodgers, Manning, Manning, etc.

 

It's obviously a tremendous advantage to be able to save money at the most expensive position and invest elsewhere in the team, it would be illogical to say otherwise, regardless of the raw numbers of appearances by rookie QBs.

 

And for the most part, NFL quarterbacks compete at this level much earlier in their career than years ago. Redshirting for 3 years like Rodgers did is almost unheard of now.

 

I'm very confused at how you find this not comparing apples to apples? I'm thinking you are implying that P-Manning (on his second SB) and Brady were low-cost HOF QBs that won the SB when they were off their rookie contract? Otherwise, I can't simply remove specific cases of winners/losers just because... this was a simple analysis of results.

 

Looking at the data (actual real data not opinion; not excluding anyone) there were some easy conclusions:

1) Tom Brady wins a lot of Super Bowls. He won two (of the six I mentioned) on his rookie contract as well as the other after. He alone is an anomaly. If he skews the data after the rookie contract, he skewed it on his rookie contract also.

2) HOF "probable" QBs have won about 80% of the last 20 years of SBs (Brady, 2 Mannings, Rodgers, Roth, Brees, Wilson, etc..). The number was slightly lower for the losing side, but still far more likely than not.

3) Most QBs have required 4 years at a minimum (P-Manning took longer) to win a SB. The exceptions: Wilson won, but with a huge run game and fantastic defense. Tom Brady...is again the anomaly.

 

Certainly there is more behind the scenes that I could dig into here... At a simplistic level, getting a great QB on a cheap contract is obviously a good thing. But that doesn't always mean a QB on a rookie contract meets that description. They take a few years to really be good enough to lead a team there. The data points stronger to getting a HOF probable QB (on any contract) to win the SB; obviously the cheaper the better.

 

Also, Rodgers red-shirting for 3 years was unheard-of at anytime for a 1st round QB. Three years is a really odd situation. But it is actually more common now for a rookie 1st round QB to sit initially than 20 years ago. The rookie salary slots help fix the huge rookie salaries (P-Manning, Ryan Leaf) that force the team to start them. Mahommes sat one year. Fields wasn't going to start until Dalton got injured (and looks like he isn't ready either). Love will sit behind Rodgers 2 years at least. Without counting, I would guess it is about 50/50 if a 1st round QB starts for the team (non-injury related) they are drafted for in the past few years.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

I think the Packers had a much bigger "love" affair with Rodgers than Love. I think they clearly went into that draft targeting Rodgers and had intel he would fall. I think there were several guys they thought they'd get two years ago none were there. This is a lot of conjecture obviously, but Love seemed much more like a 5th or 6th choice on the board and it just happened to get there based on the articles I've read since then.

 

I also feel that was one of the reasons Rodgers was never approached about the possibility. They didn't think it was going to happen so it was best to avoid the topic altogether.

 

While I'm sure they do big time work on anyone they draft, there are a lot of stories now about how Rodgers was scouted. Someone telling Thompson he "had to come see this guy" at a workout, and one of the head scouts in particularly lobbying so hard he told Thompson he'd regret it forever if they didn't pick him.

[homer]

OBJ's agents are having fun leaking rumors today.

[brewcrewdue80]

You know I'd take the chance with OBJ over Malik Taylor and those ST blunders Taylor seems snakebitten with. Can OBJ field punts and KRs? Even if it's just fair catching? If we are going to call this Rodgers' last season then give him another weapon to play with. When he leaves, can't say we left him with nothing to work with. Cobb and OBJ.

[CheezWizHed]

OBJ is too injury prone for ST. Cobb is also, but I'd feel better with him back there.

[brewcrewdue80]

OBJ is too injury prone for ST. Cobb is also, but I'd feel better with him back there.

 

When you're renting a diva does it really matter if they get hurt? Think what should attempt is the hopeful upgrade you get over Taylor.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

I doubt that a guy on a 2-month prove-it deal is going to jump at the chance to return punts.

[CheezWizHed]

If you actually want production out of him as a WR, yes it does matter.

[roadcrew3]

 

While I'm sure they do big time work on anyone they draft, there are a lot of stories now about how Rodgers was scouted. Someone telling Thompson he "had to come see this guy" at a workout, and one of the head scouts in particularly lobbying so hard he told Thompson he'd regret it forever if they didn't pick him.

 

I think this is a bit of revisionist history...Rodgers was highly debated as the top overall pick in the draft coming out so I'm sure plenty of people told Thompson he had to go see the guy. Packers were picking at 24 and Favre was already doing the retirement song and dance so when the potential top pick falls that far, and is a QB, I'm sure plenty of scouts were lobbying for them to take a swing. I haven't heard anybody say before that the Packers went into the draft 1.) targeting Rodgers and 2.) thinking they had a legit shot at him sitting at 24.

[brewcrewdue80]

I doubt that a guy on a 2-month prove-it deal is going to jump at the chance to return punts.

 

What's this prove it deal? He's going to have his choice of teams that he'd only be a complete idiot if he chose a team not likely top 3 of offers in the Super Bowl contenders. He doesn't need to prove anything. He should want to win a Super Bowl. And returning punts? He's had his share returning punts. Even 1 this season. If he wants to "prove it" having the ball more often in his hands to do well can only help "proving it" he can't lose value as a punt returner or kick returner. FA after this season if he's awful or fumbles you're not signing him to return, you're signing him to be one of your WR. All it will take is making one decent return where he looks like a play-maker to add value to his next deal. That's what somebody wants to see.

[Fear The Chorizo]

I don't think prime Devin Hester would want to return punts behind the blocking this special teams unit provides.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

He is likely getting paid league minimum or close to it.

 

He is 29. He has likely one good contract left, if that, at this point. If he lights the world on fire, someone will pay him a lot this offseason.

 

Returning punts and getting hurt in 2 weeks is probably not what he wants to do. Thus "prove it" deal.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

 

While I'm sure they do big time work on anyone they draft, there are a lot of stories now about how Rodgers was scouted. Someone telling Thompson he "had to come see this guy" at a workout, and one of the head scouts in particularly lobbying so hard he told Thompson he'd regret it forever if they didn't pick him.

 

I think this is a bit of revisionist history...Rodgers was highly debated as the top overall pick in the draft coming out so I'm sure plenty of people told Thompson he had to go see the guy. Packers were picking at 24 and Favre was already doing the retirement song and dance so when the potential top pick falls that far, and is a QB, I'm sure plenty of scouts were lobbying for them to take a swing. I haven't heard anybody say before that the Packers went into the draft 1.) targeting Rodgers and 2.) thinking they had a legit shot at him sitting at 24.

 

It's not revisionist history at all. In fact, the idea that the #1 pick that year was some big debate is more folklore than fact. The vast majority of teams had soured on Rodgers leading up to the draft. There was no debate as to who would be picked #1 for quite some time before the draft. The media sold that, but it was not the case. And that should be apparent based on how far he fell. Once SF didn't take him, there was a very limited number of logical landing spots between 1 and 24. Rodgers contemplated not even coming to the green room at all.

 

Here is an excerpt from Gil Brandt:

 

"I was piecing every bit of information together that I could, and if teams were being honest with me -- and they always had been -- I knew the first 23 picks, and none of them included Rodgers. Pick No. 24 was held by the Packers, who, of course, had Brett Favre on their roster."

 

"My job as a recruiter was to call teams and find out who they were going to select in the first round ... They trusted me to keep the information confidential, and I did. It allowed me to do my job of getting the top players to New York for a week of draft festivities ... 10 days out from the beginning of draft week, I got a commitment from Smith, who I had learned was San Francisco's target with the top overall pick. That information was leaking out everywhere. I knew it, Smith knew it and so did Rodgers, who was non-committal in accepting his invitation."

 

The Packers not thinking they had a shot to get him is probably fair. But they absolutely targeted him and I don't know how they weren't targeting a guy they picked?

 

"One day, weeks before the draft, Cortez called Rossley and begged him to come and watch Rodgers throw. “You need to see this guy,” he said. Rossley hadn’t planned on scouting Rodgers, because he was certain he wouldn’t be available for the Packers. But, out of friendship, he made the trip. “He worked out for an hour, and every ball he threw was caught,” Rossley said. “I watched [former Ravens quarterback] Kyle Boller’s Cal workout, and he got on his knees at the 50 and threw one over the goalpost. It was amazing—and Aaron’s workout eclipsed that. I told Ted, 'This guy Rodgers is special.'”

 

“About three or four days before the draft,” he said, “I was convinced that the best thing to do, if he got to us, was draft Aaron Rodgers.”

 

The Packers really were the first team on the board that LOVED Rodgers.

[roadcrew3]

 

While I'm sure they do big time work on anyone they draft, there are a lot of stories now about how Rodgers was scouted. Someone telling Thompson he "had to come see this guy" at a workout, and one of the head scouts in particularly lobbying so hard he told Thompson he'd regret it forever if they didn't pick him.

 

I think this is a bit of revisionist history...Rodgers was highly debated as the top overall pick in the draft coming out so I'm sure plenty of people told Thompson he had to go see the guy. Packers were picking at 24 and Favre was already doing the retirement song and dance so when the potential top pick falls that far, and is a QB, I'm sure plenty of scouts were lobbying for them to take a swing. I haven't heard anybody say before that the Packers went into the draft 1.) targeting Rodgers and 2.) thinking they had a legit shot at him sitting at 24.

 

It's not revisionist history at all. In fact, the idea that the #1 pick that year was some big debate is more folklore than fact. The vast majority of teams had soured on Rodgers leading up to the draft. There was no debate as to who would be picked #1 for quite some time before the draft. The media sold that, but it was not the case. And that should be apparent based on how far he fell. Once SF didn't take him, there was a very limited number of logical landing spots between 1 and 24. Rodgers contemplated not even coming to the green room at all.

 

Here is an excerpt from Gil Brandt:

 

"I was piecing every bit of information together that I could, and if teams were being honest with me -- and they always had been -- I knew the first 23 picks, and none of them included Rodgers. Pick No. 24 was held by the Packers, who, of course, had Brett Favre on their roster."

 

"My job as a recruiter was to call teams and find out who they were going to select in the first round ... They trusted me to keep the information confidential, and I did. It allowed me to do my job of getting the top players to New York for a week of draft festivities ... 10 days out from the beginning of draft week, I got a commitment from Smith, who I had learned was San Francisco's target with the top overall pick. That information was leaking out everywhere. I knew it, Smith knew it and so did Rodgers, who was non-committal in accepting his invitation."

 

The Packers not thinking they had a shot to get him is probably fair. But they absolutely targeted him and I don't know how they weren't targeting a guy they picked?

 

"One day, weeks before the draft, Cortez called Rossley and begged him to come and watch Rodgers throw. “You need to see this guy,” he said. Rossley hadn’t planned on scouting Rodgers, because he was certain he wouldn’t be available for the Packers. But, out of friendship, he made the trip. “He worked out for an hour, and every ball he threw was caught,” Rossley said. “I watched [former Ravens quarterback] Kyle Boller’s Cal workout, and he got on his knees at the 50 and threw one over the goalpost. It was amazing—and Aaron’s workout eclipsed that. I told Ted, 'This guy Rodgers is special.'”

 

“About three or four days before the draft,” he said, “I was convinced that the best thing to do, if he got to us, was draft Aaron Rodgers.”

 

The Packers really were the first team on the board that LOVED Rodgers.

 

Andrew Brandt, one of the Packers executives when they drafted him, said: "In 2005, we had approximately 20 players rated above the first-round line. When we arrived at our pick, at No. 24, the only name left above that line was Rodgers."

 

That hardly suggests they entered the drafting thinking Rodgers was there guy and they weren't leaving without him.

 

He also is quoted as saying: "Aaron won everyone over soon after arriving in Green Bay, but to this day I sometimes think about how the NFL balance of power could be different if that phone had rang with a trade offer during those excruciating 10 minutes" suggesting that even with Rodgers on the board, if they would have gotten a trade offer they likely would have taken it.

 

I think Rodgers fell into the Packers lap as much as anything, but that is not to discredit them for actually making the selection and then properly developing him into what he is now. I hope the same happens with Love, but if we could go back to these message boards in 2005-2007, we would probably find the overwhelming majority saying the same thing about Rodgers as they are about Love now. Hoping a few years down the road we get to remember these takes more fondly..because that means Love turned out being the real deal.

 

Article with the Brandt quotes here for reference. He is a pretty good twitter follow.

 

https://www.acmepackingcompany.com/2014/5/7/5691188/andrew-brandt-reflects-on-the-packers-war-room-drafting-aaron-rodgers

[roadcrew3]

https://www.si.com/nfl/2014/05/07/nfl-draft-war-rooms

 

Here is actually a better article highlighting just how close the Packers were to not taking Rodgers.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

He didn't say they had Rodgers ranked 20th, which is what you seem to be implying and is quite a huge distinction to point out.

 

The rest of that quote is a sort of a nothingburger. It's the Draft. Of course there was a chance they'd field trade calls. There is some measure of luck involved in any successful Draft pick.

 

As far as this: "That hardly suggests they entered the drafting thinking Rodgers was there guy and they weren't leaving without him."

 

I never said it. But they really loved him and picked him with Favre on the roster. A lot of other teams didn't.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

Again, I doubt many picks are unanimous in the war room after picks 1, 2 or 3. Anything in the 20s is going to have huge debates going on. I don't know what your point is, really. That they almost didn't take him? They probably almost didn't take BJ Sander. It doesn't change the fact the Packers had a lot of people in-house dying to get Rodgers. Including their OC at the time.

[thebruce44]

I think this is a bit of revisionist history...Rodgers was highly debated as the top overall pick in the draft coming out so I'm sure plenty of people told Thompson he had to go see the guy. Packers were picking at 24 and Favre was already doing the retirement song and dance so when the potential top pick falls that far, and is a QB, I'm sure plenty of scouts were lobbying for them to take a swing. I haven't heard anybody say before that the Packers went into the draft 1.) targeting Rodgers and 2.) thinking they had a legit shot at him sitting at 24.

 

It's not revisionist history at all. In fact, the idea that the #1 pick that year was some big debate is more folklore than fact. The vast majority of teams had soured on Rodgers leading up to the draft. There was no debate as to who would be picked #1 for quite some time before the draft. The media sold that, but it was not the case. And that should be apparent based on how far he fell. Once SF didn't take him, there was a very limited number of logical landing spots between 1 and 24. Rodgers contemplated not even coming to the green room at all.

 

Here is an excerpt from Gil Brandt:

 

"I was piecing every bit of information together that I could, and if teams were being honest with me -- and they always had been -- I knew the first 23 picks, and none of them included Rodgers. Pick No. 24 was held by the Packers, who, of course, had Brett Favre on their roster."

 

"My job as a recruiter was to call teams and find out who they were going to select in the first round ... They trusted me to keep the information confidential, and I did. It allowed me to do my job of getting the top players to New York for a week of draft festivities ... 10 days out from the beginning of draft week, I got a commitment from Smith, who I had learned was San Francisco's target with the top overall pick. That information was leaking out everywhere. I knew it, Smith knew it and so did Rodgers, who was non-committal in accepting his invitation."

 

The Packers not thinking they had a shot to get him is probably fair. But they absolutely targeted him and I don't know how they weren't targeting a guy they picked?

 

"One day, weeks before the draft, Cortez called Rossley and begged him to come and watch Rodgers throw. “You need to see this guy,” he said. Rossley hadn’t planned on scouting Rodgers, because he was certain he wouldn’t be available for the Packers. But, out of friendship, he made the trip. “He worked out for an hour, and every ball he threw was caught,” Rossley said. “I watched [former Ravens quarterback] Kyle Boller’s Cal workout, and he got on his knees at the 50 and threw one over the goalpost. It was amazing—and Aaron’s workout eclipsed that. I told Ted, 'This guy Rodgers is special.'”

 

“About three or four days before the draft,” he said, “I was convinced that the best thing to do, if he got to us, was draft Aaron Rodgers.”

 

The Packers really were the first team on the board that LOVED Rodgers.

 

These stories, and this isn't the only time I've heard this type of thing, always confuse me. Do teams actually base 1st round draft picks and the fate of their organization on a couple hours of a private workout vs years of live game footage?

 

Like, he flew to California and was just shocked by what he saw, what somehow no other NFL team saw, and they just knew that was their guy? While it is romantic, like Roy Hobbs being discovered in The Natural, it just doesn't seem at all based in reality.