2020 Offseason

[gopkrs]

I guess I can put this here. I am not very knowledgeable about the draft. Only look at the mocks. I know we are all worried about a lot of positions. I remember when Favre was pretty angry when we drafted Rodgers (which turned out to be one of the best picks ever). What if a guy like Justin Herbert was available? Of course only if we felt really strongly about it. We aren't likely to be drafting high for awhile and he looks like he could learn with a few years behind Rodgers. Like I said though. I would only do it if we saw great potential.

 

[Dantés]

I guess I can put this here. I am not very knowledgeable about the draft. Only look at the mocks. I know we are all worried about a lot of positions. I remember when Favre was pretty angry when we drafted Rodgers (which turned out to be one of the best picks ever). What if a guy like Justin Herbert was available? Of course only if we felt really strongly about it. We aren't likely to be drafting high for awhile and he looks like he could learn with a few years behind Rodgers. Like I said though. I would only do it if we saw great potential.

The beauty of drafting a QB high is having a starter at that position on a rookie contract. It's a huge competitive advantage. The Chiefs won the SB with their superstar QB who was counting for like 6M against the cap.

So I don't see the logic in taking a QB high at this point because of Rodgers' contract. It is not remotely feasible to moving on from him until 2022, and even this they would take a 17M cap hit to release him. Ideally, you'd want to wait at least until 2023. And that assumes that he's declining over that phase and that you actually want to replace him, which isn't necessarily going to be the case.

So if you were to take a QB in the first round this year, that kid is sitting for 2-3 years. In other words, you're wasting 2-3 years of his highest value while he's on that rookie contract.

So for that reason, I think they have to wait. If Rodgers doesn't improve in the offense in 2020, then they should start considering it. If he does improve, then I'd hold off until the 2022 draft.

And that doesn't mean they have to waste the value if a desirable QB fell to #30. That would likely give them the chance to trade out of the first round with a QB needy team picking high in round 2.

 

[Sky King]

The beauty of drafting a QB high is having a starter at that position on a rookie contract. It's a huge competitive advantage. The Chiefs won the SB with their superstar QB who was counting for like 6M against the cap.

So I don't see the logic in taking a QB high at this point because of Rodgers' contract. It is not remotely feasible to moving on from him until 2022, and even this they would take a 17M cap hit to release him. Ideally, you'd want to wait at least until 2023. And that assumes that he's declining over that phase and that you actually want to replace him, which isn't necessarily going to be the case.

So if you were to take a QB in the first round this year, that kid is sitting for 2-3 years. In other words, you're wasting 2-3 years of his highest value while he's on that rookie contract.

So for that reason, I think they have to wait. If Rodgers doesn't improve in the offense in 2020, then they should start considering it. If he does improve, then I'd hold off until the 2022 draft.

And that doesn't mean they have to waste the value if a desirable QB fell to #30. That would likely give them the chance to trade out of the first round with a QB needy team picking high in round 2.

Your post hits solidly across the board.

Those reasons are why it's always time to take a flyer on a late-round QB every year, ala Ron Wolf. Low odds are better than no odds.

 

[Jason Edens]

Herbert or Love would have to fall to 30, and even then, I would say we should trade down out of the first round to a team that wants a QB with a 5th year option. We are married to Rodgers for the next 2 seasons due to the cap. Burrow and Tua are gone in the first 10 picks, probably first 5. Rodgers and Smith were by far the best 2 QBs in that draft and it was a freak draft where Rodgers fell that far. Rodgers could have gone number 1, they were that close. GB ended the insanity, and he landed in a good spot. By the time it gets to draft pick number 30 I expect 4 QBs to be off the board. If not, GB is in the position to trade down to someone wanting one of the top 4 QBs with a 5 year option. I wouldn't be surprised to see 5 QBs taken in the first round if Eason or Fromm impress at the combine, and once again that puts GB in a good position to trade down.

We have Rodgers for the next two years and we have to try and win one more SB in that time. We can't feasably get rid of Rodgers until 2022 to rebuild, and we are spending so much cap on him, that it would be stupid not to try and win won right now before the window closes on his career. The 30th pick in the draft holds considerably more value than the 33rd pick because of that 5th year option, and that is why it is good trade bait to a team that might be interested in an Eason/Fromm as a QB for the future. Maybe Detroit would be interested if they stick with Stafford and go Defense with their early pick. You never know, but that is where you pick up that QB because that 5th year option is worth something.

 

[gopkrs]

The beauty of drafting a QB high is having a starter at that position on a rookie contract. It's a huge competitive advantage. The Chiefs won the SB with their superstar QB who was counting for like 6M against the cap.

So I don't see the logic in taking a QB high at this point because of Rodgers' contract. It is not remotely feasible to moving on from him until 2022, and even this they would take a 17M cap hit to release him. Ideally, you'd want to wait at least until 2023. And that assumes that he's declining over that phase and that you actually want to replace him, which isn't necessarily going to be the case.

So if you were to take a QB in the first round this year, that kid is sitting for 2-3 years. In other words, you're wasting 2-3 years of his highest value while he's on that rookie contract.

So for that reason, I think they have to wait. If Rodgers doesn't improve in the offense in 2020, then they should start considering it. If he does improve, then I'd hold off until the 2022 draft.

And that doesn't mean they have to waste the value if a desirable QB fell to #30. That would likely give them the chance to trade out of the first round with a QB needy team picking high in round 2.

I was just throwing it out there. But to say the beauty of picking up a 1st round QB is the ability to play immediately and play great. Well, good luck with that. And it hasn't stopped Rodgers having a hall of fame career. And probably sitting awhile helped him. imho. A QB sitting for a bit is not generally a waste of time. Saying all that, yes, I would like to win another super bowl. And we need some upgrades. But I would also like to see The Pack be good for another 15 year stand and not wait to get a high pick on a QB which will generally not play to potential for three years anyway. Would prefer not to regress to that point. Still, we would need to be very sold on him.

 

[Dantés]

I was just throwing it out there. But to say the beauty of picking up a 1st round QB is the ability to play immediately and play great. Well, good luck with that. And it hasn't stopped Rodgers having a hall of fame career. And probably sitting awhile helped him. imho. A QB sitting for a bit is not generally a waste of time. Saying all that, yes, I would like to win another super bowl. And we need some upgrades. But I would also like to see The Pack be good for another 15 year stand and not wait to get a high pick on a QB which will generally not play to potential for three years anyway. Would prefer not to regress to that point. Still, we would need to be very sold on him.

And I was just responding to what you threw out there.

Of course sitting for 2-3 years does not preclude a QB from having a great career. I'm just talking about taking advantage of a cheap rookie contract. Which is something that you want to do, regardless of position.

And while it's basically the norm for first round QB's to start immediately, I am not saying that it's the only way to go. If we took a QB next draft, as I suggested we might, that player would almost certainly sit for a year. Mahomes sit for a year, and yet the Chiefs still got the value of most of his contract.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Just a reminder, the Packers selecting Rodgers in the first round, was more because of luck as well as the growing uncertainty of Favre at that point. Fans may have not felt it, but I think the Packer organization saw the writing on the wall, Favre wasn't going to end his career in Green Bay and they were right. Rodgers wasn't a planned selection, but something that was too good to pass up, especially given the uncertainty with Favre.

Now maybe Rodgers feels the same way as Favre did, but his contract says different. He will most likely be a Packer for the next 3 years, drafting his potential successor is luxury that I doubt the Packers can afford or justify right now. Maybe 2021 but more likely 2022 and beyond.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Obviously whenever Kittle gets extended, he is going to get more money than Hooper. When people say that Hooper is potentially going to "reset" the market, they are saying that he is going to beat the current high salary at the position, which on annual average is actually Jimmy Graham at 10M.

If Hooper wants to be the highest paid tight end at this point it would most likely be smart for the Packers to pass on him.

LOL.....I think instead of going down this Rabbit hole for about the 7th season in a row, we should just agree to disagree and be thankful for the Packers position on the subject matter.

Well, there are a ton of words that come to my mind when thinking about the Packers position on Crosby. Surprisingly thankful isn't one of them though

I said that a month or so ago. I think if the Packers really do want to sign a top FA TE this season, they are going to pay a lot less if they can do it before Kittle's contract is reworked.

Just for the record, the Niners aren't allowed to extend Kittle until the start of the new league year.

I'd be for adding Hooper. That may spell the end of Tonyan's time with us, or Lewis' which would be unfortunate.

The Packers would definitely still have room for Tonyan on the roster even after signing Hooper.

I know I disagree with a lot of people here on this (especially you), but I just don't want to spend a bunch of money on a TE. We have other places to spend that money wisely.

Gutekunst needs to improve the receiving corps this offseason. Considering there aren't a lot of intriguing options at wide receiver available in free agency tight end might be the position to pursue.

 

[tynimiller]

Hooper and Henry are going to price themselves above what logic tells me we should do so let's erase that as an option. Other TE's out there:

-Marcedes Lewis - sign him. He loved it here, will be great veteran in the locker room and still has serious blocking chops and exhibited while he is a lumbering specimen his hands are good still.

OKAY now for to me the real discussions possible...sadly outside of Hooper and Henry let's be clear there are NO guarantees:

Jacob Hollister - The ex-Patriot traded over to the Seahawks filled in when injury struck and did quite admirably. 41 receptions, 350 yards and 3 TDs. Many seem incredibly undecided on him...but at 26 years old, with enough tape study a team may like what they see.

Eric Ebron - I keep forgetting he is only 26 years old...and his raw chops cannot be questioned...however he reminds me of a young James Jones hands wise, but has struggled for years there. He is a serious red zone threat for sure, and if he ever figures the hands thing he seriously would be a top 5 arguably, top 10 TE without a doubt. He made $5Million last year, had a slightly down year and I fear he is going to enjoy the limited TE pool pay wise, but still could be worth a study and discussion. I expect he'll be in that $7M area honestly like Olsen if on a single year deal.

*Blake Jarwin - Is my pick [albeit forced] of the bunch I'm listing. I remember liking him when he came out what seems like years ago now, but he is young (25) and is a pass catching TE that shows promise and seems to take steps forward each year. IF the Cowboys don't tender him or it is low enough tender, I believe GB should definitely consider him. Pair him with a Marcedes signing and you instantly have a TE room with a solid blocking veteran, a promising high draft pick, a developing Tonyan and now an experienced pass catching TE that is still young offering a future. Go watch some tape of him...so long as you don't expect to see the next HoF tight end, I sense you may like what you're seeing.

**Tyler Eifert - This is my runner up darkhorse. Plagued by injuries (red flag...but also discount possibly) he finally had a healthy season in 2019 and put up respectable numbers and finally was able to show what many have always said was there; a highly skilled TE capable of starting nearly anywhere. His injuries worry me, but at 6'6' and 250 his athleticism is awesome on that frame...and if you look at the years he played at least 10 games he is a 40, 400 type TE (receptions, yards) and 3.5-4.5 TDs as well in those years.

Darren Fells - He is the more athletic version of Marcedes Lewis basically. While he won't come as cheap as Lewis, he is not going to be anywhere close to top dollar. A late bloomer in getting his shots, this 6'7' 33 year old hauled in 7 TDs and is a strong blocker. I wouldn't want him to be the only addition to the TE room....but if we happen to not want to bring Lewis back, or you are not a Lewis fan but want a blocker added, this is your guy.

Ricky Seals-Jones - Yet another younger, not quite proven guy, that I'm not 100% sold on, but as we know the pool is very limited. RSJ saw the field in 2019 about as much as Tonyan, but in 2018 saw over 500 snaps, put forth 34 receptions and 340 yards. 6'5' 243lb, I like his frame and being just 24 years old again there is promise of growth which he has exhibited. He is like Jarwin, but IMO is even more of a roll of the dice future wise. Upside is high, unknowns are arguably as well...

My opinion if we don't feel good about the draft providing a TE, I'm a sign Lewis/Fells type guy and then study the crap out of film and roll with Jarwin, RSJ or Eifert type signings. In a class that is literally a two headed dragon of guys that will get stupid money looking elsewhere is the smart thing IMO.

 

[bigbubbatd]

Sounding like Henry will be franchised but Hooper will hit free agency. Hooper is the only guy who moves the needle at TE. The rest are pretty much Jimmy Graham level production.

 

[gopkrs]

Just a reminder, the Packers selecting Rodgers in the first round, was more because of luck as well as the growing uncertainty of Favre at that point. Fans may have not felt it, but I think the Packer organization saw the writing on the wall, Favre wasn't going to end his career in Green Bay and they were right. Rodgers wasn't a planned selection, but something that was too good to pass up, especially given the uncertainty with Favre.

Now maybe Rodgers feels the same way as Favre did, but his contract says different. He will most likely be a Packer for the next 3 years, drafting his potential successor is luxury that I doubt the Packers can afford or justify right now. Maybe 2021 but more likely 2022 and beyond.

The point is that Rodgers sat on the bench for several years. It did not hurt him or us. Maybe it helped him. btw I do not expect the right QB to be available when we pick.

 

[GleefulGary]

The point is that Rodgers sat on the bench for several years. It did not hurt him or us. Maybe it helped him. btw I do not expect the right QB to be available when we pick.

We had a QB who had been threatening retirement, and Rodgers was cheaper than a QB in the 1st would be now.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

The point is that Rodgers sat on the bench for several years. It did not hurt him or us. Maybe it helped him. btw I do not expect the right QB to be available when we pick.

Don't get me wrong, I am thankful TT grabbed Rodgers in the 2005 draft and yes maybe his 3 years on the bench behind Favre made him the great QB he ended up being or maybe he would have followed the same path had he started as a Rookie, giving the Packers 3 more quality years of AR? We will never know. What did cost the Packers is having to pay him on a first round rookie deal to sit on the bench AND a new expensive second contract, 2 months after his first NFL start.

So like many teams that we see today, that find a solid starting QB on a rookie deal for several years and can spend that money elsewhere, I would prefer the Packers wait to use a high pick on their perceived future QB. Obviously, if another Aaron Rodgers drops into their laps or a Tim Boyle develops into a FHOF, the conversation shifts a bit.

 

[tynimiller]

Unless Rodgers starts flirting or pressing into the retirement talks legitly, there is no reason to draft a QB outside mid round or later. 100% support opening up to even a 1st rounder should the day come doubt begins to seriously be there.

 

[RicFlairoftheNFL]

Just a reminder, the Packers selecting Rodgers in the first round, was more because of luck as well as the growing uncertainty of Favre at that point. Fans may have not felt it, but I think the Packer organization saw the writing on the wall, Favre wasn't going to end his career in Green Bay and they were right. Rodgers wasn't a planned selection, but something that was too good to pass up, especially given the uncertainty with Favre.

Now maybe Rodgers feels the same way as Favre did, but his contract says different. He will most likely be a Packer for the next 3 years, drafting his potential successor is luxury that I doubt the Packers can afford or justify right now. Maybe 2021 but more likely 2022 and beyond.

With a broken foot, a tibial plateau fracture, 2 broken collar bones and concussion issues, not wanting to play in pre-season in a new system, plus being 35+ it's a NEED not a luxury.

 

[Do7]

With a broken foot, a tibial plateau fracture, 2 broken collar bones and concussion issues, not wanting to play in pre-season in a new system, plus being 35+ it's a NEED not a luxury.

And you're certain it was his decision not to play in the pre season? Also what I find hilarious is that if by chance he did and got hurt in the process, you'd find a way to ***** about that and pin that on him.

The dude can't win with you.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

With a broken foot, a tibial plateau fracture, 2 broken collar bones and concussion issues, not wanting to play in pre-season in a new system, plus being 35+ it's a NEED not a luxury.

Nice list, how did that effect his playing time last season? You forgot to mention the black eye that he suffered when he fell off his bike at the age of 6.

Should we make that list for every player on the field, because if we do, I think we might "need" 30 or so backups, just for our backups.

 

[GleefulGary]

What we do at RT is probably the most impactful part of our off-season.

I'm not sure we can afford Bulaga, and I don't trust Turner at RT. I think we have to take an OT on day 1 or 2 of the draft.

What we do at OT determines whether we have the money to sign Littleton. If we don't sign Bulaga, we probably can sign Littleton and a decent DL, and maybe a WR. If we do sign Bulaga, we can probably sign Kwiatkoski, but the remaining positions is more difficult to project.

Interesting, and difficult decision that the Packers have.

 

[tynimiller]

What we do at RT is probably the most impactful part of our off-season.

I'm not sure we can afford Bulaga, and I don't trust Turner at RT. I think we have to take an OT on day 1 or 2 of the draft.

What we do at OT determines whether we have the money to sign Littleton. If we don't sign Bulaga, we probably can sign Littleton and a decent DL, and maybe a WR. If we do sign Bulaga, we can probably sign Kwiatkoski, but the remaining positions is more difficult to project.

Interesting, and difficult decision that the Packers have.

I 100% concur with the thoughts RT decisions loom BIG and is perhaps arguably the biggest question mark....I don't necessarily believe what you paint is true however of abilities should we resign Bulaga.

With current cap space, the cutting of Graham and Taylor alone will free up more than enough money to swing a Bulaga resign....and even a BJ Goodson ILB resign should we desire. That leaves us able to but would stretch us tight to go after a Littleton type guy. This is the main reason why I am a "win now" mindset type that adds cutting Linsley sliding Patrick to start at Center and you instantly have enough to sign a Littleton, Bulaga, Crosby (as he already "is") and perhaps even Tramon and/or some other Tier 2 and Tier 3 free agents.

Without cutting Linsley or a few other hard/not fun cuts....you are right though about Bulaga resigning costing us....I think it swiftly eliminates us from being able to even talk about resigning Tramon...

All this offseason from how we attack free agency, roster moves and the draft could all swing with Bulaga news...which is why I pray in the first few days of FA we know the answer.

 

[Jason Edens]

I guess I can put this here. I am not very knowledgeable about the draft. Only look at the mocks. I know we are all worried about a lot of positions. I remember when Favre was pretty angry when we drafted Rodgers (which turned out to be one of the best picks ever). What if a guy like Justin Herbert was available? Of course only if we felt really strongly about it. We aren't likely to be drafting high for awhile and he looks like he could learn with a few years behind Rodgers. Like I said though. I would only do it if we saw great potential.

Rodgers, that great Hall of Frame QB that went 1-3 in the NFC championship game with 2 of those losses being sure wins but victims of horrid offensive breakdowns blamed on the coaching scheme. The third horrendous game he had 2 interceptions and 3 fumbles, but still not his fault. At this point the super bowl Rodgers won was luck. The rest of his performance is on him. Otherwise he should give up $100,000,000 for robbing us of playmakers to put him in the position he was in to win that sole SB.

 

[tynimiller]

Rodgers, that great Hall of Frame QB that went 1-3 in the NFC championship game with 2 of those losses being sure wins but victims of horrid offensive breakdowns blamed on the coaching scheme. The third horrendous game he had 2 interceptions and 3 fumbles, but still not his fault. At this point the super bowl Rodgers won was luck. The rest of his performance is on him. Otherwise he should give up $100,000,000 for robbing us of playmakers to put him in the position he was in to win that sole SB.

Now I know you're just trolling.

Yup, Rodgers sucks...never has been good, terrible player and terrible QB. Been ticked ever since we never got Cutler and let the Bears grab him...shoot and don't even get me started on letting them nab Trubisky....still irate over that one.

 

[Do7]

Now I know you're just trolling.

Yup, Rodgers sucks...never has been good, terrible player and terribly QB.

It we appears we have another one of "those" guys it seems. I suppose we were about due for a new one on here.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

We had a QB who had been threatening retirement, and Rodgers was cheaper than a QB in the 1st would be now.

Actually Rodgers signed a rookie contract accounting for 8.95% of the cap in 2005. Josh Jacobs (the 24th pick last season) had to agree to a cheaper deal (6.34%).

Rodgers, that great Hall of Frame QB that went 1-3 in the NFC championship game with 2 of those losses being sure wins but victims of horrid offensive breakdowns blamed on the coaching scheme. The third horrendous game he had 2 interceptions and 3 fumbles, but still not his fault. At this point the super bowl Rodgers won was luck. The rest of his performance is on him. Otherwise he should give up $100,000,000 for robbing us of playmakers to put him in the position he was in to win that sole SB.

That's an absolutely ridiculous post. I just want to comment on the three NFCCG the Packers have lost with Rodgers as their starter.

First of all I would like to know which one aside of the one against Seattle do you deem as sure wins??? The defense gave up 43 points against the Falcons in 2016 and 37 vs. the Niners this year and the Packers never came close to taking the lead in any of those games. Therefore they definitely weren't sure wins.

I agree the Packers should have won at Seattle in 2014 but Rodgers definitely isn't the one to mainly blame for that loss either.

 

[tynimiller]

Actually Rodgers signed a rookie contract accounting for 8.95% of the cap in 2005. Josh Jacobs (the 24th pick last season) had to agree to a cheaper deal (6.34%).



That's an absolutely ridiculous post. I just want to comment on the three NFCCG the Packers have lost with Rodgers as their starter.

First of all I would like to know which one aside of the one against Seattle do you deem as sure wins??? The defense gave up 43 points against the Falcons in 2016 and 37 vs. the Niners this year and the Packers never came close to taking the lead in any of those games. Therefore they definitely weren't sure wins.

I agree the Packers should have won at Seattle in 2014 but Rodgers definitely isn't the one to mainly blame for that loss either.

Oh man.....prepare to be responded to. I place the over/under number of times @Jason Edens uses vulgarities at 4.5 and I place O/U on the amount of times he brings up the male "appendage" at 3.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Oh man.....prepare to be responded to. I place the over/under number of times @Jason Edens uses vulgarities at 4.5 and I place O/U on the amount of times he brings up the male "appendage" at 3.

Well, I guess he will be banned before long. Maybe even before he will be able to reply to my post.