CBS Sports calls out Packers lies regarding Jordan Love

Fat Dogs

Cheesehead
Joined
May 15, 2017
Messages
434
Reaction score
33
Oh my God, it is like some of you have never been able to have a discussion and or state reasons even if they are not your own before. LoL

I guess I need to have a lot more disclaimers and explanation that "what I'm about to present is a valid thought process despite it possibly not being true OR my own.


Ha ha disclaimers never hurt:) many people truly view it this way so I kindly redirect my statements to them.
 

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
14,191
Reaction score
5,039
Yes, they are. However, the front office pretending he fell to them is not true, he didn't fall. Mind you, the only reason I care about this is because it's a topic and I'm bored without sports. It's amazing what constitutes a subject worth discussing when sports aren't on.

You cannot claim this as fact, a theory but no one knows they had him ranked at. If he was their 15th best player as example he for sure fell and they couldn't resist getting a player that high at when they did.

Is this true, neither you or I know, but one thing is certain they did not expect Love to last as long as he did.
 

Mondio

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 20, 2014
Messages
15,893
Reaction score
3,797
No offense but the FO has some of you brainwashed. Everyone outside of the Packers fan base sees it. Daniel Jones was drafted and we thought that Eli’s days were numbered. Mahomes is taken and we all thought that Smith was on his way out. Love gets taken and everyone says “no” “no” “We traded up for Love so we have a capable back up until Rodgers contract ends.” What? On what planet do teams do this? I know what MLF said and it’s called collateral damage. The Giants and Chiefs F.O. Said the same things. Best case scenario is that Love shows promise after 2 years and they can get something for Rodgers. Worst case is he absolutely stinks and never plays as a starter (waste of a pick.)
I don't think there is any doubt this pick was made with year 3 and 4 in mind. I don't think it was made with this year in mind or likely even next. If Rodgers is playing at a very high level in 2 years, There is a good chance he might still b here anyway because at that point it's just salary and while we may save on cap, 3-4 years from now, 25 million for a QB that is playing really good football is going to look pretty nice when some new contracts are given out.

Lots of options in the coming years, options aren't bad to have. Lots left to be decided yet though.

I don't see Eli or Smith being equals or even close to the same situation though. KC swapped 1st rounders, gave up another 1st round pick and a 3rd round pick. GB swapped 1st's and gave up a 4th. A bit different price paid. they also selected Mahomes when Smith was entering the LAST year of his contract, not after he completed his 2nd with 4 more to go. a bit different situations.
 

Dantés

Gute Loot
Joined
Jan 21, 2017
Messages
12,115
Reaction score
3,036
Yes, they are. However, the front office pretending he fell to them is not true, he didn't fall. Mind you, the only reason I care about this is because it's a topic and I'm bored without sports. It's amazing what constitutes a subject worth discussing when sports aren't on.

Well he certainly didn't fall to their original pick, but if they had a cluster of guys they liked in the first and he was the one who "fell" the furthest and they decided to go get him... that's possible.
 

Fat Dogs

Cheesehead
Joined
May 15, 2017
Messages
434
Reaction score
33
I don't think there is any doubt this pick was made with year 3 and 4 in mind. I don't think it was made with this year in mind or likely even next. If Rodgers is playing at a very high level in 2 years, There is a good chance he might still b here anyway because at that point it's just salary and while we may save on cap, 3-4 years from now, 25 million for a QB that is playing really good football is going to look pretty nice when some new contracts are given out.

Lots of options in the coming years, options aren't bad to have. Lots left to be decided yet though.

I don't see Eli or Smith being equals or even close to the same situation though. KC swapped 1st rounders, gave up another 1st round pick and a 3rd round pick. GB swapped 1st's and gave up a 4th. A bit different price paid. they also selected Mahomes when Smith was entering the LAST year of his contract, not after he completed his 2nd with 4 more to go. a bit different situations.


Sit behind Rodgers four years to Look good in limited action ala Matt Flynn, Brock Osweiler, and nick Foles? Love didn’t fall. We traded up adding extra pressure to hit on the pick. Super Bowls appearances are hard to come by. The Packers have been one game away three times in the past 6 years. Gute Is praying that Love is ready in 2 years or he’ll be forever known as the guy who took a backup QB instead of giving Rodgers a defensive playmaker or offensive weapon to help put us over the edge. Rodgers is far from done and that’s what makes this pick so perplexing. I can see him winning the division the next 3 years and getting ousted in the playoffs because the FO refuses to build around him. Decisions like this is what get GM’s fired so yes, I think Love needs to show “mahomes like” potential in year 2 and get something for Rodgers to salvage the fact that he wasted the last remaining years of a HOF QB.
 

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
14,191
Reaction score
5,039
Sit behind Rodgers four years to Look good in limited action ala Matt Flynn, Brock Osweiler, and nick Foles?

I think it is very clear the Packers are desiring Love sit behind one of the best ever and learn. Whether that is 3, 4 or even 5 years none of us should claim to know it as fact, because to do so would just be ignorant (this is a broad statement not directed at anyone specifically.

Love didn’t fall.

On many boards he most definitely did, on other boards he didn't and on other boards he was drafted earlier than they had. I guess unless you were in the Green Bay virtual "war room" and know the Packer's board breakdown you can make such a claim. But it is very possibly he was the organization's say #15 best overall player in the draft...when he started falling past 20, then 21...they began seeing what they could do because he was a player that was not only of value but appeared to them as a level of player they should have no business getting where they did. *Remind everyone this is a thought process that is just as valid of a possibility as some of our own...I had Love as my personal #2 QB arguably over Herbert even...but I wouldn't have picked him, and had a early 2nd round grade personally on him. However, I'm not the Packers and they shouldn't follow my board LOL

Rodgers is far from done and that’s what makes this pick so perplexing. I can see him winning the division the next 3 years and getting ousted in the playoffs because the FO refuses to build around him.

Two questions, first is how do you define "far from done". I LOVE Aaron's ability and I argue he is the most skilled QB to play the game as of yet. However, it would take someone choosing to be blind to not have seen his performance dropping the last couple seasons. Now granted, his performance has to drop a lot to be an average quarterback, but most of us are old enough to know that father time catches up with everyone eventually and rarely is it a slowly cliff once stepped over. I can remember one minute being afraid of facing guys like Manning, Elway, Marino, Favre...the list goes on and one day you realize they are a shell of what once was. That cliff is coming for Brees and Brady soon I suspect...Rodgers soon after. Is that in a year....two....four....none of us know.

The second question is has the FO refused to build around him, or have they refused to build the way you want around him?



Just for the record, I was and still am critical of the Love pick in the perspective that it is not in anyway the direction I'd have went. However, the thought process of the why's or 'how comes' to the Love pick is easily identified or understood, despite my disagreement with it as being what I would deem the "right" decision and I'm 100% hopeful of his future because I do like him, just not the pick or process it took to do it.
 

Fat Dogs

Cheesehead
Joined
May 15, 2017
Messages
434
Reaction score
33
I think it is very clear the Packers are desiring Love sit behind one of the best ever and learn. Whether that is 3, 4 or even 5 years none of us should claim to know it as fact, because to do so would just be ignorant (this is a broad statement not directed at anyone specifically.



On many boards he most definitely did, on other boards he didn't and on other boards he was drafted earlier than they had. I guess unless you were in the Green Bay virtual "war room" and know the Packer's board breakdown you can make such a claim. But it is very possibly he was the organization's say #15 best overall player in the draft...when he started falling past 20, then 21...they began seeing what they could do because he was a player that was not only of value but appeared to them as a level of player they should have no business getting where they did. *Remind everyone this is a thought process that is just as valid of a possibility as some of our own...I had Love as my personal #2 QB arguably over Herbert even...but I wouldn't have picked him, and had a early 2nd round grade personally on him. However, I'm not the Packers and they shouldn't follow my board LOL



Two questions, first is how do you define "far from done". I LOVE Aaron's ability and I argue he is the most skilled QB to play the game as of yet. However, it would take someone choosing to be blind to not have seen his performance dropping the last couple seasons. Now granted, his performance has to drop a lot to be an average quarterback, but most of us are old enough to know that father time catches up with everyone eventually and rarely is it a slowly cliff once stepped over. I can remember one minute being afraid of facing guys like Manning, Elway, Marino, Favre...the list goes on and one day you realize they are a shell of what once was. That cliff is coming for Brees and Brady soon I suspect...Rodgers soon after. Is that in a year....two....four....none of us know.

The second question is has the FO refused to build around him, or have they refused to build the way you want around him?



Just for the record, I was and still am critical of the Love pick in the perspective that it is not in anyway the direction I'd have went. However, the thought process of the why's or 'how comes' to the Love pick is easily identified or understood, despite my disagreement with it as being what I would deem the "right" decision and I'm 100% hopeful of his future because I do like him, just not the pick or process it took to do it.


I wasn’t referring to him falling on anyone’s board. We didn’t hold tight and allow him to fall. We gave up draft capital to climb up to get him.

I agree that Father Time is inevitable and this is why these next four years are so important. Here’s a Question for you. Is his performance dropping because he’s throwing to rookie and second year 6th, 7th, and UFA’s? Could the new offensive install have contributed? Rodgers threw for 4,400 yards in 2018 (his second highest total of his career.) He surpassed 4,000 yards in 2019. Yes, He threw for less TD’s but is this because his skills are diminishing or because the FO failed him? Rodgers is a unique situation and should be treated as such. He only has 12 years on his arm. Both Brees and manning put up elite numbers for 17 years, and Brady has done it for 18.
 

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
14,191
Reaction score
5,039
I wasn’t referring to him falling on anyone’s board. We didn’t hold tight and allow him to fall. We gave up draft capital to climb up to get him.

All that means is they didn't allow him to fall further to #30. Doesn't necessarily mean he didn't fall. I follow you better now though.


Here’s a Question for you. Is his performance dropping because he’s throwing to rookie and second year 6th, 7th, and UFA’s?

Despite you not answering mine I'll provide an answer to your's to me. Judging his receiver quality strictly by a round they're selected is not a proper way of evaluating. Up until Cobb walked Rodgers has never had a year without two bonafide WR options...going into last year the organization was banking on MVS, Gmo, EQ, Kumerow and a plethora of young hopefuls at least half taking steps forward and MVS or GMo continuing to grow into a larger role. Sadly, EQ gets hurt, and no one else arguably got better....honestly the odds of that much regression or tire spinning is nuts. Thankfully Lazard grabbed the chance and ran with it...whether he really has chops to be something or merely a product of the situation 2020 will teach us more on that. As for his performance dropping, I think the largest part of it comes with his ability of shaking and using his feet is decreasing more as time wears on him. That lower body injury especially has made him vastly less of a threat to wiggle and move and run for those 4-6 yard gains he used to do consistently. While he has always had issues with it, it seems he's holding the ball longer as well...someone with paid access to this stat may be able to shed light as whether this observation is correct or not though. I'd also argue he is missing more throws than I'd ever expect him to...some can be attributed to WR error, but no one can get me to claim all of them are.

Rodgers in the end is still the best QB on our team, in our division and I'll say right now even in our Conference IMO. Yup, I believe it. I think this whole Love draft and last year's under-performance not just may, but will ignite some of that old Rodgers fury within...and that man plays better with a chip than any QB I've watched in my time on this earth.
 

Sunshinepacker

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 29, 2013
Messages
5,777
Reaction score
903
Well he certainly didn't fall to their original pick, but if they had a cluster of guys they liked in the first and he was the one who "fell" the furthest and they decided to go get him... that's possible.

Then that's not falling. Perhaps it's just a difference in how we each define the term "he fell to us". To me, that means the player literally fell down the draft into your draft slot. Since that's not what happened, that's not what I consider falling.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
In 2005 we drafted a QB in the first round and he sat behind a another future HOF QB too. If Love turns out to be a successful franchise QB then not too many folks are going to care about the WRs we didn't draft last month.

It will take some time to fairly evaluate Love. That might not be true for a lack of talent on the receiving corps though.

You can never have too many good quarterbacks. Just look what happened when 12 went down. The Love pick is fine.

It's great to have a decent backup quarterback but there's no reason to spend a first rounder on one though.

Bruce Ariens, a guy who knows a few things about grooming QBs, will be starting Tagovailoa, health permitting, saying, "I don't think you learn anything on the sidelines holding a clipboard." That is the reality.

Just for the record, Arians will start Brady next season. Tagovailoa was drafted by the Dolphins.

Having a young, electric and promising backup on a rookie contract is a positive thing.

Love will count more against the cap in 2020 than some decent backups out there. Teams actually want a promising starter ob a rookie deal.

If Love shows he is truly capable of taking over when Rodgers leaves, 5th year option and a small sample size could lead to a cheaper contract for the QB of the future when his rookie contract comes up.

Geez, you simply don't get the huge benefit of having a starting quarterback on a rookie deal.

I think it is very clear the Packers are desiring Love sit behind one of the best ever and learn. Whether that is 3, 4 or even 5 years none of us should claim to know it as fact, because to do so would just be ignorant (this is a broad statement not directed at anyone specifically.

It's unrealistic to expect Love backing up Rodgers for more than three years if the Packers believe he has developed into a decent starter though. They might even be in favor of making a change earlier.






Judging his receiver quality strictly by a round they're selected is not a proper way of evaluating. Up until Cobb walked Rodgers has never had a year without two bonafide WR options...going into last year the organization was banking on MVS, Gmo, EQ, Kumerow and a plethora of young hopefuls at least half taking steps forward and MVS or GMo continuing to grow into a larger role. Sadly, EQ gets hurt, and no one else arguably got better....honestly the odds of that much regression or tire spinning is nuts.

I agree that evaluating a receiver based on the round he was drafted in doesn't make sense but it was hardly a surprise the Packers corps struggled last season because of an overall lack of talent at the position.

Unfortunately it seems Gutekunst hasn't changed his approach at the position this year.
 

Fat Dogs

Cheesehead
Joined
May 15, 2017
Messages
434
Reaction score
33
All that means is they didn't allow him to fall further to #30. Doesn't necessarily mean he didn't fall. I follow you better now though.




Despite you not answering mine I'll provide an answer to your's to me. Judging his receiver quality strictly by a round they're selected is not a proper way of evaluating. Up until Cobb walked Rodgers has never had a year without two bonafide WR options...going into last year the organization was banking on MVS, Gmo, EQ, Kumerow and a plethora of young hopefuls at least half taking steps forward and MVS or GMo continuing to grow into a larger role. Sadly, EQ gets hurt, and no one else arguably got better....honestly the odds of that much regression or tire spinning is nuts. Thankfully Lazard grabbed the chance and ran with it...whether he really has chops to be something or merely a product of the situation 2020 will teach us more on that. As for his performance dropping, I think the largest part of it comes with his ability of shaking and using his feet is decreasing more as time wears on him. That lower body injury especially has made him vastly less of a threat to wiggle and move and run for those 4-6 yard gains he used to do consistently. While he has always had issues with it, it seems he's holding the ball longer as well...someone with paid access to this stat may be able to shed light as whether this observation is correct or not though. I'd also argue he is missing more throws than I'd ever expect him to...some can be attributed to WR error, but no one can get me to claim all of them are.

Rodgers in the end is still the best QB on our team, in our division and I'll say right now even in our Conference IMO. Yup, I believe it. I think this whole Love draft and last year's under-performance not just may, but will ignite some of that old Rodgers fury within...and that man plays better with a chip than any QB I've watched in my time on this earth.


I did respond to yours. I share your gut feeling about Rodgers having a chip on his shoulder and that’s why I feel like Love was a waste of a pick. Rodgers Has a minimum of four years in him. I am also well aware that the teams way of building a contender is different than mine. I just think that Rodgers deserves a FO that will invest in players that will help this year rather than one that has zero chance of helping Rodgers win a championship.

I also agree that receivers should not be judged by where they are drafted because there are exceptions to every rule but the Adams, Michael Thomas, Hopkins, and Julio Jones’s high picks do statistically have a higher success rate than throwing darts at late rounders and UFA’s. All this being said... I do believe in the upside of our young core and I hope that Rodgers gets us to the promise land despite the FO drafting for the future when we have a 13-3 team that could use first round talent now.
 

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
14,191
Reaction score
5,039
I agree that evaluating a receiver based on the round he was drafted in doesn't make sense but it was hardly a surprise the Packers corps struggled last season because of an overall lack of talent at the position.

Unfortunately it seems Gutekunst hasn't changed his approach at the position this year.

Sorry but that last sentence is incorrect. The signing of Funchess is already a vastly different approach than was applied last year.
 
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
Just for the record, Arians will start Brady next season. Tagovailoa was drafted by the Dolphins.
That should have been "would start", not "will start". Not learning anything holding a clipboard is the operarable concept.

https://www.sun-sentinel.com/sports...0200606-5xev35rninht5mi7x5gsjev2ee-story.html

It does seem some folks forget even the recent cautionary tales, to wit, DeShone Kizer, a guy McCarthy declared a "first round talent", McCarthy being another purported QB whisperer. Kizer didn't learn much on the field in Cleveland or holding the clipboard thereafter.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Mondio

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 20, 2014
Messages
15,893
Reaction score
3,797
Sit behind Rodgers four years to Look good in limited action ala Matt Flynn, Brock Osweiler, and nick Foles? Love didn’t fall. We traded up adding extra pressure to hit on the pick. Super Bowls appearances are hard to come by. The Packers have been one game away three times in the past 6 years. Gute Is praying that Love is ready in 2 years or he’ll be forever known as the guy who took a backup QB instead of giving Rodgers a defensive playmaker or offensive weapon to help put us over the edge. Rodgers is far from done and that’s what makes this pick so perplexing. I can see him winning the division the next 3 years and getting ousted in the playoffs because the FO refuses to build around him. Decisions like this is what get GM’s fired so yes, I think Love needs to show “mahomes like” potential in year 2 and get something for Rodgers to salvage the fact that he wasted the last remaining years of a HOF QB.

I think there are a lot of variables or possible outcomes from all of this. If Rodgers is playing very well, well that's good. If Rodgers is playing very well, and Love is what they think he is in 2 years, that's good too. If Rodgers is playing great and love sucks, well, i'm still ok. If Rodgers is still good and Love is ok, and they trade love and get something later, i'm good. The only way this sucks is if Rodgers isn't Rodgers and Love stinks. and even if both are great and we trade someone, what if one on our team gets injured? lots of ways for this to be "good" or "bad"
 

Dantés

Gute Loot
Joined
Jan 21, 2017
Messages
12,115
Reaction score
3,036
Then that's not falling. Perhaps it's just a difference in how we each define the term "he fell to us". To me, that means the player literally fell down the draft into your draft slot. Since that's not what happened, that's not what I consider falling.

So it's just semantics then.
 
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
I think there are a lot of variables or possible outcomes from all of this. If Rodgers is playing very well, well that's good. If Rodgers is playing very well, and Love is what they think he is in 2 years, that's good too. If Rodgers is playing great and love sucks, well, i'm still ok. If Rodgers is still good and Love is ok, and they trade love and get something later, i'm good. The only way this sucks is if Rodgers isn't Rodgers and Love stinks. and even if both are great and we trade someone, what if one on our team gets injured? lots of ways for this to be "good" or "bad"
Those outcomes have varying probabilites. And you avoided one possibility: Rodgers is still good, the Pa ckers don't want to cover his $35 - $40 mil cap cost, Love has not played much or at all to that point, Rodgers departs, and then Love sucks. That's kinda like Brady out, Stidham in except we await Stidham's sucking or not.
 
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
Which is not what we were talking about...
Oh. It didn't sound like that given the post you replied to. Anyway, Love did not fall to the Packers, they reached for him, and that would not be semantics, just for the record.
 

gopkrs

Cheesehead
Joined
May 12, 2014
Messages
5,446
Reaction score
1,302
To the Pack, Love fell to a point where they thought they should go up to get him.
 

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
14,191
Reaction score
5,039
Oh. It didn't sound like that given the post you replied to. Anyway, Love did not fall to the Packers, they reached for him, and that would not be semantics, just for the record.

No one can state this unless they were in the war room for the Packers. Again, trading up doesn't mean you reached for a player on your board. If he was ranked higher than #26 on their board, there was no reaching done. As best I know, none of us have that insider information.
 

Dantés

Gute Loot
Joined
Jan 21, 2017
Messages
12,115
Reaction score
3,036
Oh. It didn't sound like that given the post you replied to. Anyway, Love did not fall to the Packers, they reached for him, and that would not be semantics, just for the record.

"Fall" and "reach" are terms that people are going to supply different meanings to.
 

Fat Dogs

Cheesehead
Joined
May 15, 2017
Messages
434
Reaction score
33
I think there are a lot of variables or possible outcomes from all of this. If Rodgers is playing very well, well that's good. If Rodgers is playing very well, and Love is what they think he is in 2 years, that's good too. If Rodgers is playing great and love sucks, well, i'm still ok. If Rodgers is still good and Love is ok, and they trade love and get something later, i'm good. The only way this sucks is if Rodgers isn't Rodgers and Love stinks. and even if both are great and we trade someone, what if one on our team gets injured? lots of ways for this to be "good" or "bad"


Ok, there are other possibilities how many justify trading up in the 1st? The best possible outcome for Gute Is that Love is ready in 2 years, trades Rodgers for a first, and uses the Rodgers savings to build a championship roster with a younger QB under a rookie contract. This is why teams draft players in the first. Rodgers sitting three years behind favre is an extreme rarity.
 

Fat Dogs

Cheesehead
Joined
May 15, 2017
Messages
434
Reaction score
33
Those outcomes have varying probabilites. And you avoided one possibility: Rodgers is still good, the Pa ckers don't want to cover his $35 - $40 mil cap cost, Love has not played much or at all to that point, Rodgers departs, and then Love sucks. That's kinda like Brady out, Stidham in except we await Stidham's sucking or not.


Or.... Rodgers has two or three bad games in a row (due to receivers not separating or simply not being on the same page) and fans start calling for his head (Jones/Eli) *not comparing Rodgers and Eli* simply introducing a scenario. The FO says ok Love. It’s your time. Rodgers demands a trade and wins 2 Super Bowls with another team. The packers kick the can for a few more years with Love but end up spending the next 20 years looking for a franchise QB. It’s super sad how we wasted a HOF career. Spent a thousand picks on the other side of the ball but couldn’t throw the guy a bone.
 

Members online

Top