NFC North 2025

[Pokerbrat2000]

Banks is not a whiff.

I did say "So far". Given the money he's being paid, tell me how he hasn't been a whiff, so far.

 

[OldSchool101]

My Division theory is this. The Packers have 3 of 4 home games before going to Detroit. These next 4 games are crucial, partly because of the Tie. No Division tie breaker will be in play for Packers. Currently Detroit is 1/2 game behind. IF the Packers just go = with Detroit before our contest? I believe that Packers at Detroit game will dramatically impact probability of a Packer Division Winner.

Before we play Detroit we both play The Eagles. However the Packers host the Eagles and the Lions have to go to Philly. Detroit plays a similar Vikings, Washington, Giants
The Packers play Vikings, Panthers, Giants

After our Detroit meeting, we both play exactly 5 contests. They are very equal strength teams looking across the schedule.
Packers play vs Bears, @Broncos, @Bears, vs Ravens, @Vikings

Detroit plays Vs Cowboys @Rams,
vs. Steelers, @Vikings, @Chicago

If for any reason the Packers defeat the Lions on Turkey Day.. not suggesting probable but certainly possible) the Packers would essentially be 2 games ahead of Detroit (Detroit would have to close the gap 2 games in 5 weeks). GB could remain even or even -1 down the stretch and still Win the Division.

So my prediction is If The Packers can remain Even with Detroit until our meeting on Thanksgiving? and can muster up a W at Detroit? the Lions would have a massive uphill battle for the North. They’d fall 2 games back with 5 to go and a relatively equal schedule strength down the stretch.

 

[milani]

My Division theory is this. The Packers have 3 of 4 home games before going to Detroit. These next 4 games are crucial, partly because of the Tie. No Division tie breaker will be in play for Packers. Currently Detroit is 1/2 game behind. IF the Packers just go = with Detroit before our contest? I believe that Packers at Detroit game will dramatically impact probability of a Packer Division Winner.

Before we play Detroit we both play The Eagles. However the Packers host the Eagles and the Lions have to go to Philly. Detroit plays a similar Vikings, Washington, Giants
The Packers play Vikings, Panthers, Giants

After our Detroit meeting, we both play exactly 5 contests. They are very equal strength teams looking across the schedule.
Packers play vs Bears, @Broncos, @Bears, vs Ravens, @Vikings

Detroit plays Vs Cowboys @Rams,
vs. Steelers, @Vikings, @Chicago

If for any reason the Packers defeat the Lions on Turkey Day.. not suggesting probable but certainly possible) the Packers would essentially be 2 games ahead of Detroit (Detroit would have to close the gap 2 games in 5 weeks). GB could remain even or even -1 down the stretch and still Win the Division.

So my prediction is If The Packers can remain Even with Detroit until our meeting on Thanksgiving? and can muster up a W at Detroit? the Lions would have a massive uphill battle for the North. They’d fall 2 games back with 5 to go and a relatively equal schedule strength down the stretch.

There is also the remote chance that Detroit plays a tie. But the way Dan Campbell plays he instinctively goes for the win even if it risks defeat. I wonder if he was in our shoes in Dallas would he have gone for the TD with one second on the clock.

 

[tynimiller]

I did say "So far". Given the money he's being paid, tell me how he hasn't been a whiff, so far.

Whiff is making zero contact….thats a player that has lost his starting spot or doesn’t even have one to lose….which Hobbs is appearing to fit but Banks is a sure starter when healthy.

Not saying great starter but whiff is a pure miss of something

 

[gopkrs]

There is also the remote chance that Detroit plays a tie. But the way Dan Campbell plays he instinctively goes for the win even if it risks defeat. I wonder if he was in our shoes in Dallas would he have gone for the TD with one second on the clock.

I'm glad we didn't. imho we did the smart thing

 

[gopkrs]

Whiff is making zero contact….thats a player that has lost his starting spot or doesn’t even have one to lose….which Hobbs is appearing to fit but Banks is a sure starter when healthy.

Not saying great starter but whiff is a pure miss of something

I'm still giving him a chance. Hell, I have to. But if he doesn't start opening up some holes; I'll end up calling it a whiff. That's too important with spending that much money.

 

[tynimiller]

I'm still giving him a chance. Hell, I have to. But if he doesn't start opening up some holes; I'll end up calling it a whiff. That's too important with spending that much money.

I think my baseball background and the term whiff is just holding a very different meaning to me and you is all honestly

 

[Heyjoe4]

Whiff is making zero contact….thats a player that has lost his starting spot or doesn’t even have one to lose….which Hobbs is appearing to fit but Banks is a sure starter when healthy.

Not saying great starter but whiff is a pure miss of something

It's just semantics. But yeah, "whiff" to me is a baseball term meaning swinging and completely missing the ball.

Aside from that, Hobbs has not performed nearly as well as his contract would suggest, so I'm with Poker on this - at least so far, looks like Gluten missed with this signing.

Banks is a bit overpaid, and he's been injured, but he's a good player when healthy and a good addition to the OL, IMO.

 

[Thirteen Below]

Bullard is playing well. But maybe there are situations when Hobbs can play in the middle. Like 3rd and long. Take out a linebacker.

I think one possibility might be to play Hobbs in the slot on running downs, and Bullard on passing downs.

Clearly, the Packers really really want to bring Javon along and work him into a fulltime safety, and this might be the best way to do it - and a way that is most advantageous to the team. It's not that Bullard is really that bad on running downs, but he's not great at it either - average at best, for the most part.

However, he excels on coverage - and... well... Hobbs doesn't. For safeties, Bullard is #11 in the NFL so far this season in yards allowed per target (4.9), and #1 in yards allowed per reception (5.9). In advanced metrics, his coverage rating is +2.8 (94th percentile), and he is targeted on roughly 15% of his snaps (can't recall exactly, and too tired to look it up; but... a little over 15%... sorry).

So he's seeing a hell of a lot of footballs (on 1 out of every 7 snaps, the ball is coming to him), and doing one hell of a job playing his part. I won't break down the exact numbers, because I really feel self-conscious about my long posts, but I'll just say that Nate's metrics on passing downs is very, very different. On passing downs, Bullard is one of the best safeties in the league, and Hobbs is clearly below average.

On passing downs, Javon needs to be in the slot, and Hobbs needs to NOT be. In the last 3 games that Hobbs started (against Dallas, Cincinnati, and Arizona), he has given up an average of 63 passing yards per game - very close to 25% of all passing yards that Green Bay has given up.

Clearly, the Packers see Bullard as the future in the slot, and the numbers I've dug up certainly seem to validate that plan. I think that ideally, they believe (or at least hope) that he'll be The Guy by 2026, and they can then do whatever with Hobbs - and better afford it next year than this year.

But I also think they're disillusioned with Hobbs' play at outside cornerback, and are largely playing him there partly because they figure they need to get some value for the money they've invested in him, and partly because they're hoping he'll eventually become a better perimeter defender (which I think is quite unlikely - he is what he is).

But one thing I think is clear is that the Packers finally understand what a lot of us saw 6 months ago - the signing of Hobbs was a foolish, extravagant, and frankly reckless decision. That was a lot of money that could be much better spent elsewhere right now.

I think my baseball background and the term whiff is just holding a very different meaning to me and you is all honestly

That's fair enough, but I'm sure we can all agree that we're not getting from Hobbs anywhere near what we paid for. We've spent half a season trying to square-peg him into a round hole, and it's been an expensive failure.

 

[Heyjoe4]

I think one possibility might be to play Hobbs in the slot on running downs, and Bullard on passing downs.

Clearly, the Packers really really want to bring Javon along and work him into a fulltime safety, and this might be the best way to do it - and a way that is most advantageous to the team. It's not that Bullard is really that bad on running downs, but he's not great at it either - average at best, for the most part.

However, he excels on coverage - and... well... Hobbs doesn't. For safeties, Bullard is #11 in the NFL so far this season in yards allowed per target (4.9), and #1 in yards allowed per reception (5.9). In advanced metrics, his coverage rating is +2.8 (94th percentile), and he is targeted on roughly 15% of his snaps (can't recall exactly, and too tired to look it up; but... a little over 15%... sorry).

So he's seeing a hell of a lot of footballs (on 1 out of every 7 snaps, the ball is coming to him), and doing one hell of a job playing his part. I won't break down the exact numbers, because I really feel self-conscious about my long posts, but I'll just say that Nate's metrics on passing downs is very, very different. On passing downs, Bullard is one of the best safeties in the league, and Hobbs is clearly below average.

On passing downs, Javon needs to be in the slot, and Hobbs needs to NOT be. In the last 3 games that Hobbs started (against Dallas, Cincinnati, and Arizona), he has given up an average of 63 passing yards per game - very close to 25% of all passing yards that Green Bay has given up.

Clearly, the Packers see Bullard as the future in the slot, and the numbers I've dug up certainly seem to validate that plan. I think that ideally, they believe (or at least hope) that he'll be The Guy by 2026, and they can then do whatever with Hobbs - and better afford it next year than this year.

But I also think they're disillusioned with Hobbs' play at outside cornerback, and are largely playing him there partly because they figure they need to get some value for the money they've invested in him, and partly because they're hoping he'll eventually become a better perimeter defender (which I think is quite unlikely - he is what he is).

But one thing I think is clear is that the Packers finally understand what a lot of us saw 6 months ago - the signing of Hobbs was a foolish, extravagant, and frankly reckless decision. That was a lot of money that could be much better spent elsewhere right now.


That's fair enough, but I'm sure we can all agree that we're not getting from Hobbs anywhere near what we paid for. We've spent half a season trying to square-peg him into a round hole, and it's been an expensive failure.

Good points. Playing Hobbs in slot on running downs, and Bullard on passing downs makes sense. It's the best way to treat a bad situation (with Hobbs).

I agree Bullard's future is probably best at S. He's a strong guy and more suited to the physical play of a safety. It gives Hafley another option to blitz with a safety, something McKinney is doing now on occasion, even Williams. Would be nice to vary that from play to play and confuse the offense. That is, have both McKinney and Bullard show blitz with Williams deep, and then rushing one and dropping the other back in coverage.

Fortunately the S group is solid. I think Gluten will have to wait until the offseason to address the CB group. Hobbs is certainly looking like an expensive misfire. It happens. This is just not a good year for it, especially considering Nixon's mostly weak performance.

 

[tynimiller]

That's fair enough, but I'm sure we can all agree that we're not getting from Hobbs anywhere near what we paid for. We've spent half a season trying to square-peg him into a round hole, and it's been an expensive failure.

He didn't get top of market but for sure was paid to be a starter and he absolutely is not being that. Right now his value will be if something causes Bullard to miss time or have to play more safety for us. Hobbs just can't hack it outside it seems and that gamble, at least this early on in it - appears to have been a failure.

If it is a massive failure I wouldn't put it past Gute to walk from him next year even....only save a $1M on cap but if you're not going to play the guy, send the message to others - we don't want to keep guys around merely because of contract.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Whiff is making zero contact….thats a player that has lost his starting spot or doesn’t even have one to lose….which Hobbs is appearing to fit but Banks is a sure starter when healthy.

Not saying great starter but whiff is a pure miss of something

We can agree to disagree, but given the amount of money that Banks was given, 4 year $77M, he has been a whiff so far. 2 more strikes and the batter is out.

 

[tynimiller]

We can agree to disagree, but given the amount of money that Banks was given, 4 year $77M, he has been a whiff so far. 2 more strikes and the batter is out.

Banks was paid to be a starter and has been? How is that an utter whiff is all I'm saying. Whiff means you had an objective or target and you completely, unequivacally didn't accomplish it at all, not a little bit, not just missed...you missed it entirely. You shot an arrow at a target and didn't just miss the bullseye or the rings around it...your arrow ended up missing the ENTIRE 24 by 24 inch target.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Banks was paid to be a starter and has been? How is that an utter whiff is all I'm saying. Whiff means you had an objective or target and you completely, unequivacally didn't accomplish it at all, not a little bit, not just missed...you missed it entirely. You shot an arrow at a target and didn't just miss the bullseye or the rings around it...your arrow ended up missing the ENTIRE 24 by 24 inch target.

Context is everything my friend.

Thus, I will repost my original statement:

Both Hobbs and Banks appear to be real whiffs by Gute, at least so far. I think it is still too early to throw in the towel on either. I also think that we will see better play out of both of them as they settle into their roles.

So yes, if you want to be purely grammatical, no player that gets on to the field and plays as they were intended to, could be considered a whiff.

Curious, is Jaire Alexander a "whiff", so far, for the Ravens, in your opinion?

 

[tynimiller]

Context is everything my friend.

Thus, I will repost my original statement:



So yes, if you want to be purely grammatical, no player that gets on to the field and plays as they were intended to, could be considered a whiff.

Curious, is Jaire Alexander a "whiff", so far, for the Ravens, in your opinion?

Jaire wasn't paid to be a for sure starter at his numbers... $4M outside corner money is TINY and depth/role type guy and with known injury issues. Baltimore brass didn't hold the same expectations to Jaire that we can hold Hobbs to.

 

[Voyageur]

On Hobbs? If he isn't going to work out, it's time to consider trading him to someone desperate for a CB and bank a low pick, eating the cap space loss. We need players, not guys eating up cap and not being of any value tot he team.

Banks still has some real future value. He's not the quickest "reader" in the group so he needs time to get on the same page as the guys beside him. I've seen a lot of guys come into Green Bay who people decide hasn't got the tools but it's really more about a level of confidence that they need to develop. He needs to be coached up to find what he can do best to help the team.

I've never quite understood why so many people don't see Bullard's value to the team. He has been developing quite rapidly to be honest. Think about how long he's been here and the role he's playing. Not everyone is destined for the HOF the day they step onto the field but this kid (23 years old) has been slowly carving out a spot for himself out there in a role that so few players really learn how to play well because it encompasses so darned many variables and puts them in a position where they not only have to take on less weighty wide receivers, but often RBs and TEs who have some bulk. Remember, Javon is about what"? 5-9 or 5-10, and goes at most about 200#. Yet he's making those tackles and still brings under 4.5 speed to the position.

For so long I've heard people say that we should look at the INTs, sacks, and tackles a defender makes to determine how good they are. I disagree. I look at the stats, figure out how much time they spend on the field, and look at the number of missed tackles, and stats like 13 showed to determine a guy's value. The gaudy figures don't show a guy that opponents won't throw at, it's those deep dive figures that tells you that the opposition is throwing away from him because they don't like the results when they throw at them.

 

[Firethorn1001]

On Hobbs? If he isn't going to work out, it's time to consider trading him to someone desperate for a CB and bank a low pick, eating the cap space loss. We need players, not guys eating up cap and not being of any value tot he team.

I don't even think that is feasible. Packers are at 12M cap and he is 16M dead cap cost.

 

[tynimiller]

I don't even think that is feasible. Packers are at 12M cap and he is 16M dead cap cost.

There is zero blocking of a trade of Hobbs. Just because dead cap is more than this year's hit doesn't mean you cannot trade someone....we traded Rodgers with A MASSIVE difference.

I don't envision nor would support trading him this year at all. NOW if this year plays out as it likely will that we are a better team with Valentine and Nixon outside than Hobbs and all he is serving as is primary backup both outside and inside for Bull - than I fully understand if some team would give you a 7th or 6th for him next draft trade him then....saves just $1M but again getting him out of the locker room sends signal to the guys here, we won't cater to those with the bigger salary...don't deliver you will be moved to make room for those that do.

 

[OldSchool101]

Good points. Playing Hobbs in slot on running downs, and Bullard on passing downs makes sense. It's the best way to treat a bad situation (with Hobbs).

I agree Bullard's future is probably best at S. He's a strong guy and more suited to the physical play of a safety. It gives Hafley another option to blitz with a safety, something McKinney is doing now on occasion, even Williams. Would be nice to vary that from play to play and confuse the offense. That is, have both McKinney and Bullard show blitz with Williams deep, and then rushing one and dropping the other back in coverage.

Fortunately the S group is solid. I think Gluten will have to wait until the offseason to address the CB group. Hobbs is certainly looking like an expensive misfire. It happens. This is just not a good year for it, especially considering Nixon's mostly weak performance.

Yes. We seem to have quite a few guys who can play a similar role. Yet I’m not sure that any can play good out on the boundary or on an island. Hobbs, Williams, Bullard, Nixon, Oladapo all kinda fit a similar Role.
Nicon is an anomoly because he can play boundary. He’s super scrappy and I like his attitude and his physicality is unmatched. However my concern with Keisean is he draws a ton of flags. In some ways it’s not all bad because it seems to frustrate his opponent or keep them off their game (look at
Metcalf etc. )

 

[OldSchool101]

There is zero blocking of a trade of Hobbs. Just because dead cap is more than this year's hit doesn't mean you cannot trade someone....we traded Rodgers with A MASSIVE difference.

I don't envision nor would support trading him this year at all. NOW if this year plays out as it likely will that we are a better team with Valentine and Nixon outside than Hobbs and all he is serving as is primary backup both outside and inside for Bull - than I fully understand if some team would give you a 7th or 6th for him next draft trade him then....saves just $1M but again getting him out of the locker room sends signal to the guys here, we won't cater to those with the bigger salary...don't deliver you will be moved to make room for those that do.

https://www.packersnews.com/story/sports/nfl/packers/2025/10/23/pete-dougherty-answers-reader-questions-on-nate-hobbs-trade-rumors/86833359007/

Interesting article I accidentally encountered while looking to his position with us.

We might not benefit immediately for sure. So then it comes down to another based on a draft pick. Your spend $$ either way, but if we could loosen a roster spot (which are valuable) to gain a player in a needed area, plus garner a late Draft selection, this could be feasible. The issue is who wants him if he’s pigeon holed to playing 1 role and he’s not exactly cheap? It would take the right offer and I’m not sure we’d get one in real-time. He’s a dilemma, but his $$ is already largely settled and it won’t change much until 2026.

That said, if someone took his contract we’d save $9mil Cap NEXT season. So for me it all comes down to deal him now or deal him later.. what’s the draft pick? A 7th? No thank you. A 5th? I’m going to throw in a Pink Bow and overnight his A! lol. The only other obvious trade scenario that could work is for a player that fits our immediate need. The probability is fairly low this type offer comes around and the $ works.

It’s also not ideal to sign a player and give up on him (even though he’s played poorly). Prudence is a valuable tool and sometimes we get too jumpy. It’s not going to cost us much to work through this dilemma short term. A roster spot? Yes. 1.2mil? Yes. Potential Loss of a 7th rounder etc? Maybe.

 

[tynimiller]

https://www.packersnews.com/story/sports/nfl/packers/2025/10/23/pete-dougherty-answers-reader-questions-on-nate-hobbs-trade-rumors/86833359007/

Not going to read all the Q and A - since replying to my post, does Dougherty claim he isn't tradeable?

He isn't going to be this year, nor IMO should he...but he is for sure tradeable if they wanted.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Unless there is a massive uptick in the level of play by the Packers existing corners, the key to beating the Packers will be to attack their CB's. That isn't easy to do if the the OL doesn't give the opposing QB time, but when they do, a good QB will surgically take apart the Packers defense.

If that uptick in play doesn't occur, I expect CB to be a position that Gute throws the most resources at in the offseason.

 

[OldSchool101]

Speaking of Resources. Aidan just got paid

Lions giving Hutchinson 4-year, $180M extension

The Lions are signing star edge rusher Aidan Hutchinson to a four-year, $180 million contract extension that includes $141 million guaranteed, his agent told ESPN.

www.espn.com

 

[tynimiller]

Unless there is a massive uptick in the level of play by the Packers existing corners, the key to beating the Packers will be to attack their CB's. That isn't easy to do if the the OL doesn't give the opposing QB time, but when they do, a good QB will surgically take apart the Packers defense.

If that uptick in play doesn't occur, I expect CB to be a position that Gute throws the most resources at in the offseason.

Yeah and without a first round pick I think the uptick concept or idea might be we see Gute sacrifice affording a resigning or two at the cost of bringing in a bonafide at worst CB2 level outside corner.

 

[OldSchool101]

Not going to read all the Q and A - since replying to my post, does Dougherty claim he isn't tradeable?

He isn't going to be this year, nor IMO should he...but he is for sure tradeable if they wanted.

Kinda responded to show I’m bit the only one out there exploring moving on from Hobbs. It’s not to say you were right or wrong, just that’s it’s plausible. From what I gathered Pete said it’s not super advantageous or will it have some profound immediate effect. So it’s more that it’s not an ideal time because there’s not much immediate benefit. Which I can see that. The argument against a trade being we might be able to repurpose him for lack of better terminology. Hobbs has shown ability at times both in Las Vegas and in Camp. Might be more switching his role. In the meantime Niemann just tore a muscle, so there’s a chance he could get involved on Teams in the meantime.