Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Packers at Bears Pre Game Thread
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="OldSchool101" data-source="post: 1083859" data-attributes="member: 10086"><p>Good points [USER=15739]@Krabs[/USER]. Let’s talk football!</p><p></p><p>Those are massive injuries if both Burden and Odunze are out. That = Micah imo. Now my thought is we played them last time without Odunze also. So the net result is minus Burden.</p><p></p><p>This brings up a thought I’ve had recently. Obviously we all know that when a high performing player goes out? It’s going to negatively impact that team. Particularly at QB first, then other premier players behind QB. This is my opinion, but the greatest impact of a loss happens during that game IF it’s an earlier in-game injury, such as Jayden Reed was Week 2?</p><p></p><p> The longer the affected team is separated from the injury (across time) the more the Coaching Staff can close the gap by preparing for that injury answer. Now I’m not suggesting the affected team will be made “whole” the following week, if ever. However there have been cases of depth players coming in and performing admirably. Which closed the gap on the loss.</p><p></p><p>GB only had 6 days to respond to losing Parsons. It’s still better than an “in-game” injury though. With Reed and then Kraft it took a few weeks to kinda get our Bearings. Then eventually got Watson (who has similar to Kraft-like impact) she then returns Reed. Inbetween we had bumps and bruises and it was noticeable.</p><p></p><p>The Packers were 5-1-1 with Tucker playing his usual 90% snaps. Once those snaps dropped under 50% (Carolina)? We are 4-3.</p><p></p><p> <strong>Receiving leaders through Tuckers injury were: </strong></p><p>Doubs- 2 games</p><p>Kraft- 2 games</p><p>Golden-2 games.</p><p>Jacobs- 1 game</p><p><strong>Receiving leaders once Kraft fell under 50% snaps or out: </strong></p><p>Since Kraft played regular it’s:</p><p>Watson 3 games</p><p>Doubs 2 games</p><p>Wicks 1 game</p><p>Reed 1 game</p><p></p><p>Now what’s interesting is we all probably realize it takes a game or two to rebound or respond from an injury loss. Yet here we seem to be in relatively good shape IF Watson returns.</p><p></p><p>Golden.</p><p>This will be Matthew’s 3rd game back from injury. Yet he only played 5 snaps against Chicago with zero production. He played 35% snaps last week and we began to see glimpses of his former self. His usual earlier season snaps they kept him around 70%, so that gives an indicator that we expect him to continue to rise off last weeks snaps. Possibly to limit Watson a little bit also. Golden is an +add in Chicago we didn’t have last meeting.</p><p></p><p>Reed.</p><p> We have to remember that this at Chicago game is only Reed’s 3rd game back from injury. In our 1st Chicago meeting? he played 25 snaps (47%) and was shaking rust. Last week at Denver he played 43 snaps (63%). He’s normalizing. Reed missed practice yesterday, but for personal reasons not injury. He returned to practice today and seems ready to pick up where he left off.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="OldSchool101, post: 1083859, member: 10086"] Good points [USER=15739]@Krabs[/USER]. Let’s talk football! Those are massive injuries if both Burden and Odunze are out. That = Micah imo. Now my thought is we played them last time without Odunze also. So the net result is minus Burden. This brings up a thought I’ve had recently. Obviously we all know that when a high performing player goes out? It’s going to negatively impact that team. Particularly at QB first, then other premier players behind QB. This is my opinion, but the greatest impact of a loss happens during that game IF it’s an earlier in-game injury, such as Jayden Reed was Week 2? The longer the affected team is separated from the injury (across time) the more the Coaching Staff can close the gap by preparing for that injury answer. Now I’m not suggesting the affected team will be made “whole” the following week, if ever. However there have been cases of depth players coming in and performing admirably. Which closed the gap on the loss. GB only had 6 days to respond to losing Parsons. It’s still better than an “in-game” injury though. With Reed and then Kraft it took a few weeks to kinda get our Bearings. Then eventually got Watson (who has similar to Kraft-like impact) she then returns Reed. Inbetween we had bumps and bruises and it was noticeable. The Packers were 5-1-1 with Tucker playing his usual 90% snaps. Once those snaps dropped under 50% (Carolina)? We are 4-3. [B]Receiving leaders through Tuckers injury were: [/B] Doubs- 2 games Kraft- 2 games Golden-2 games. Jacobs- 1 game [B]Receiving leaders once Kraft fell under 50% snaps or out: [/B] Since Kraft played regular it’s: Watson 3 games Doubs 2 games Wicks 1 game Reed 1 game Now what’s interesting is we all probably realize it takes a game or two to rebound or respond from an injury loss. Yet here we seem to be in relatively good shape IF Watson returns. Golden. This will be Matthew’s 3rd game back from injury. Yet he only played 5 snaps against Chicago with zero production. He played 35% snaps last week and we began to see glimpses of his former self. His usual earlier season snaps they kept him around 70%, so that gives an indicator that we expect him to continue to rise off last weeks snaps. Possibly to limit Watson a little bit also. Golden is an +add in Chicago we didn’t have last meeting. Reed. We have to remember that this at Chicago game is only Reed’s 3rd game back from injury. In our 1st Chicago meeting? he played 25 snaps (47%) and was shaking rust. Last week at Denver he played 43 snaps (63%). He’s normalizing. Reed missed practice yesterday, but for personal reasons not injury. He returned to practice today and seems ready to pick up where he left off. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Members online
CarryTheG14
SudsMcBucky
Magooch
Latest posts
Christian Watson signs a 4 year 110m extension
Latest: CarryTheG14
A moment ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Josh Jacobs facing charges…
Latest: OldSchool101
2 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
2026 Roster Thread - Semi-Live
Latest: OldSchool101
7 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Why I Love The 2026-2027 Green Bay Packers
Latest: OldSchool101
Today at 9:26 AM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Badgers Football 2025-2026
Latest: Pokerbrat2000
Today at 8:57 AM
Wisconsin Badgers Forum
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Packers at Bears Pre Game Thread
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top
