The offense must run through Jones and Dillon

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
6,359
Reaction score
1,717
Also that it's already rapidly "falling apart"! What a boondoggle that I get to help pay for...48MM in repairs in the next year, 280MM in the next decade. The New Jersey businessmen love their new investment...play well enough to sucker delusional fans into thinking this is the year we clear the dust from the case but not so bad as to unanimously warrant a total rebuild!
It's falling apart already? Wow. I'll admit it's a beautiful stadium, although as far as modern aesthetics, I prefer SoFi in LA.

And I agree with Poker that from a pure-football perspective, including all of its 100 year plus history, there just isn't a better experience than Lambeau. It's just such a simple architecture, yet perfect for watching football. And I credit the additions and innovations that 1) make it a year-long attraction and 2) don't detect from watching a football game. It would have been easy to get that wrong, and they nailed it! I think that was started by Harlan and Murphy has been involved. Certainly there may be others I'm forgetting.

I'm old enough to remember when the Packers had to play half their home games at the old County Stadium. Now there's a place where football should have never been played, may it RIP.
 

Schultz

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 8, 2021
Messages
2,688
Reaction score
1,548
While I get what you are saying, in which round do you plan on drafting this rookie? In 2024, if the Packers use their 2nd pick in the 2nd round on a RB, his contract would be around $1.6M+/year. Not to mention the "cost" of using the pick. Wait until the 3rd round and pick #91? Still at $1.4M/year.

I guess what I am getting at is this. If you don't have to break the bank on Dillon and use a Day 1 or Day 2 pick on a RB, you resign Dillon and use a Day 3 pick on a RB and hope to bring him along as your #3 and potentially your eventual #1. I don't think Dillon is going to get any high offers after his 2023 season, his best option might be to sign a 1 year "prove me" contract with the Packers and hope for a successful 2024 season that nets him a bigger contract in 2025.
IMO the Pack has tried the day 3 RB the last few years with little to no success. IMO it is time to draft one in round 3 or their 1st pick in round 4. IMO.
 

Thirteen Below

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 15, 2022
Messages
384
Reaction score
293
Yes, that is very possible for the NFL to do...but they won't. Fans & viewers will ALWAYS continue watching regardless of officiating accuracy. The NFL doesn't want to expend the money if there is NO PAYBACK. Also, controversy actually increases interest & potentially viewers so why should they reduce or eliminate it?
I think it would actually be very difficult to make that woirk, because the accuracy of GPS when determining the position of a moving object - especially a very rapidly moving object - is measured in feet (at best) and for this to work we'd need a bulletproof accuracy of a few centimeters. For the really close calls (which is, of course, where we need it to be the most reliable) we'd literally need it to be within about a half inch.
 

Thirteen Below

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 15, 2022
Messages
384
Reaction score
293
I still want Dillon on the roster but in the H-Back / FB role instead of Deguera. That dude missed too many blocks against SF in the backfield. Dillon should assume the John Kuhn role.
I'm going to go out on a limb here, and say there's a good chance is a better receiving option than Deguera anyway. I'm not sure what Deguera offers that Dillon can't.

In fact, I'm not sure where he even fits on the team at all next year. You could argue that if he's still on the roster in 24, we probably had a pretty lousy draft.
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
6,359
Reaction score
1,717
IMO the Pack has tried the day 3 RB the last few years with little to no success. IMO it is time to draft one in round 3 or their 1st pick in round 4. IMO.
Ty probably knows this, but how is the depth at RB in this draft class? I think the first round pick should be for a S, maybe a LT or C. Just depends who is there.

They have two picks in the 2nd round. Fine by me if they see value at RB with one of those.

There is FA as well. I don't know who is available. Considering how much the position has been devalued, maybe there's a guy there. Long shot.I'd prefer the draft.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
32,173
Reaction score
7,960
Location
Madison, WI
IMO the Pack has tried the day 3 RB the last few years with little to no success. IMO it is time to draft one in round 3 or their 1st pick in round 4. IMO.

Since 2018 when Gute arrived in GB, he has used 4 of his 61 draft picks on RB's, those 4 picks were pretty minimal investments:

- 2019: Dexter Williams; Pick #194 (Rd. 6)

- 2020: AJ Dillon; Pick #62 (Rd. 2)

- 2021: Kylin Hill; Pick #256 (Rd. 7)

- 2023: Lew Nichols; Pick #235 (Rd. 7)

Gute has also signed quite a few UDFA and bargain basement FA Practice squad RB's during his time. None really amounting to much.

I fully agree with you that waiting until the 6th and 7th rounds probably won't net the Packers much. If the plan moving forward is to have Jones on the team for at least 2 more years, I would prefer a different approach to finding our #2 RB (if Dillon isn't resigned) than the draft. Seems every year there are older once really good RB's available in free agency and this year is no different. Below is just part of the full list of RB's scheduled to hit Free Agency. Spend $3-5M on one of them and you probably get not just a proven quality 2nd RB, but a guy who can also start if Jones is injured.

You must be logged in to see this image or video!
 

Schultz

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 8, 2021
Messages
2,688
Reaction score
1,548
Since 2018 when Gute arrived in GB, he has used 4 of his 61 draft picks on RB's, those 4 picks were pretty minimal investments:

- 2019: Dexter Williams; Pick #194 (Rd. 6)

- 2020: AJ Dillon; Pick #62 (Rd. 2)

- 2021: Kylin Hill; Pick #256 (Rd. 7)

- 2023: Lew Nichols; Pick #235 (Rd. 7)

Gute has also signed quite a few UDFA and bargain basement FA Practice squad RB's during his time. None really amounting to much.

I fully agree with you that waiting until the 6th and 7th rounds probably won't net the Packers much. If the plan moving forward is to have Jones on the team for at least 2 more years, I would prefer a different approach to finding our #2 RB (if Dillon isn't resigned) than the draft. Seems every year there are older once really good RB's available in free agency and this year is no different. Below is just part of the full list of RB's scheduled to hit Free Agency. Spend $3-5M on one of them and you probably get not just a proven quality 2nd RB, but a guy who can also start if Jones is injured.

You must be logged in to see this image or video!
A couple of people have advocated for a D. Swift signing, which I totally agree with. I also like C.E.H., but it seems I am the only one. IMO scenario #1- re-sign Dillon relatively cheaply and draft a RB day 3. #2- Sign a cheaper type FA and draft a RB day 3. #3 Draft a RB Day 1. IMO -#2-#3-#1 are my order of preference.
 

Pkrjones

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 3, 2014
Messages
3,808
Reaction score
1,728
Location
Northern IL
I think it would actually be very difficult to make that woirk, because the accuracy of GPS when determining the position of a moving object - especially a very rapidly moving object - is measured in feet (at best) and for this to work we'd need a bulletproof accuracy of a few centimeters. For the really close calls (which is, of course, where we need it to be the most reliable) we'd literally need it to be within about a half inch.
With officials using push-button plungers (as contestants on Jeopardy do) in conjunction with stoppage of motion placement of ball can be extremely accurate. Ball position at a specified point in time (punt crossing sideline, forward progress ceasing, knee or elbow touching the ground, etc) so between button system & computerized GPS would be possible. This GPS system only needs to be "focused" on an area 53yds wide x 120 yds long so accuracy of fractions of an inch would be possible.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
32,173
Reaction score
7,960
Location
Madison, WI
I think it would actually be very difficult to make that woirk, because the accuracy of GPS when determining the position of a moving object - especially a very rapidly moving object - is measured in feet (at best) and for this to work we'd need a bulletproof accuracy of a few centimeters. For the really close calls (which is, of course, where we need it to be the most reliable) we'd literally need it to be within about a half inch.
The bolded part is a misconception, as least for me. Since there are times the refs are missing spots by a full yard, having technology that gets it correct withing a foot or less would be better IMO.

After reading a few more articles, most of which were 2-3 years old, I think that by combining a radio-frequency system, in concert with optical tracking and/or GPS, they are getting closer and closer to being able to automate the process of spotting the ball. I didn't realize it, but they are already using a tracker in the balls to better spot punts that sail out of bounds. Once they come up with a relatively quick system that uses accurate technology, I see them switching to it.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
32,173
Reaction score
7,960
Location
Madison, WI
With officials using push-button plungers (as contestants on Jeopardy do) in cojunction with stoppage of motion placement of ball can be extremely accurate. Ball position at a specified point in time (punt crossing sideline, forward progress ceasing, knee or elbow touching the groun, etc) so between button system & computerized GPS would be possible. This GPS system only needs to be "focused" on an area 53yds wide x 120 yds long so accuracy of fractions of an inch would be possible.
LOL....get out of my head!
 

milani

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 11, 2012
Messages
4,187
Reaction score
1,506
I still want Dillon on the roster but in the H-Back / FB role instead of Deguera. That dude missed too many blocks against SF in the backfield. Dillon should assume the John Kuhn role.
Now that is what the Packers need to hear!
 

Poppa San

* Team Owner *
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Messages
12,832
Reaction score
2,744
Location
20 miles from Lambeau
The bolded part is a misconception, as least for me. Since there are times the refs are missing spots by a full yard, having technology that gets it correct withing a foot or less would be better IMO.

After reading a few more articles, most of which were 2-3 years old, I think that by combining a radio-frequency system, in concert with optical tracking and/or GPS, they are getting closer and closer to being able to automate the process of spotting the ball. I didn't realize it, but they are already using a tracker in the balls to better spot punts that sail out of bounds. Once they come up with a relatively quick system that uses accurate technology, I see them switching to it.
How many transponders in the ball? One at the inflation point or opposite of it? One at each point plus four around the fattest part? Just one at each point and the position of the rest of the ball interpolated? Are you going to use the tracked place of the ball to align the chains? If the ball is spotted 3" back of where the tracker placed it, are you going to halt play to move it? In a hurry up? When the offense is trying to catch the defense in a quick change-out? Way too many questions to further slow the game. Calls of favoritism when the other team gets a free breather.
 

Thirteen Below

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 15, 2022
Messages
384
Reaction score
293
With officials using push-button plungers (as contestants on Jeopardy do) in conjunction with stoppage of motion placement of ball can be extremely accurate. Ball position at a specified point in time (punt crossing sideline, forward progress ceasing, knee or elbow touching the ground, etc) so between button system & computerized GPS would be possible. This GPS system only needs to be "focused" on an area 53yds wide x 120 yds long so accuracy of fractions of an inch would be possible.
Except that there isn't a GPS system in existence that can track a moving object any more precisely than a couple of feet, so current GPS technology doesn't offer a solution.

But I wonder if RF sensors could be installed at the goal line, to work in conjunction with passive IR tags on the ball. They're light, tough to damage, and don't need batteries. A tag crosses the goal line, it's a touchdown.

It would only work for goal line situations, though. It wouldn't work for general, "4th and inches" scenarios all over the playing field, because basically the entire field would have to be one massive RF sensor.

The NHL has experimented with puck tracking technology for years, but so far they haven't really dialed it in. Seems like it would be easier with a puck, too.
 

sschind

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 5, 2014
Messages
4,988
Reaction score
1,256
Except that there isn't a GPS system in existence that can track a moving object any more precisely than a couple of feet, so current GPS technology doesn't offer a solution.

But I wonder if RF sensors could be installed at the goal line, to work in conjunction with passive IR tags on the ball. They're light, tough to damage, and don't need batteries. A tag crosses the goal line, it's a touchdown.

It would only work for goal line situations, though. It wouldn't work for general, "4th and inches" scenarios all over the playing field, because basically the entire field would have to be one massive RF sensor.

The NHL has experimented with puck tracking technology for years, but so far they haven't really dialed it in. Seems like it would be easier with a puck, too.
Not much of a tech person but could RF sensors be attached to the chains and set at the first down markers. You wouldn't need it over the whole field, just the official first down stick.

I remember when the NHL first tried the red flash thing on the puck. If I real it wasn't a big hit.
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2014
Messages
14,289
Reaction score
5,683
IMO the Pack has tried the day 3 RB the last few years with little to no success. IMO it is time to draft one in round 3 or their 1st pick in round 4. IMO.
Yes and in particular this draft. There are around 5-7 guys in the 2024 draft that are what I’d call consensus Day 2 RB’s.

If we’re looking for RB help, it’s a thin class at the top (what I’ll call Bonafide Top 100 overall). That creates a natural frenzy for those top 5 or so. Teams WILL reach just based on need > Supply

For me personally. We could either get aggressive in RD3 and reach just a little by selecting a Top 100 area guy at #88
Or
Draft 2 in that Rd4-6 area, where there are 14-16 RB prospects graded 101-200 overall. I do have confidence in our Staff to get a good one in Rd4-6 areas, especially if we double down there.

Again, if Dillon takes a shorter team friendly <$3mil type (yearly) deal, I’d go after 1 RB in that top 125 as you said. Then stagger contracts by drafting another one in 2025/2026
 
Last edited:

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
6,359
Reaction score
1,717
I got new internet service, it must run through Austria. :coffee:
At a time like this I miss ol Cap. Would be fun to see him back pedal on Love.

Now I was clear I didn't like Love either. I'm also clear now that I was wrong.
How many transponders in the ball? One at the inflation point or opposite of it? One at each point plus four around the fattest part? Just one at each point and the position of the rest of the ball interpolated? Are you going to use the tracked place of the ball to align the chains? If the ball is spotted 3" back of where the tracker placed it, are you going to halt play to move it? In a hurry up? When the offense is trying to catch the defense in a quick change-out? Way too many questions to further slow the game. Calls of favoritism when the other team gets a free breather.
Good points. And placing some kind of trackers, GPS or otherwise, is really the only way I can think of to track the ball.

Just me, but I don't see ball placement as a big enough issue to make these changes. I mean taken to an extreme, trackers could be put on players - in their helmets, pads, or cleats - the sideline boundaries could have trackers as well as the end zone and pylons. And while we're at it, why not the goal posts - especially those cases where the ball is close to one of the uprights but sails well over it?

Some parts - or rather most parts - should be left to judgement. Balls will be placed incorrectly from time to time, but I don't see the need to automate it. I like challenges, and I also like that they're limited to two/game and come with a price if wrong. We saw what happened when PI was allowed to be challenged for one year. I just don't see the need to change a whole lot.
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
6,359
Reaction score
1,717
Except that there isn't a GPS system in existence that can track a moving object any more precisely than a couple of feet, so current GPS technology doesn't offer a solution.

But I wonder if RF sensors could be installed at the goal line, to work in conjunction with passive IR tags on the ball. They're light, tough to damage, and don't need batteries. A tag crosses the goal line, it's a touchdown.

It would only work for goal line situations, though. It wouldn't work for general, "4th and inches" scenarios all over the playing field, because basically the entire field would have to be one massive RF sensor.

The NHL has experimented with puck tracking technology for years, but so far they haven't really dialed it in. Seems like it would be easier with a puck, too.
Good point on GPS, although I think it's gotten more accurate, but not by much.

I can remember working with utility companies and city engineers to use GPS for approximating gas and electric transmission and distribution infrastructure. Cities also used GPS for road placement. But that was the 90s and GPS was only reliable within one hundred feet or so. There was still a lot of "eyeballing".

Yeah it is down to inches now, but that's the complaint with ball placement usually - off by inches, certainly no more than 12-24".
 
Last edited:

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
32,173
Reaction score
7,960
Location
Madison, WI
I mean taken to an extreme, trackers could be put on players - in their helmets, pads, or cleats - the sideline boundaries could have trackers as well as the end zone and pylons.
This is already in place. However, they are using the devices on the players to track metrics that allow the team to evaluate the players performance. Balls are equipped with a chip as well. As I said before, punts that are kicked high out of bounds are being better spotted using technology.

Just me, but I don't see ball placement as a big enough issue to make these changes.
Watch the spotting of the ball after Jones's 3rd down carry, followed by Love rushing up and sneaking on 4th down. Had the Umpire not screwed up, Packers pick up the first down and who knows how the NFCCG changes from there.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
32,173
Reaction score
7,960
Location
Madison, WI
How many transponders in the ball? One at the inflation point or opposite of it? One at each point plus four around the fattest part? Just one at each point and the position of the rest of the ball interpolated? Are you going to use the tracked place of the ball to align the chains? If the ball is spotted 3" back of where the tracker placed it, are you going to halt play to move it? In a hurry up? When the offense is trying to catch the defense in a quick change-out? Way too many questions to further slow the game. Calls of favoritism when the other team gets a free breather.
Actually, if and when they get the technology correct, it will help to speed up the game. More importantly, no longer will they need to rely on an official that doesn't have a good angle or view of the actual spot of the ball to do it.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
32,173
Reaction score
7,960
Location
Madison, WI
Back to RB's.

Curious to know what people think of former Badger RB Braelon Allen. If he is still available late in round 3, would you be happy if the Packers used their #91 pick on him? For me he is kind of a cross between Dillon and Jones.
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
6,359
Reaction score
1,717
This is already in place. However, they are using the devices on the players to track metrics that allow the team to evaluate the players performance. Balls are equipped with a chip as well. As I said before, punts that are kicked high out of bounds are being better spotted using technology.


Watch the spotting of the ball after Jones's 3rd down carry, followed by Love rushing up and sneaking on 4th down. Had the Umpire not screwed up, Packers pick up the first down and who knows how the NFCCG changes from there.
Interesting, thanks. I probably should have known that tracking devices are on players - but didn't know there is a device in the ball to track a high punt that goes out of bounds. It looks like the ref makes a judgement call, and then paces off the yards to place the ball. So does he have a tracker with him?

And yeah, selfishly I would favor anything to get a new spot on that Love sneak. But again if the accuracy is only inches, not sure what help it provides, much less what other technology/devices would have to be deployed to make the spot accurate.
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2014
Messages
14,289
Reaction score
5,683
The bolded part is a misconception, as least for me. Since there are times the refs are missing spots by a full yard, having technology that gets it correct withing a foot or less would be better IMO.

After reading a few more articles, most of which were 2-3 years old, I think that by combining a radio-frequency system, in concert with optical tracking and/or GPS, they are getting closer and closer to being able to automate the process of spotting the ball. I didn't realize it, but they are already using a tracker in the balls to better spot punts that sail out of bounds. Once they come up with a relatively quick system that uses accurate technology, I see them switching to it.
exactly and Why not use technology. Anytime the league can reduce errors to a minimal degree, they should implement that process as long as it’s safe and cost effective.
We don’t need to change the entire game here. I think some people are over blowing this out of proportion.


When Oldschool has to break out the screen shots to mark a spot properly that’s a full yard off for the NFL??
I think it might be time for change :coffee:

PS. It would be a funny commercial this Super Bowl. Have the Refs ask Siri on intercom for her decision on several challenges! Then she can answer with a sarcastic or degrading response that speaks to just how out of touch we are with her microscopic capability :laugh:
Such as “perhaps you’d rather throw a Red Rag and do a Roundtable Conference??!”
 
Last edited:

PikeBadger

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jan 19, 2013
Messages
6,355
Reaction score
1,740
Yes and in particular this draft. There are around 5-7 guys in the 2024 draft that are what I’d call consensus Day 2 RB’s.

If we’re looking for RB help, it’s a thin class at the top (what I’ll call Bonafide Top 100 overall). That creates a natural frenzy for those top 5 or so. Teams WILL reach just based on need > Supply

For me personally. We could either get aggressive in RD3 and reach just a little by selecting a Top 100 area guy at #88
Or
Draft 2 in that Rd4-6 area, where there are 14-16 RB prospects graded 101-200 overall. I do have confidence in our Staff to get a good one in Rd4-6 areas, especially if we double down there.

Again, if Dillon takes a shorter team friendly <$3mil type (yearly) deal, I’d go after 1 RB in that top 125 as you said. Then stagger contracts by drafting another one in 2025/2026
More importantly imo is getting one with good intangibles, good fit for both the offense and team culture. The difference in athleticism between the 3rd "best" and the 20th "best" according to draftniks is likely miniscule and team fit as well as intangibles are far more likely to be the determinants as to where these guys get drafted.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
32,173
Reaction score
7,960
Location
Madison, WI
And yeah, selfishly I would favor anything to get a new spot on that Love sneak.

I am not referring to the QB sneak play, I can see how that was very hard to mark. What I am referring to is the play before the sneak. I wish I had a clip to share with you, but I have watched it over and over and over.....on YouTubeTV. Once Jones is down, the side judge is doing his usual "foot down, running in with his hand up to spot the ball, his spot is a half yard short of the first down, you can see it clearly as he is running in. Then the Umpire (Mike Morton) comes from BEHIND the play, like from midfield, grabs the ball and marks it a FULL YARD short of the first down, 1/2 yard short of the side judges spot. With the Packers hustling to get a play in fast, nobody seems to notice. Had the ball been spotted correctly after Jone's run, Love's sneak picks up a first down on his 4th down QB sneak.

didn't know there is a device in the ball to track a high punt that goes out of bounds. It looks like the ref makes a judgement call, and then paces off the yards to place the ball. So does he have a tracker with him?

From my understanding, the ref, spotting where a high punt travels out of bounds can consult with the booth for a more accurate spot.

Chris Simms statement at the 1:35 mark (video below) sums up my feelings on the matter to a T. I'm looking for information on how it went in the USFL. But I like how the USFL is trying to modernize some of the football rules.


You must be logged in to see this image or video!
 

Latest posts

Top