Hi everybody, let's jump right in. Yeah Jordan, I'd think that's a possibility for certain situations. We haven't seen it in camp yet, but, for example, on really obvious passing downs they could go with 7 DBs, with two of them being Burnett and Jones playing essentially as ILBs, and Clinton-Dix and Brice as safeties. Lots of possibilities depending on opponent matchups, injuries, etc. I don't think we'd see it a lot, though, like on early downs, for the reason you suggest, vulnerability to the run.
The Packers have been using GPS for more than five years. McCarthy has tweaked practice structure and also plans practice reps for individual players based on GPS data. So the Packers while not on the very forefront of that were among the first teams using GPS. He brings it up occasionally because I think the more data they acquire over the years, the more they learn and tweak things. My guess is the Packers and other NFL teams will start using those robotic tackling dummies either next year or the year after, as the technology improves. I think Pittsburgh and maybe one or two other teams have experimented with it in the NFL so far.
That's a possibility for sure, you have a good read on Thompson. A lot of it depends on how much Brice improves,and even Evans for that matter. The one thing is, they might be able to re-sign Burnett at a palatable price. He'll be 29 next year, so that could limit his value on the free agent market. So the Packers might be able to re-sign him for a reasonable price -- just guessing here, maybe in the $5M range a year, maybe a little more) thinking they'll get one or maybe two more years out of him. That's why it pays to wait, see how things go this season, the landscape could look different in February than it does now.
Overall, yeah, I think it would and should be considered a disappointment if they only win one SB with Rodgers at QB. Same for Indy with Peyton Manning, that was a golden time for the Colts but also a disappointment they won only one SB. The window for Rodgers isn't as big as it was, but he still could have eight, nine really good years left. So there should be plenty of chances. But yeah, they really need to break through there. It's so rare to get this kind of player at quarterback. It doesn't guarantee titles, but it guarantees being in the running. You've got to take advantage.
I'd be surprised if he's a top-tier back. Sure, that would be ideal, but his greatest asset is that he's a real receiver too. The league is going that way, with running backs who can split out and basically function as receivers. It creates all sorts of matchup/personnel issues and decisions for defenses. In New England's comeback in the SB last season, the key guy was James White, they kept splitting him out and throwing to him. That was the bulk of their offense in the fourth quarter. Montgomery here, McCaffrey getting drafted in Round 1 by Carolina. So Montgomery doesn't have to be a top-tier RB to be an effective and valuable player.
I was thinking about that yesterday. I'm guessing it will be Nelson or Adams, but they might not have anyone top even the 80-catch mark. Don't forget Montgomery too, he'll probably have plenty of catches -- not lead the team, but that cuts into everybody else's receptions. That should make them tough to defend, they should be able to find a good matchup somewhere against any team.
It's hard to get a feel for that stuff, media isn't in the locker room all that much -- basically a half hour a day when there's practice. You probably need to be in meetings, etc., to get a great feel for that. You do get a vibe that a few of the veterans -- Daniels, Bakhtiari, Rodgers, etc., -- are tired of going to the playoffs and sometimes even going deep, but not getting to the SB.
From what I've seen he's been OK against the run, sometimes gets some push and makes a play. His pass rush isn't real good, but as you suggest he's a run-down player. They very well might need him because of the Montravius Adams injury more so than Guion.
My guess is that he's going to be a really important player, even if his reception numbers are only OK or decent relative to the top tight ends in the league. We saw last year what a difference it made when Cook finally got healthy. Bennett isn't as fast but he's a huge guy (all of 6-6 and 275 pounds) and a good all-around receiver, and he's a much, much better blocker. That makes it tough on defenses, because if they go with passing personnel, the Packers will be better equipped to run the ball, and with run personnel he's a good receiver. My guess is he'll be an important guy, and if he gets hurt, that could be a problem, although the Kendricks signing could mitigate that some.
Can't argue with that. I have trouble seeing salary room for both Adams and Cobb next year -- Adams will be a free agent and could be in for a pretty big payday. So I'm guessing one of those two won't be back. Adams is younger and bigger, so if he has a good year, Cobb could be out. Matthews makes $11.4 million next year. I guess it all depends on how well he plays this year. He's still a talented guy, and their defense has a shortage of that kind of talent, so they lose some leverage there. If he has a good season, they might just have to pay. Or they could do a contract extension with him that lowers his cap number but guarantees him that money over a couple seasons. But if he misses several games because of injuries, or gets hurt and plays through it but can't play well because he's diminished, then who knows?
Yeah, he's playing with the starters on all four core special teams, and he's working I think with the No. 2s at ILB, He's got a real chance.
yeah, if I'm the Packers, that's by far my biggest concern heading into the season. Matthews and Perry have looked OK during one on ones. Fackrell hasn't done much in that regard as far as I can tell. Just today the defensive assistants met with the media, and Winston Moss said that while Fackrell is very assignment-sure he wants him to play with more abandon and become more of a playmaker, so that confirms to me that Fackrell has had a quiet camp so far.
Sorry about the delay, had to consult with a co-worker on something. No, I don't think Lang saying that had anything to do with not re-signing him. They tried pretty hard to re-sign him, from what I can tell might have gotten in the $8M a year range, but Detroit when higher so that's where he went. Everything i saw and heard suggested they wanted him back but in the end would go only so far financially. As for Evans, there's definitely a chance he could decline hard and fast, though at least in the first few days of practice I haven't seen any red flags. It's a long season, so it's something to keep an eye on. But i though that was a pretty good, strategic signing. The thing is, when Rodgers holds the ball a long time like you suggest, he's running around, so that usually helps the linemen -- not always, but usually. I know some people foresaw disaster last year after they cut Sitton and went with Taylor, and it turned out they were fine. My guess is they'll be OK here, too, but it is worth keeping an eye on how well Evans holds up.