No, the fullbacks have been getting snaps in practice, and they're important for special teams. So I'm thinking at least one makes it, and maybe both. Maybe they'd go with only three tight ends if they kept two FBs.
It's not new, it's something they do every camp, but the volume is a lot different this year. In the past few years they did 1s v 1s, etc., from the first practice through Family Night, with no game planning in those practices. Then in the week of the preseason opener, it was a mix of both, and if I remember right, more heavily weighted to practicing the game plan. And by preseason game 2 it was almost exclusively game planning, with only an occasional 1 v 1 mixed in. So the difference is the volume, much more 1 v 1 leading up to the opener this year. On Monday they didn't do any game planning, so it was all 1 v 1, 2 v 2, and yesterday only I think one period of game planning.
No update, nobody's been able to get any news on that. I texted a scout from another team about him, got a one-word response, "Flake," without much elaboration other than he was "strange" at the Senior Bowl. So don't know what's going on there. Yeah, that could hurt if he's given up the game, because they lack depth on the OL and have done well drafting in the fourth and fifth rounds at that position group.
Yeah, they practice the day before the games, and those are closed to fans and media, and I think there are at least a couple other days that are open on the public-media schedule but where they're going to practice. For instance, after next week's preseason game they have three straight open days on the camp schedule, but I'm sure they'll be practicing at least one of those.
Not a lot of incentive for Rodgers to do that because that's close to what he'll make with the tags anyway. If he's going to do a standard-type deal, he's going to want a lot of guaranteed money, I'd think well over $100M. Maybe $110M? $115M? $120M?
Yeah. He's been out a couple days with a sore shoulder (his non-surgical shoulder) but when he's played you can see a lot of ability. He gets beat, they all do, but he's long and athletic.
You know, I wouldn't rule him out for the practice squad. He's doing OK, not sure he's been any worse than Lancaster, the DL from Northwester who I think got the biggest bonus of the UDFAs, or at least was kind of the big name of that group. I've watched him on a few plays, he's done OK on most of the plays I've watched. Was talking with Wisconsin State Journal columnist Tom Oates about him yesterday, he said the guy's been underestimated every step of his career.
That's something that would be worth exploring more in-depth. There was a time when that undoubtedly was true. But the Packers have a big national following, always sell out and are trying to generate extra revenue from the Titletown project. So I'm not prepared to say, straight out, that the Packers would be a big disadvantage. Not saying you're wrong, you very well might be right. But I'd have to dig into that before declaring anything one way or another. That might not be a given, as it was 25 or 30 years ago. It's an interesting question. But I guess I have trouble seeing the NFL going away from its current model, it's been so successful financially for all the league's teams. The NFL union just isn't as strong as baseball or basketball. There are way more players, and the careers are shorter so guys can less afford to strike and give up paychecks. So it's hard to see this system changing except on the margins.
Actually it was Bob Skoronski that Starr mentions. From what I've heard Skoronski graded out as well or better than the other OL game to game. But I'm not sure that means he's actually better. I just think the Lombardi era has run its course. There are guys from farther back who deserve a good look, like Bobby Dillon (1950s safety), Verne Lewellen ('20s and '30s back and punter), and Lavvie Dilweg ('20s and '30s end).
Burks is an interesting looking guy, he's tall and rangy, which makes him a little harder to throw over, and it looks like he runs well enough. He's had some plays in practice where he's looked pretty good in coverage over the middle against backs and TEs. Still not sure on Jones yet. He's big and fast, has some instigator in him. Not sure how his side to side movement is, though.
Yeah, that's kinda one of the two or three big questions. When Capers came in they drafted Matthews or Raji and jumped from being in the 20s defensively to top 10. The change in coaching and adding those guys made a difference -- Capers got a lot out of Woodson playing him in that slot role. Pettine emphasis inside rush and coverage, so they signed Wilkerson and drafted Alexander. Pettine makes a really good early impression, comes across as smart and direct and tough. But that's talk. But we'll have to go by what happens on the field. I'd say there are decent reasons to think they'll be noticeably better, though not sure about top 10. They're better at CB if King stays healthy -- Williams looks like an upgrade from last year, and Alexander flashes ability, he plays quick and fast even though he lacks height. So that's basically three guys they didn't have last year (King was hurt the whole time he played). The DL looks pretty good with Clark on the rise and Wilkerson added. Outside rush is a big question. So I think there's potential between the personnel upgrades and coaching change for the defense to be, as you say, credible. I'm not out and out predicting it, with the way the league is today you really don't know if there's a lot of improvement or decline until they start playing real games. But the changes in coaching and personnel probably were for the better.
Not really, just kinda sounds like he didn't like football enough.
It's cap and age. They had all those outstanding defensive players, but it's tough to stay on top on defense, because most players don't stay at the top of their games for more than two or three years, and all those guys are different ages, it's just hard and expensive to keep a group like they had together. They spent big but then guys started declining and got hurt -- Sherman, Bennett, Chancellor, Avril, Thomas all got hurt, and with the exception of Thomas got old too. I'm probably forgetting someone, too. Now we'll see just how good Wilson really is or isn't.
Really quiet right now. That said, these things tend to pop out of the blue, so you never know when they might announce a new contract. But in the offseason I thought it was a given. At this point, judging by how things are going and asking around, it's looking like there's a decent chance they don't do an extension this year. Former Packers exec Andrew Brandt, who has a column with SI.com, wrote a little more than a week ago that he doesn't think a deal will get done this year, not enough incentive for both sides at this point. He very well might be right.
No, Fackrell is ahead of him. Biegel has had a few good rushes in team drills from what I've seen, but nothing consistent and not eye-catching. They haven't done many one-on-ones, so not much to go on there. As I said earlier, he's one of the guys to isolate on Thursday night.
Then they should cut those two and make him the No. 2. I don't think that's going to happen. Boyle definitely has an NFL arm, he's got plenty of zip on the ball. And you have to like the way he stands in the pocket and delivers. Early in camp he looked about as good as the backups, but in the last couple practices it's clear they're ahead of him, just so much for rookie QBs to learn. Unfortunately, have to end this chat here, other duties to attend to. But what good questions and so many, only got to a fraction of them. If I didn't get to yours try again next week. Very much enjoyed chatting with you, thanks for taking the time to stop by. Until next week, take care.