The one thing is, they have several dime packages and often like to use a safety at one of the slots. So I don't know how much four-CB dime they'll do.
Pretty sure they do. Fridays are rest and recovery days, they don't practice (and instead have a short but real practice Saturdays), and on those days each players has to do several recovery stations among a menu of recovering modalities. I'm pretty sure that or something like it is one of them.
I saw that report and wasn't sure what to make of it. Mike Lombardi is well connected, a former high-ranking personnel guy in the league, so you have to take it seriously. But for the reasons mentioned earlier, it's hard to see them making a deal. And they've planned so much of their offense with him being a part of it, I just don't see them cutting him. I just don't see them trusting their rookie WRs enough to do that, Montgomery notwithstanding.
That's a point I meant to make about Rodgers' cap numbers. They can push the bigger cap numbers to later years becasue the cap keeps going up $10M a year. As to your question, not looking like it's coming any time soon. Based on how the Thursday night packages have gone, it sounds like the media deals will keep going up -- the structure in the future might change, with more income coming from streaming services.
If I'm Reggie M, I sign him to a contract with about $45M or $50M guaranteed and a $20M average, I'm guessing something in that vicinity gets it done. I don't trade him unless the offer is mind-blowing. But it's not his call, it's Gruden's.
You're talking about Rodgers, and yeah, that was a non-starter. A deal like that probably won't get done until a player of Rodgers' caliber is a true free agent, and I don't think that's ever happened. When Manning was a free agent, he was clearly nearing the end.
No, if I were predicting a 53 I'd probably have him on it. He's on pretty much all the No. 1 special teams, that's usually a sign a player is going to make it. Not always, but usually. They keep at least four OLBs, and he's been working in the top-four rotation all of camp.
I'm guessing he'll have to wait another year. They have the fifth-year option on him, and he's in only his third season, so they have him for two years after this one. So they'll probably wait until going into that fifth season.
I'd argue he took a little less than he could have pushed for. Reminds me a lot of his last deal, which made him the highest-paid at the time, but not by all that much, and he was passed up within a year or so.
I think he said he just jammed it in an unusual way when he made contact with another player with his arms out in warm-ups.
Yeah, we'll do all that, including picking playoff teams and the SB, the weekend of the opener. I'd suggest giving it the Col. Klink treatment: Whatever we say, do the opposite.
I'm sure that would depend on the price. If he has an average year, his value on the open market might not be high. But is he a guy they could move on from next year? Sure. His experience after a year in Pettine's defense would be valuable, safeties are primary communicators in this scheme. But if they're looking so save a little money, they very well could move on. It's a year-to-year business, so it mostly depends on how he plays this season.
There's a lot of truth there. I'm not sure anybody has that good an OL, and I doubt more than a couple teams have much depth to speak of. That's one of the effects of the cap and free agency, you can't pay all those linemen. So the Packers might not be that much worse off in depth than most teams -- their starting five is probably better than average. But they're still perilously thin at tackle and as hard as it is to get depth, they still need to find a way to do it. The Spriggs pick really hurts there, unless he improves a lot in a short period of time.
It's looking like Lucas Patrick is the most likely No. 2, and I'd think McCray would be the emergency No. 3.
I don't have any numbers or charts to back this up, but I've been cover this team for 25 years and this has to rank among the healthiest camps I remember. I still think a decent amount of it is luck. But McCarthy also has six years of GPS data, too, so he probably has a lot of useful information from that. They don't share much of anything about what they've learned for proprietary reasons, but it has to help -- the GPS data tracks heart rate and explosive movements, so they can in effect see how fatigued guys are after X hours on the practice field, X number of reps, etc. I also wonder if moving all the practices to late morning or later -- they started all practices ins this camp anywhere from 11:15 a.m. to 12:15 p.m. helped also. My suspicion is one of the reasons McCarthy did that -- in past camps, the first maybe six or seven practices started at I believe 8:15 a.m. -- was to see if it would reduce injuries. The GPS data might have suggested as much. But I don't know that for a fact.
It's looking that way, at least a little. We still have only a small sample size to choose from -- I'm thinking Thompson would have made this Hundley deal too -- but the early signs are pointing that way. At least a little.
I hadn't seen that. I know the Saints like Hill -- Sean Payton has made some fairly strong public declarations. But they would have to change their offense a lot to play him, because so much of his game is based on his ability to run. I watched some of their game last Sunday and he played pretty well -- moved the ball, threw a TD pass. But that trade has to make you wonder what they really think.
OK, time just flew today with all the news to chew over. But this has to do it, time to move on to other duties. This could be a tough call on Boyle. If they really like him, they shouldn't even risk it. I was thinking if they wanted to make sure he would make to the practice squad they shouldn't even play him this week -- they didn't last week. Two games wouldn't be a lot for other teams to go on. But it sounds like he's going to play this week -- McCarthy said so yesterday, and the Hundley trade means there's more time available. If he plays well tomorrow, then the risk of losing him goes up. If they really think he could be a No. 2 in a year or two, I'd probably keep him on the 53 and not even take the chance. Not seeing any reason to look for a veteran backup. And with that, let's call it another chat. Thanks everybody for coming by, an especially interesting chat today with all the news, thanks for coming by and sharing your thoughts. Keep checking back to PackersNews.com over the next few days for game coverage and of course the cutdown to 53 over the weekend. We'll chat again next week. Until then, take care.