Really tough question, I've gone back and forth on this over the last week or so. I guess I still lean Lacy, but that could change if Davis shows much later in the season. Having a run threat can help a quarterback so much. The Packers could face a really tough call there if both are able to return. The defense has missed Shields whenever he's been gone.
Yes. And look, a lot of money is blown in free agency. There are way more bad signings than good ones. I still think he could do more signings like he did with Cook this year, and if they don't work, there's not a lot lost (shorter term deals, etc.). Same with in-season trades for a CB. You have to feel pretty good that the player is better than what you have, and worth the price of whatever draft pick you give up. Those picks are valuable, you can't go dealing them willy nilly.
Wondering the same thing myself. He didn't do much of anything on special teams in the preseason, so that hurts his chances. It looks like four guys for sure won't suit up because of injuries: Cook, Randall, Rollins, Starks. So that leaves three other inactives.
I think that was just someone in online media doing one of those lists, "five trades that should happen." I don't think it was based on any reporting. So I don't know if Cleveland is even willing to trade him, and whether the Browns would ask for a lot. If they want a lot, well, the guy is 27, so he's as good as he's going to get and could start declining in a year or two. He is a talented player, so if he's available it's something the Packers would have to look into. But it's not at all clear he's available.
Sorry, that's the question I just answered, don't think it posted initially for some reason.
Flores was added to the practice squad, not the 53. I'm not at all convinced Shields will be back this year, but I don't have any inside information on that, just suspicious that they put him on IR after he'd already been out a month.
Not necessarily. They could go one more year at his current price and see how much stronger-better his knee gets -- but he is 31, so age is working against him. They also could try to re-work his contract, though he'd have to agree to it. Sometimes players will do it if they can earn back the lost money via incentives, or if they get some guaranteed money even if their overall pay is lowered.
I don't know if it is, but knowing that he's had four concussions in the NFL and another back in college, and that he missed a month last year with one and will miss at least 12 weeks with one this year, retirement at minimum has to be on the table.
Haven't picked a score yet, but have to go with Atlanta. Falcons have a really good offense with run-pass balance, a good QB and a great WR who probably will have a good day against the Packers' thin CB group.
That's what I'm wondering. It almost forces the Packers to play more of the quick-rhythm passing game.
He's on PUP and returned to practice last week, so the Packers have three weeks from the day he returned to either activate him to the 53, place him on IR or cut him. I'm assuming they'll eventually activate him, but since he's not starting they might wait the full three weeks to see what their roster/injury situation is at that time.
I'd guess Lang. Even though Perry has been excellent -- and he really has -- I'd think they'd wait on him because of his injury history. My guess is they'll want to make sure he gets through the season healthy, and if he does then they'll pay up before he hits the free agent market in March.
That is something to think about whenever you're talking about firing a coach or GM with a team that's been pretty successful. You better feel pretty sure you can do better. Elway did it and it worked; Philly did it and it didn't.
I'm picking the Falcons. But if the Packers won it wouldn't be a total shocker. The Packers are only, I think, three-point underdogs. Rodgers could go off, the Packers' run defense could play great. I wouldn't pick the Packers but of course they still can win.
That's a lot. I'd say no.
Maybe he will. These guys do a lot of press conferences so they say a lot of things, some of them true, many not. We'll have to judge them on what they do.
Linsley answered earlier, except for the part about his role. At this point in the season with the OL playing well I don't think they'd go back to him as the starting center for the rest of the season. That's always subject to change depending on circumstances, but that's my best guess. Nothing new on Cook. He's no longer wearing the walking boot. He's not playing this week, and on Sunday he'll be five weeks removed from his injury. So I'd think there's a decent chance he'll be back in a week or two, but just guessing there.
I'd think that's a possibility.
I think he has to play well on a more consistent basis. He had a really nice game last week, but it's worth remembering he was matched against a bottom-of-the-depth-chart CB (Bausby). Adams needs to show he can consistently get open and catch the ball week after week. Yes, that should have helped his confidence a lot. The Packers need somebody at WR to break out and give them a big lift.
It's a way to have guys on a de facto short-term IR without having an actual short-term IR like baseball does. Then setting the limit at 46 for game day means everybody has the same amount of players on game day, otherwise one team might have five injured guys who can't play that week, and the other might have only two, so that would be a competitive advantage.
OK everybody, we went way overtime because of all the great questions but really have to go now. Sorry if I didn't get to yours, but remember we'll be doing this again next week, same time, same place. I think you make a good point. When I watched the coaches tape of that game from '11 earlier this week, the thing that jumped out to me was how willing Rodgers was to throw it to Jennings when he was covered or a had two or even three guys relatively near in zone coverage. Several times Rodgers just dropped back and threw it to him -- step, step, step, throw -- regardless. He obviously had great trust in him. And yeah, he probably needs to be more willing to throw guys open even if he doesn't have that same feeling for them. It could mean a couple more INTs over the course of the season but also might help get the offense in the rhythm it's lacked more often than not over the last year. He just seems to prefer to break the pocket to get something better, and sometimes it works but sometimes not. So this new offensive approach is interesting, because it includes a lot of four and five WRs, with short, quick throws. Thanks again everybody for taking the time, always a pleasure talking with you. Until next week, take care.