No updates on King. He's been out since early in camp, and I've been thinking/assuming that with his history they're not going to mess with it and are waiting for the opener to bring him back. Don't know that for a fact, but that's my best guess.
It looks to me like Boyle this year gives them a better chance than Kizer last year. Beyond that I really can't say much to answer your question either way. Boyle's never played in a real game.
No, I don't think the Packers handle it more poorly than other teams. Maybe under Thompson they did a little bit, they rarely even released a statement when they cut guys, even really prominent players. Gutekunst always releases a statement when he parts with a big-name guy now. It usually ends badly for players in the NFL no matter the team. It's a harsh business in many ways, and to run a team well you have to make cold-blooded decisions on personnel. If you read the news from around the league daily, like on Pro Football Talk, there often are players upset by their release. It has to hurt no matter what, somebody is saying they don't want you. It's just this business. The thing that matters most for attracting free agents is the contract offered. That and maybe the chance to play with a really good QB.
He was a really, really big recruit to Alabama, like one of the best prospects coming out of the state of Texas that year, I know that. He has really good measureables, that's true too. So he does not look like your typical UDFA. I can't remember all the details about what happened at Alabama but he had trouble getting on the field regularly. He's a big and free-spirit personality, that might have been a factor, and Alabama recruits really well at DB, so the competition to play CB there is uncommonly stiff.
It's borderline with him. He's had a really good camp, no getting around that. I read two roster predictions today, one by Rob Demovsky at ESPN.com and one by Bill Huber of SI.com, and if I remember right Rob had Shepherd making it and Bill didn't. It's a really close call. Bill made the point that there's a really good chance they get Shepherd through to their practice squad because he's 5-11 and runs 4.58, which as far as size-speed makes him a dime a dozen in the NFL. Lazard is 6-5, 227, which is a lot harder to find. Gutekunst obviously loves tall receivers and their big catch radius. On the other hand, LaFleur has said he likes having different body types at receiver, and Trevor Davis is the only smaller, quicker guy they have, so maybe that helps Shepherd. I'm inclined to agree with Bill, but it is true that Shepherd has played well and made some tough catches, plus is probably their best fallback in the return game if Davis is injured. But if Shepherd is on the practice squad and Davis gets hurt, they could just promote him.
That was the question on him going into the draft and remains the question today. He flashed ability in practice, no question, but hasn't done much in the games. I don't have a strong opinion on how he's going to turn out, I just don't know and would be making a wild guess. The old saying is that if a guy didn't sack the QB in college he's probably not going to do it in the NFL, but there are exceptions, such as Minnesota DE Danielle Hunter, he had 4 1/2 sacks in three seasons at LSU and has had 40 in four seasons with the Vikings, including 13 last season. I guess in the end, I still think Gary is more likely to end up being an interior player a year or two down the road. But personally, I think we need to wait until next season to get a good feel for what kind of rusher he'll be. Khalil Mack had four sacks as a rookie.
I wouldn't say he's a lock. I'd bet on him to make it but wouldn't call it a lock because of the money. But I guess in the end I have trouble seeing the Packers cutting him, I mean, it's a given the Bears would want him if the Packers waive him.
This might not be a surprise anymore, but it's sure looking like they might trade or cut Lane Taylor. They're giving Jenkins every chance in the world to win the starting LG job, and if they cut or trade Taylor they'd save $2.75M on on their cap. Maybe they can trade Taylor for an ILB.
I tend to think not, unless maybe there's one out there that has a history with LaFleur. It's just that, what are the chances any of these guys getting cut are any good? Really slim. QBs are so hard to find, and teams aren't cutting good ones. The best one who might become available is NE's Brian Hoyer, because rookie Jarrett Stidham is having a good camp. Maybe Hoyer would interest the Packers because he's played for Kyle Shanahan and thus knows the offense, and has a 16-21 record as a starter, so he's at least won some NFL games.
It's hard to keep straight, I had to look it up to be sure. Teams now can have up to four players who have two accrued seasons in the NFL -- to get an accrued season, a player must be on an NFL roster for at least six games (that includes being on IR) in a season. Players can be on the practice squad for two years, with one year counting as six weeks in a season. A third year on the practice squad is only allowed if the team keeps 53 players on their active roster at all times, which almost every team does.
I think they just wanted to get younger and save the money. Going into last offsason I thought he'd be worth re-signing at maybe $4M or so to play inside. The one thing we don't know and that wasn't addressed in the story about him this week was whether he was OK with playing inside. The Rams are playing him as an outside rusher, so maybe he would have preferred that anyway. And it could be the Packers think he's at a time in his career where he's going to decline fast. I guess push to shove I'd have tried to sign him to play inside, which they didn't do. But I'm not going to say they made a big mistake by not re-signing him. As harsh as it sounds, part of good team building in this league in being willing to part with guys, and knowing when to do it. More often than not it's smart to be proactive, which is where the saying "better to part with a guy a year early than a year late" comes from.
I wrestle with this one, there's not a pat, easy answer. The closest thing I have to one is that I find the Ron Wolf model really appealing. Draft one every-other year. You're going to miss on some-many, so try to keep two you feel good about in the pipeline at all times. If one pans out, eventually you can trade him or maybe get a compensatory pick for him, and then you bump up the No. 3 and keep drafting for a new No. 3. There are a handful of decent veteran backups, but only a handful, and if you're paying your starter the kind of money the Packers are paying Rodgers, it's really tough to pay a quality veteran backup, that's just too much money put into that position. So if there are three or four solid veteran backups, if you don't have one of them, I'm not sure any of the other veterans on the market are really worth it, they have some game experience but pretty much haven't won, so do they really give you a better chance? Probably not unless your young backups are not good at all. I mean, Blaine Gabbert? Matt Barkley? Do guys like that really give you a better chance to win than Boyle or Kizer? I doubt it.
Really interesting point, have to admit I never thought of that. I think you're right. I highly doubt any team would pick up Lewis. Something to watch for this weekend.
I'm not sure what to think.Rodgers said that's why he didn't play. But LaFleur hinted/suggested that if Oakland had played its starters, he would have played his. There were reports the FieldTurf there was a little harder and slicker than it is in the Hutson Center, so maybe that was why. But LaFleur at least hinted that he might have played the starters if Oakland had played its starters.
I'm thinking they'll limit his touches all season. He's just not a 20-plus-touch guy, his first two years suggest that over 16 games he won't hold up. Maybe more like 15?
Yeah, that's probably safe to say, though I do wonder if age is going to start catching up with Minnesota's defense a little this year. The Packers probably closed the with free agency this year. And they do have the best quarterback, if he stays healthy.
I'm thinking 2020 is more the make-or-break year.
I'd guess there's probably one or two jobs won in that last game most years.
Talked about this earlier but wanted to add, when I read the story, I don't remember him actually saying he would be fine with playing ILB. It talked about him having done it in the past, but it didn't say it was something he would have signed up for if he'd had the chance to be an outside rusher elsewhere. Maybe I skimmed over the part where he said he was willing to return at ILB, but if the financial offers were close, I wonder if he'd have gone where he was going to rush from the outside.
I tend to agree, as I've said on previous chats, I probably would have kept Daniels, for the exact reason you cite, pass-rush depth. But to some degree I look at it similar to Matthews, and that it's smart for teams to be proactive in replacing older players at least as a general approach. So I get why they did it. With Daniels, I think body type played at least part of the role. Gutekunst likes big, long, athletic guys on the DL, and Daniels wasn't that and had a fairly big contract and age working against him. Like I said, I'd have kept if it were my call. The more pass rushers the better.
I would think that's a really good possibility, either in a trade or after final cuts.
I think I can answer that while remaining objective. The reasons to think this team could be good are that the quarterback is healthy and their defense should be improved after signing three big-money guys and using their two first-round picks on that side of the ball. If Rodgers takes to LaFleur's offense, and if LaFleur turns out to be a good offensive mind, they could have a lot going for them, though it might take several weeks into the season for the offense to start to click. The concerns would be if the injuries have taken a toll on Rodgers and start affecting his play, or if LaFleur is over his head (that could happen to any rookie coach, even one who ends up being a good coach down the road), or if he and Rodgers don't mesh, or if Gutekunst swung and missed on the free-agent signings.