Packers-Bears Monday postgame chat with Ryan WoodSkip to main content

Packers-Bears Monday postgame chat with Ryan Wood

Submit your questions for our 11 a.m. Monday chat following the Packers-Bears game Sunday afternoon.

    Hey folks, welcome to our weekly postgame live chat. The Packers went on the road Sunday afternoon, and it looked like the six road games that came before it. In a word, unproductive. This time, the Packers saw their eight-game win streak at Soldier Field end, and in the process watched the Bears win their first NFC North crown since 2010. Let's get to your questions.
    How has the NOT signing of K Mack affected this season ? Wonder if Gute looks in the mirror and thinks he really blew it. I understand the money was there if needed .
    I think it took Brian Gutekunst about five seconds to be disappointed he couldn't secure Khalil Mack. There's a reason the Packers were in on Khalil Mack. They just couldn't secure him, because the Bears were positioned to make a better offer. But there's no question Mack's arrival in Chicago swung the NFC North. He is their Aaron Rodgers, a player of such immense talent at such an impactful position, his very presence changes the fortunes of a team. And he's under contract the next five years, so Mack isn't going anywhere.
    The 2019 first round draft pick should be the best right tackle on the board. The end of round 1 pick should be the best guard on the board because right now, Rodgers is hearing footsteps in the pocket. Your thought?
    As I just posted that comment on Khalil Mack not going anywhere, I thought to myself, Boy, that makes offensive linemen even more important. It's like the rest of the NFC North has treated the edge rush position with Aaron Rodgers in Green Bay. Rodgers isn't going anywhere, so you better deal with it. The best way? Load up on pass rushers who can get to him. Well, Mack isn't going anywhere, so how best to deal with that? Be ever vigilant with the offensive line, especially offensive tackle. David Bakhtiari is one of the NFL's best, but the Packers could go younger and more durable on the right side. I'd be surprised if it was the first-round choice -- the Packers desperately need edge rushers -- but certainly I think offensive line is high on their priority list this spring.
    What is your take on Josh Jackson? Jackson has 35 tackles, no picks, no sacks, and regularly looks late to the action, or flat out behind the receiver on longer routes. And let's not even talk about that lazy forearm tackle he tried in the 1st half that led to a 1st down.

    He played mostly zone in Iowa, allowing him to jump routes based on instinct, so maybe man corner isn't his deal. But for a guy rumored to be a 1st round talent, he is greatly underperforming his stock and makes me question if a shift to Safety in the offseason might not be a worthy test. Thoughts?
    Well, there's a reason Josh Jackson wasn't a first-round talent. A number, to be more specific: 4.56. That's his 40 from the combine. Compare that with Jaire Alexander's 4.38, and it's clear Jackson doesn't have the speed to make up for rookie mistakes. Jackson's 4.56 doesn't disqualify him from being a good corner at some point. Bashaud Breeland ran a 4.62, and Packers fans are rightfully hoping he returns. Casey Hayward ran a 4.57, and he's become one of the top cornerbacks in the league after leaving Green Bay. You can run what Jackson runs and play the position at a high level, but if you don't have 4.3 speed, it makes your play speed (namely, your recognition) all the more important. It's hard for rookies at any position to have great play speed. All of this is to say I think it's too early to know what Josh Jackson will be. It's possible he never pans out. But I think we'll learn for sure over the next two years.
    Hi Ryan-- Do you think the Packers will try to find Rodgers' successor in the 2019 draft? Or 2020?
    I was wondering this myself last night. The Packers are positioned with their late-first-round pick to take an area of need early, then take a fringe first-round quarterback and let him develop late. I wouldn't completely rule that out, but I think it's unlikely. The reason is the Packers just paid Aaron Rodgers uber money -- yes, that's a term I just made up -- to be their franchise starter not the next two or three years, but the next five or six. Once you go down that path, it's hard to alter it. So I think they keep throwing their assets into the win-now pot instead of planning for the future in 2019. But it will be interesting, and certainly it's worth keeping in mind.
    Sounds like when greenbay tied the game all the officials calls started to go against them
    I thought the officials were terrible in the Packers game against the Falcons one week earlier. I did not have the same impression yesterday.
    Other than the Northwestern Coach, why would any top coaching prospect be interested in the Packers job with the Albatross off Rodgers and his elite contract and attitude, but without the elite play???
    Because if you measure him against other historically great quarterbacks, chances are his level of play will once again return to elite.
    Ryan- with the game tied at 14 each, Rodgers had two sure TD passes that were badly thrown.. passes he normally completes with ease (even under pressure). Is his issue physical or mental, or a bit of both?
    Sure sounded like he was suggesting it was physical yesterday. Rodgers said he tweaked his groin on that Hail Mary throw before the half, and it bothered him all second half. Which makes sense because, my goodness, his throws were off. Let's not forget he's had a significant knee injury all season, too. How much the injury has affected him this season, we really won't know until next year.
    The one consolation is that trubisky is an average QB no more. The Bears will be good till they have to overpay him
    Yeah, I made mention to this last night, and apparently drew the ire of the entire city of Chicago. Lookit, Mitch Trubisky is not bad, but he certainly is not good. At least not right now. Will he be at some point? Quite possibly, but I don't read the future. What I know is Packers fans should be highly, highly thankful the Bears drafted Trubisky and not Patrick Mahomes. If you paired Mahomes with this Bears defense, I believe that's a team with the potential flirt with 19-0. This Bears defense is so great, it could still make a run at the Super Bowl, but having an average quarterback makes that much more difficult.
    Are any of the following in a Packer uniform next year and if so why? Mathews, Perry, Cobb, Bulaga, Graham, Kendricks.
    It's possible all of them are, and none of them are. Wow, what a definitive answer for you, huh? Let's unpack each of these on their own:
    Clay Matthews: He's not an elite pass rusher anymore, and won't be paid like it. Nor should his role for any defense be rushing the passer 75 percent of snaps. But he's a heady veteran who knows the game, and he's got enough athleticism to be a rangy player off the ball. His versatility is an asset. On the right deal, say about $5 million, I think he has value to the Packers as a linebacker who can split time off the ball and rushing from various positions as a No. 3 OLB. If not that, then no.
    Nick Perry: He's the one guy I can't seem coming back. Too injury prone. Hasn't been that productive when healthy. His original contract called for a potential out after three years and it's only been two, but probably time to cut the losses.
    Randall Cobb: His quarterback sure seemed to stump for him yesterday. And watching the Packers offense this season, Aaron Rodgers has a point. Cobb gives them something they don't have otherwise, a slot receiver who can really work the underneath stuff well, especially those 8- to 10-yard slants. But the Packers are loaded with developmental talent at the position. Rookies EQ and MVS could really take off, and Geronimo Allison is now a veteran who has shown good chemistry with the QB. So the Packers are positioned to move on.
    Bryan Bulaga: Yes, the Packers could upgrade here for sure. It's hard to trust Bulaga can stay healthy, especially with his 30-year-old season coming next year. But I thought the Packers could make a change at RT last year with Bulaga coming off the torn ACL, and they stayed with him. The reason: they had so many other things to address. Just like this offseason. So I wonder if they put RT on the back burner again, focus on other areas and have Bulaga play out the final year of his contract in 2019.
    As for Jimmy Graham and Lance Kendricks...
    Graham is an interesting case because the Packers made him the highest-paid TE in the NFL at $10M APY last spring, and with it you expect a game changer. Graham hasn't changed games. Far from it. But his numbers aren't bad, and given the Packers struggles in finding stability and production at the position, that's not nothing. They've got a $5M roster bonus due to Graham in March, and if they pay it, he'll count $12.6M against the cap next season. That's a ton of money, and they're not getting that kind of return. Either way, they'll need to target someone younger, probably high in the draft. But that's another case for Graham to return. Who better for a young TE to learn from? I could see one more year, even if the production hasn't matched the contract.
    As for Lance Kendricks, he's done little in his two seasons with the Packers, but I don't see why he couldn't return on a league minimum deal. There's nothing wrong with a Lance Kendricks being your Nos. 3 or 4 tight end. He just can't be the No. 2, as he has been this year and last.
    Hey Ryan,

    What does your gut tell ya about Rodgers? Is this just a fluke year and he’ll be a top 5 QB again next year or is this just who he is now?
    I saw him play poorly in 2015 and the first half of 2016, then in the matter of a week or two flip the switch and play the QB position about as well as it's ever been played by anyone ever during run the table. He's only 35; that's the new 30 in for elite QBs in today's NFL. And his knee injury is real. So I do think he'll return to a high level of play again. Doesn't mean he will because, again, I don't read the future, but that would be my guess.
    Will a handful of guy go on IR this week so practice squadders can come up, and so we can maybe poach some practice squad guys off other teams ?
    Good question. I'm not sure. That would make sense, because it's officially the developmental point in their season. So I'm sure you'll see some of that. There's a good case for allowing Rodgers to finish the season, though. He's continually talked about not being on the same page with his young receivers. Yesterday, he said the "details" are off. Well, these next two games gives them a chance to work on that heading into 2019. I think that could be valuable time for them.
    Who will back up Williams the next 2 weeks at RB ? The FB, or a practice squad callup ?
    I'd be really surprised if Aaron Jones played again this season, so this is a good question. Jamaal Williams is the only other RB on their 53, but the Packers have Lavon Coleman and Malcolm Johnson on their PS. Could see either of them called up. We've also seen Brian Gutekunst call up players from other PSs and place them on the 53, so that's also possible. Either way, you'd think a move will be made here.
    As noted, the Bears D is pretty good.
    Definitely good/great talent there. But how much of their current success is Fangio?
    And if he were to leave to take a HC position (no idea how inclined he is to do so), isn't anointing that D & team, as some are doing, a bit premature?
    I think you're exaggerating when you say the Bears are being anointed. There's a big difference between saying the Bears are positioned to go on a run of success, as I believe, and saying it will actually happen. Now, if the Bears had Patrick Mahomes, all bets would be off; I'd call it in a heartbeat. But they do not. There's no question Vic Fangio has had a big impact on this defense, which was top 10 last year before Khalil Mack arrived. There's also no question the Bears defense has top talent in guys like Mack, Akiem Hicks, Roquan Smith, Kyle Fuller, Eddie Jackson... you could go down the list. So to say it's all Fangio would be grossly inaccurate. It's a players game, and the Bears got players.
    Everyone keeps talking about Rodgers knee and not the screws in his shoulder. Why?
    Because the knee is injured, not the shoulder.
    Do you agree it would be irresponsible to play Rodgers these next two games? I just can’t see the value outweighing the risks. Building chemistry with receivers who may or may not be a part of the next regimes plans running plays that won’t be there next years seems like a waste of time and could potentially injure Rodgers for nothing.
    No, I see a lot of value in him getting as many snaps as possible with his young receivers, who he's going to be throwing to next year.
    I hope the Packers start making decsions for the Green Bay Packers not Aaron Rodgers. Next head coach needs to be best leader they can find. He can hire inovative OC and DC and let them run the show on their side of the ball. Can't acquiesce to Rodgers. The new resigm hopefull will be there longer and have to lead the transition. Leadership will be key to next few years.
    I get your argument, but I think the premise is flawed. If this season taught us anything, the best thing for Aaron Rodgers is the best thing for the Green Bay Packers. Those two are not mutually exclusive. The Packers need their quarterback to play at the highest level, and putting him in the position to do that is of the utmost importance.
    Seems like opponents always show up and play up to the Packers (at least at QB) but this year Packers seemed to mostly play down to their opponents (even at QB). Is that an accurate assessment?
    From San Francisco to Los Angeles, I think you saw the Packers play to their opponent's level a lot this year.
    Hey Ryan, I know AR surpassed 400 throws without an INT, but how many of them were thrown away? Also, when was the last time AR lead the pack to a road win?
    Why does it matter how many were thrown away? A pass out of bounds is better than an interception. You could ask how many times did he fail to take a necessary shot at a big play for fear of throwing a pick, but if he's got nothing available, there's nothing wrong with the ball going out of bounds. And his last road win was at Dallas last year, when he threw a last-second, game-winning TD pass to Davante Adams, one game before breaking his collarbone.
    Do you think the Packers will try to resign Breeland, perhaps to a one- or two-year contract?
    I'd think he'll be back on a one-year deal, yes.
    I recall a season about four years ago where Rogers was just off. He was missing passes and just wasn't the Rogers we knew. He bounced back from that season and he will bounce back from this season.
    Yep. You're probably right, Jeff. Everyone is a prisoner of the moment, and that's fine. Aaron Rodgers, in this moment, has not been good. Doesn't mean he'll never be good again.
    Do you find it interesting how quickly supposed fans have jumped on Rodgers not just with deserved criticism but with a vitriolic rage that to me shows they are fans as much as spoiled brats who are ready to be on the bandwagon in good times but want to trash our own players if they have an off year. I expect our fans to be better than this. Do you?
    Nope. That's what fans do.
    Ryan - Rodgers is having an all-time poor year by (hopefully) his and our standards. However, why is there so much chatter about Pack fans wanting to move him? Why hit the panic button after 1 year?
Powered by Platform for Live Reporting, Events, and Social Engagement