Packers chat with Pete Dougherty Skip to main content

Packers chat with Pete Dougherty

Submit your questions for Pete's live chat Wednesday at noon CDT.

    I wonder the same thing too. I don't get why anyone would want to wear a necklace while playing.
    Tom thinks the Packers have to go out and find more playmakers for the offense now. I'm seeing marked improvement from week one to two and I expect to see the offense get better every week especially with the two best Ds already faced. I say be patient and let the offense and the young playmakers develop. What do you think?
    Like I said earlier, I still think there's some talent to work with there with MVS, Allison and Tonyan. I could very easily be proven wrong, but I still think one or even all of them could really improve as the season goes on. Who knows, maybe Kumerow or Davis will contribute more. I wouldn't just go out and get someone who's decent. But I do get Tom's point, and a guy like Green is at least worth looking into very seriously, because he is a super-talented guy as long as the injuries haven't degraded him too much, and if they think he has a couple really good years left in him. Those are big questions, but they're very much worth looking into if you're the Packers.
    Hi Pete! Well a nice and somewhat improbable 2-0 start for the Packers this season and they should be 4-0 going into the Dallas game! Again it's only two games, but my question is the proverbial "The good, the bad and the ugly" about the Packers season so far - The good: The defense has come better than advertised although they got gashed for several big plays vs. MINN and they've played two non-Aaron Rodgers quality QB's in Trubisky and Cousins. The bad: The offense hasn't clicked yet although they played a really good Bears defense and after an almost perfect 1st quarter vs. MINN they resorted to their usual conservative ways and they were what 0-2 on 3rd down and 1 opportunities and even missed that 4th and 1. You gotta get that ONE YARD when needed! And the ugly: Gotta go with Jimmy Graham. He's worthless and even you questioned WHY Green Bay kept him. Your thoughts on the good, the bad, and the ugly? Thank you.
    I wouldn't put that 4-0 into the books quite yet. They're a pretty big favorite this week against Denver, and I'm sure I'll pick them to win. But Fangio is a good defensive coach. But more to the point, Philly is the next week, and while it will be playing on the road on a short week (Thursday night), the Eagles are a very talented team with a talented QB, a much bigger challenge for this defense than it faced in Trubisky and Cousins (and will face in Flacco). I think the fast start against the Vikings in part was because, as a scout texted me this week, LaFleur had the chance to give them a bunch of unscouted looks that worked. But once they got past that, the Vikings adjusted, and the Packers' struggles returned, and there's a good chance the biggest factor in those struggles is the new offense and new coaching staff. Now, that could be proven wrong if they're still struggling in November. And yeah, I thought they should have cut Graham in the offseason and used the money elsewhere.
    When the Packers drafted Burks he was widely considered the answer for Will ILB. His injury last year was a setback but he played a lot when he got healthy. Honestly I didn't see much when he was on the field later in the season. Now he's coming back from another injury and he's still considered the 'answer'. I really question whether he's the 'real deal'. What am I missing?
    I don't know anyone who watched camp who is at all sure he's the answer. He has ability -- he's a fairly explosive guy for that position, has some cover skills that are needed to play there in today's game. He had his occasional moments in practice in camp before he got hurt. But I can't say he just jumped off the field in camp, either. He will have a lot to prove when he returns. He does have some speed an explosiveness that none of their other ILBs has though.
    The Vikings fans just took over Lambeau field last week. I thought the packers fans were one of the most Loyal fans.
    Am I missing something...??
    I think it's becoming more and more like that in the league with the ability to acquire tickets online, and the ability to make a nice profit selling your tickets. I watched the Eagles-Falcons game Sunday night, it was played in Atlanta but when the Eagles scored you could hear the roar of the Eagles' fans there. I don't blame season-ticket holders for selling their tickets for some games. I wouldn't be surprised if the GB season-ticket holders could pay for their season tickets (or a big chunk of the costs) by selling, say, the two most popular games. Owning season tickets isn't cheap.
    I'm guessing you mean for that ILB-S role. But he turns 31 in December and had that bad Achilles injury two years ago that was still giving him a lot of trouble last year, enough that the Chiefs cut him. I think he's not with a team, right? I'm guessing he's done.
    Any word on Savage's foot? I read he was injured on the last play & left in a walking boot. Hope he can go on Sunday!!
    I think Rob Demovsky reported that Savage won't practice much this week but that he's expected to play. I suspect his injury is one of several that convinced LaFleur to conduct a walk-through today instead of a normal practice.
    I saw Tom Silverstein's piece on offensive playmakers. I think he is right that someone will have to step up besides Adams and Jones. I feel like Tonyan and Vitale could become weapons in this system. Agree? Disagree?
    Glad you mentioned Vitale, I failed to earlier. I don't want to overstate his possible impact, but I do wonder if Vitale can add a little something to the offense. I'm not saying he could become a real playmaker or anything like that, but in camp before he got hurt he showed the ability to catch the ball downfield like a tight end -- he played a combo TE-HBack-RB role in college. He was getting a lot of snaps in practice before he injured his calf. He missed a few weeks and didn't get as much work after returning. But as the LaFleur learns his players and the offense evolves, maybe he'll play Vitale more, have two RBs and three WRs, for instance -- and try to get the ball to Vitale in the passing game some.
    Randall Cobb still seems to be playing pretty well. Considering the unknowns when it comes to our receivers (except Davante) was it a mistake to release Cobb?
    I would strongly argue they made the right call. Cobb was a good player here and a very tough guy and all that, but I have serious doubts he'll make it through the season or at minimum not suffer some injuries that diminish his play. That's one of the reasons this is a big man's game, very few of the small guys like him can sustain it for a long time, they get beaten up and lose some of the explosiveness that allowed them to make plays when they were younger.
    Sounds like Jenkins is going to win the LG spot sooner rather than later. Do you think the Packers will try and trade Taylor or keep him for depth? Any idea what they could get for him if they trade him?
    If that happens, I'd still keep him for depth if I'm them.
    Pete - There era rumors this past off-season that the Giants might be shopping Evan Engram. Do you think Jimmy Graham and a third (or second rounder) would be enough to get him? We could see immediate dividends and set up our TE room for years with Jace.
    I can't imagine the Giants would want Graham, they wouldn't want to pay that salary. Engram's interesting. He's young (25), can run, was a first-round pick. No idea what the Giants would want for him. Don't know if a third-rounder would get the deal done. I think LaFleur likes TEs who can block, so their presence on the field isn't a tip-off to whether it's run or pass. I have no idea what kind of blocker Engram is.
    Everyone is acting like losing this Raven Green guy is the end of the world. Where does that sentiment come from?
    He's been pretty solid so far. You're right that he's not a difference maker, but he's done the job, so it's more erosion than anything, because Amos has to move to his spot, and Redmond replaces Amos. Redmond isn't nearly as good as Amos back there. If Burks were playing and doing OK it would matter less.
    PFF this week had Dean Lowry as one of the top players on defense v. Vikings. He’s coming along well. On the other hand, looked at Lions stat sheet and Mike Daniels didn’t even make an assisted tackle. Anything I’m missing or did Gutey once again make the right move at the right time?
    Lowry has played well the first two games. I don't know how Daniels is doing other than what the stat sheet you point to says. At the time I leaned toward keeping Daniels for the pass-rushing depth, and that at some point in the season they'd wish they'd had him because of injuries or whatever. But I also said in these chats that I understood why Gutekunst cut him, and that he probably was concerned about the injuries catching up with him -- Daniels didn't practice all offseason because of a foot injury that landed him on IR late last year. So Gutekunst lived by the old personnel aphorism better a year early than year late, and yeah, it very well could be that this season will show he made the move at the right time. We can answer that better in December.
    I'm curious...why do you even bother answering questions where people are just pointing out you were wrong about something? Cast their pettiness to the wind, I say!
    It's only fair. I criticize the Packers for their mistakes, need to fess up for my own and at least explain my thinking when I'm wrong, which is often.
    I’m trying to get a sense of how much LaFleur can keep other teams off balance with new looks this year. Do you think he has enough plays to pretty much constantly keep other teams guessing what the “looks of the week” will be, or, because this is a new offense for this team, is he limited in the number of plays he can install because of the danger of overloading the players with too many plays to remember?
    I'd think he still can add some unscouted looks each week, for all I know the new offense might allow him to do it deeper into the season. McCarthy always used to say that there were a lot of unscouted looks for the first month of the season, then fewer after that. Maybe if LaFleur is keeping things a little simpler early this year it will make it easier to add things that he hasn't shown on tape later in the season.
    Pete, if I remember correctly, packers haven’t been 2-0 to start the season since 2015. Miami was also 3-0 to start last year and look at them now. Should we still proceed with caution or can we say the packers will be a very special team this year?
    Proceed with caution.
    Hi Pete. Why do they continue to snap the play clock with no time left? Seems like it gives the defense an advantage, knowing when the snap is coming.
    I thought they did a better job of snapping 10 or more seconds this last game than in the opener. Especially early, I thought they played at a pretty good tempo. I tried to monitor that throughout the game -- can't do it every play, too much to try to watch. But yeah, as the game went on it slowed down some. Also, I'm guessing that in the fourth quarter they might have wanted to run the play clock longer to shorten the game.
    I thought the defense missed a lot of tackles and also had several whiffs last Sunday.
    The Packers overall tackling leaves a lot to be desired compared to the bears and vikings
    I thought it was very good in the opener. There was Savage's glaring missed tackle on the Cook touchdown, no getting around that. But I'd say the tackling overall has been OK so far. The Bears are really good on D, you're right there. Mack, Hicks and Roquan Smith give them an outstanding front seven.
    Pete, 2 games in the books and haven't heard Rashan Gary's name yet. Is he suiting up on gameday ?
    He's not playing much, that's for sure, played only two series against the Bears, maybe twice as many snaps last week. That's not all bad, not sure how ready he's be to contribute a lot, if he were playing a lot it probably would be very up and down. The Smiths allow the luxury of sitting him a lot. Where they're going to need him as the season goes on is as a spot player and a dime rusher (3 OLBs and one DL). The Smiths are playing a lot, I have to think the Packers will want to rest them just a little more as the season goes on to help keep them healthy. So this can't be a redshirt year for Gary, even if he's not going to be a starter.
    Pete, the Packers have not lost a September home game to an AFC team since 2009. Is this a meaningless statistic?
    CJ Anderson looked good running with this offense with the Rams,...... He'd bring some thump when we'd need it and would cost us nothing?
    I guess I'm very much in the minority in thinking he wasn't that great with the Rams last year. Yeah, his average per carry was great (6.0 yards), but look how much the Rams' offense dropped off in the final month and playoffs after Gurley's knee acted up. Defenses didn't have to stop Anderson to beat the Rams, which they had to do with Gurley. So Anderson got his yards but defenses weren't keying on him and were able to take other things away with the threat Gurley provided. So I'm not seeing it with Anderson. Maybe I'm dead wrong, but I didn't get all the high praise he was getting, and the suggestions that the Rams were able to replace Gurley without a big dropoff. I thought the dropoff was huge.
    Tom Silverstein says (after dumping on MVS) "...but it was the kind of play where the offense needed an athletic tight end or elusive slot guy to get two more yards."

    What he really means, but doesn't realize it and never will, is that "we need an elusive slot - or out of the backfield - guy like Ty Montgomery." Tough, elusive, excellent receiving skills that could provide a whole new dimension to our third down repertoire.

    Management needs to publicly apologize to him (which they will never do because they are too proud) and trade to get him back.
    Have to disagree completely on this one Mr. Daddy. Montgomery just didn't have it. He wasn't quick and explosive enough to be a playmaker, he is not a dynamic player. He's an OK player at best. And everything was always somebody else's fault. I thought it was a really bad sign when after his huge fumbled KOR against the Rams, instead of simply saying he made a mistake, he turned himself into the victim by talking at length about the hate he endured Twitter. Don't get me wrong, Twitter is often a cesspool and the threats and invective hurled his way were despicable. But he didn't have to bring it up, and it struck me he was making himself the victim when if he was really holding himself accountable he'd have just said, "I made a big mistake," and left it that. I thought he was insubordinate in bringing that ball out of the end zone in the first place. I thought the Packers were totally justified in dumping him. He hasn't done anything in Baltimore to suggest they made the wrong call. So I have to disagree with you on this one Mr. Daddy, though love that you check in and ask a question on the chat just about every week.
    Back to Fitzpatrick & the Steelers. To me, that makes perfect sense. Minkah is only in year two of his rookie contract and is a proven commodity. The draft is often times a crap-shoot so why not go with a kid that has shown he belongs? Well worth a first round pick in my opinion even if the Steelers go nowhere this year.
    The hit and miss on the draft is very true, and the Steelers must really like him, as you say. Fitzpatrick is young. I'd just be really concerned if I were the Steelers that they could have a terrible year and have just given away a top-10 pick, maybe even top-five. That's where you have the best chance to get a special player, even if there is a crapshoot element to it. But you basically articulated why the Steelers did the deal.
    We aren't giving up two first rounders for Ramsey. No chance. We need to get an impact TE. There were two this year, both were gone by pick 20 this year. The impact-making ILB were both gone early. The top OL are gone too. The only need we can fill after round 1 with certainty is RB. Two firsts is way too steep.
    OK, this will have to be the last question, lost track of the clock, time to move on to other duties. I'm sure you're right, two first-rounders is a lot for a defensive player who's not a great pass rusher, though CB is a premium position as well. Of all the CBs in the league, I'd think Ramsey would get the greatest value in a trade -- he's the most talented cover guy in the league, and he's only 25 -- which is why I didn't dismiss it out of hand. Another issue is you'd have to pay him big, big money around the corner, and if you're concerned about what kind of guy he'd be in the locker room and on the sidelines that could be a deal breaker too, because money only empowers a guy. But he is a true difference-maker who's only 25 and plays a premium position in this league, and they don't become available very often. If Minkah Fitzpatrick is worth a first-rounder that might even be in the top 10, is it really that outlandish to wonder whether Ramsey might be worth two firsts? Or, more realistically, a 1 and a 3? That's why I won't just dismiss it. With that, we'll have to call it a chat. Thanks everybody for coming by, very much appreciated, always enjoy hearing what's on your mind. Thanks especially to our subscribers, who make our thorough coverage of the team possible. And remember, you can get our PackersNews app to get all our Packers coverage for only $4.99 a month, that's a really good deal. Until next week, take care everybody.
Powered by Platform for Live Reporting, Events, and Social Engagement