Content
X

Create Account

Or log in with Facebook

X

Log in

Or log in with Facebook

Cory's Corner: Make Aaron Rodgers Comfortable

By Category

Cory's Corner: Make Aaron Rodgers Comfortable

Aaron Rodgers is like a diving watch for a deep-sea diver.  

Rodgers proved just how much he was needed last year when he missed nine games with a clavicle injury — causing the Packers to run out of playoff air.

When the 2018 NFL Draft finally kicks off next Thursday, the Packers have to go with defense. That side of the ball just doesn’t have the bodies to compete. The talent on that side of the ball is well below championship level and below what an incoming defensive coordinator needs or wants to change a culture.

But the one thing that nobody is talking about is protecting the most important asset. There’s a reason Rodgers is No. 1 in NFL history in career passer rating (104.1), interception percentage (1.55) and touchdown-interception ratio (297-72). Those stats aren’t just amazing, they are illogical. To have one guy own those kind of career passer stats shows his precision and perfectionist attitude.

But it’s hard to maintain a flawless persona by lying on the ground. Rodgers is 34 and needs help. The most help that he can get won’t be in the form of a No. 2 wideout or even Jimmy Graham catching passes down the seam. Nope, Rodgers needs to feel like he can drop back and know that he won’t be dusting himself off in a matter of moments.

There are two ways to fix this problem: retool the offensive or diversify the offensive playbook. Ever since Josh Sitton got cut before the start of the 2016 season, the offensive line hasn’t been the same. Mike McCarthy grew tired of Sitton’s critical mouth, but he wasn’t the only player that has been tough on McCarthy’s play-calling.

And as far as the playbook goes, the isolation routes have to stop. Especially now that Rodgers’ favorite wideout in Jordy Nelson is gone. Don’t put the onus on the players to get open, create plays to get players open.

Rodgers wants to play until he’s in his 40s, ala Tom Brady. That very well may be. But he’s not even going to see 40 unless he limits the number of defensive mitts that get laid on him each play. When Brady is at his best, he barely gets touched — which obviously is a win-win, because Bill Belichick knows that he isn’t getting injured.

This is interesting because Rodgers and the Packers have been trying to hammer out an extension. Rodgers is under contract for two more years and the Packers could even deal dole out two franchise tags which would make Rodgers 38 and completely box out any potential long-term deal he had hoped of signing.

But that’s not how you treat the best passer in the game. Not to mention, how many free agents are going to want to come to Green Bay if that’s what happens to veterans?

Rodgers might be honest about not caring about being the highest paid player in the league. He may not want more guaranteed money than some countries make in a year.

But what Rodgers does want is some reassurance that will give him insurance. He needs to know that he doesn’t have to have an average passer rating of 80.1 when under pressure.

Rodgers has seen a lot of changes. He’s on his third No. 1 wide receiver and the lead running back hasn’t been consistent since 2015.

Rodgers needs to feel comfortable under center because it can only translate into victories.

NFL Categories: 
  • Like Like
  • 0 points

Fan friendly comments only: off Comments (104) This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.

Lare's picture

As I've said before, if you're going to spend $100 million on something you'd better do all you can to protect that asset. Give him weapons to use to diversify the offense and do what you have to do to protect him. Hopefully Gutekunst can do both before the season begins.

Barfarn's picture

Are you asserting Rodgers is not that good and lacks value to the TEAM?

Here’s the way I see it: Mark Sanchez needs to be protected and surrounded by weapons to be effective. In terms of AAV Brady only gets a $9M TE [Who actually BLOCKS], a $5M, $4M, $2M and $2M WRs and when his LT is due $62M, he’s gone. Brady doesn’t need great weapons or great OLs because he is great [He gets rid of ball]. Note: A QB that gets rid of ball in 2 seconds CANT be sacked even with 5 mediocre UDFA OLmen blocking.

NE’s top 5 top OLmen by pay (season result):
’18: $12.5M [so far]
’17: $18.7M (SB-Loss)
’16: $18.8M (SB-Win)
’15: $18.4M (AFC Champ-Loss)
’14: $14.3M (SB-Win)
’13: $19.6M (AFC Champ-Loss)
’12: $15.4M (AFC Champ-Loss)
’11: $10.2M (SB-Loss)

In terms of draft capital: Since ’11, NE used only one 1st or 2nd rounder on OL [’11-Solder-1st]

Obviously, Brady doesn’t need weapons or High pick/high priced OLmen to WIN. If one asserts Rodgers does, fine, he is what he is. But, if he can’t carry Brady’s jock strap, he shouldn’t be paid in Brady’s ball park.

Additionally at contract time Brady doesn’t think, “I’ze gonna be a sports owner mogul;” he thinks, “team, team, team;” and works for $5-10M under his market.

GB won a SB with Rodgers making $6.5M [under 5% of Cap], it’s 5 top paid OLmen making $14.5M [under 10% of Cap], WRs making $7.6M, $5.8M, $1.2M and $1M and cheap Donald Lee and Rookie Quarles at TE. This allowed top 6 D players to eat up 31.1% of Cap. And a defensive middle class [next 9] to take 16.45%. In 2017 the top 6 defensive players only took 26.5% of Cap and the middle class [Next 9] 7.26%.

Rodgers already gets double anyone else [12% of Cap in ‘17]. He already got his purported supposed 10M shiny new toy in offseason, he’s got $12M Cobb, $14M Adams, 3rd round Monty. He’s already got a high paid Baktierri, Linsley and Bulaga, solid vet Taylor and 2nd rounder Spriggs. ENOUGH is ENOUGH. If Rodgers needs more weapons and more protection, fine, then ya gotta also admit he’s just not that freaking good.

John Kirk's picture

Very well written, as usual, but one major element is missing. Coaching.

Brady in Green Bay isn't winning SB's anymore than Rodgers isn't.

Comparing Belichick to MM is like comparing Rodgers to Hundley. Their org is brilliant while ours has been lackluster over the last several. We were great when we rode the cheap contract of our lightning in a bottle QB...not so good after.

Put Billy B with Rodgers in Green Bay and we're New England and New England is Green Bay. Ted and Mike are a laughable pairing good enough to ride a QB to the playoffs annually just like a Matt Millen Bobby Ross pairing could've.

Barfarn's picture

Didn't forget, there’s 3 phases:
(1) Coaching: McCarthy moves and counter-moves outdid Belichick’s in their last 2 games [1-1]. GB lost the 2010 game by 4 with Flynn at QB. NE got a pick 6 and a 71 yard KOR from a guard, plus a strip sack to end game at NE 15.

The game plan in Seattle champ game was brilliant. Sure up by 2 scores, 4 minutes left, Mike called a run, what coach wouldn’t? But, when Rodgers walked up to line and saw Seattle w/ 9 in box any moron could see a pitch to Lacy was going to lose 4. Brady would have changed the play; Rodgers didn’t. Also, first 3 drives in 4th Q, his poor play led to two 3 and outs and another drive that saw GB with a 2nd and 7 on Hawks 30. Rdogers went for 2 deep passes instead of hitting multiple open guys for 1st. So GB settled for a 48 Yard FG instead of 3 more downs [taking another 2 minutes off the clock]. If Brady was QB, he executes like Brady and gets at least a few more 1st downs if not a TD or 2 and it wouldn’t have mattered if D or STs collapse.

(2) Personnel Acquisition: Ted’s GB drafts were better than Belicheck’s and his rosters were just as good. Ted used free agency and comp picks to perfection. His UDFA program was the NFL’s best and critical to the GB keeping up with cities, like Boston, with an advantage in attractiveness to FAs. GB’s new GM better not screw this up trying to “be his own man!”

Ted built unequivocal SB rosters in ’10, ’11 and ’14. GB could have made SB appearances in several years [’11, ’12, ’14, ’15, ’16, ’17] if not for Rodgers inability to be GOAT-like, Brady-like, when it really counted. His uneven, sometimes bad, play in POs killed ’11, ’12 ’14, ’15 and ’16. His uneven, sometimes very bad, regular season play in ’15 and ’16 abdicated byes, homefields and caused games against stronger opponents. After his decimated OL came back ’17, Rodgers played less within the offense. He was running around like a goof looking for a highlight instead of playing like Brady and got injured. Then he played like a goof in week 15, thus upending another “streak.”

(3) Player Execution: It is not the coaching, it’s the man. Brady hardly ever goes rogue; Rodgers did it too often and excessively since ’14. And we all know Rodgers is just not as good as Brady in crunch time. This difference between their characters is the difference in winning between NE and GB over Ted’s GM tenure.

Example: in AZ PO game in ‘15 against a pretty good defense, Rodgers with Abberdaris, Janis and an aged James Jones at WR, Rodgers and Perillo at TE and Starks and Kuhn at RB [Lacy was wounded-got 12 carries], executed to GOAT perfection Mike’s unstoppable game plan and playbook for 2 17-play scoring drives in 1st and 2nd Q. Rodgers doesnt need weapons anymore than Brady, a long as he plays like this, like Brady. On frist drive of 3rd Q, Rodgers threw an inexplicable INT on 1st and 10; second drive Rodgers got a TD [Lacy had 2 runs for 75 yards]. W/ 5minutes left in 3rd Q, GB had ball and up by 3. Now it really counts, its crunch time and GB did a 3 and out, 7 and out and 3 and out with Rodgers going a Hundley-like 2 of 7 for 14 yards. If Rodgers executes on these 4 drives like he did on the two 17-play drives, that is like Brady, we win and beat Panthers the next week.

John Kirk's picture

If Brian views Rodgers like you do, then there's absolutely no reason not to deal him for picks and or players. You've railed on Rodgers plenty over the years. I don't subscribe to what I consider the very weak argument of, well, without Rodgers we're nothing, so I can't/won't criticize him. He has failed many times in the playoffs. Not to Favre levels but failure nonetheless.

What I do question and wonder about is his true level of talent surrounding him. He has failed often vs. top ranked D's and in the playoffs. Now, that doesn't mean it's all him...could be any of the other factors you listed above. MM may choke in those tight situations where Bill and Tom thrive in them. I never viewed Aaron as mentally dominant in huge situations in the playoffs. Now, of course, the throw to Cook at Dallas can be cited, and that's good on the other side, but I don't usually feel confident he's going to do something big when it really really counts in the playoffs. Hail Mary's have nothing to do with QB skill so those are out. I don't think Aaron enjoys big moments vs. very good defenses. I think he LOVES big moments vs. rookies like Lewis in Dallas or crap secondaries like in Chicago when we beat them on that bomb to Cobb. He gets off and goes off when he knows he's facing garbage. Had Jared Cook been defended by Richard Sherman or Xavier Rhodes he likely doesn't even attempt to throw it to him. That's what I don't like about Aaron...when he faces the greats on the other side of the ball he wilts not excels. The true greats rise up vs. the greats against them. Favre was way too jittery in big moments and prone to the huge mistake. Thank God for Desmond Howard or his era ends with no rings.

Would you pay 30+ million to anyone much less someone who doesn't come through in the biggest moments vs. great competition? I wouldn't. Who cares if you can set NFL records for TD passes and amass 12-4 records in the regular season if you can't get it done when it really counts? It's meaningless.

The TKstinator's picture

So, 12 needs a solid o-line and good weapons, and the d needs more talent at every level.
BG sure doesn’t have an easy task ahead of him.

Ryan Graham's picture

It doesn't help that the team has been set back by high draft pick misses in the draft, the release of talented players with an inability to replace them. The dysfunction and miscommunication that was between TT, MM and DC didnt really set the organization up for the success that could have been, so the roster has been pretty stagnant for quite a while. Unfortunately, it all means Rodgers must be patient as BG tries to fill the growing holes on both the defense and the offense at the same time. A long road to recovery.

At least we know hes literally invested in Wisconson sports now which is a good sign!

Michael Hughes's picture

Exactly ... the team lives and dies on rodgers. Our line is being held together with a mixture of duct tape and udfa and we are maybe going to have to start geronimo on the outside.

And people are still mocking us to not take an offensive player till round 5. Utter madness.

Receiver has to be taken early and we need two OL drafted before the end of round 5. We have done well in the 4th round with OL so double dipping there sounds good to me.

dobber's picture

There are still starter quality players on the OL and at WR available on the open market, and veteran players will be given their walking papers after the draft and after June 1. There are still moves to be made. That said, BG: pick the top player on your board, regardless of position, and be aggressive shoring up the roster as opportunities present themselves.

CheesyTex's picture

Dobber. And, if they can trade down to get 3 picks in first two rounds, they can add a starting caliber RT-- e.g., Brian O'Neill.

worztik's picture

Good choice Tex!!!

Tundraboy's picture

Sage advice as usual, Dobber.

Spock's picture

With Bulaga possibly not being ready to play early RT needs to be a priority in the early rounds (not round one in my opinion.

LambeauPlain's picture

This is one of the first drafts I can recall were no OTs have first round grades and few have 2nd round grades.

But OL is one position where the “grades” are least indicative of NFL success in GB for some reason. 4th to 7th rounds have been the building blocks for the Packer OL under TT.

Hopefully BG has a well researched OL board for the later rounds.

worztik's picture

Brian O’Neill... 2nd round!!!

CheesyTex's picture

Amen, Worztik.

packrulz's picture

Soon ARod will be the highest paid QB in the NFL, and I'm not comfortable with his offensive line depth. Bulaga is hurt a lot, Spriggs was a turnstile, Murphy is a good back up but I wouldn't want him starting against the Eagles. I'm not thrilled with Evans at guard either, I saw him standing around a lot. I think this years group is below average, but I hope they draft a tackle and guard in the 4th and 5th round, Rogers gets hit way too often.

Royalty Free GM's picture

That’s right. But speed is nothing without excellent hands. That’s why we draft Ridley.

Cubbygold's picture

Thatd be a great second round get

Royalty Free GM's picture

Cub - That’s extra level of idiotism if you guys really think Ridley will be available at a second round.
It’s almost as idiotic to say Ridley is too small, when one of the best receivers in this league are Brown, Hopkins and Beckham...

Cubbygold's picture

Nope, just think that would be a terrible use of the 14th pick

Spock's picture

My Mock Draft:
1st pick: Cleveland spends almost the full 15 minutes before handing the NFL Commissioner a trade card. He appears stunned and spends the next half hour explaining how all the teams have traded multiple picks to each other ultimately giving the Packers the top fourteen picks.
Calls from fans watching the Draft concerned that Mel Kiper’s hair has turned snow white and he may be in shock are dismissed when it is revealed that after his entire Mock Draft was already out the window Mel had banged his head so hard against the studio wall that his ‘helmet hair’ had broken through the drywall and was now white with drywall dust.
The Packers are now on the clock and a smiling Brian Gutekunst sends Ted Thompson to the podium. Ted spends the next 14 ½ minutes refusing to give the picks to the Commissioner, sipping bottled water, giving an occasional wry smile, and saying variations of, “the Packer organization doesn’t discuss how we do our drafting.” Finally, he relents and gives the card to the Commissioner. It contains all 14 of the Packers top picks listed in their draft pick order (with a note from Gutekunst "It is to save time on the clock for other teams.").
In a surprise announcement it is also revealed that Gutekunst and Mark Murphy had also done a personnel swap with Cleveland with Eliot Wolf coming to Green Bay as Co-GM with Gutekunst and Mark Murphy going to Cleveland. The agreement (sanctioned by Murphy) puts Murphy in a new position at Cleveland where he will be in charge of developing a new Cleveland Browns’ themed district around their stadium. A quick interview of Murphy outside the Packers War Room shows him with blueprints rolled up under his arms. He reveals he already has a name in mind for the project: Brownsville Silo Town.

The rest of the draft goes forward.

Hey it makes about as much sense as most of the Mock Drafts out there, lol. 

4thand10's picture

THAT was awesome.

Royalty Free GM's picture

To make us all happy Ted Thompson will announce our pick, “CB Calvin Ridley, Alabama”
And he will be converted into WR.

And after that all of us will be asking the same question:
“But can he sack the quarterback?”

stockholder's picture

TT will announce the next replacement for A-Rod. @14 Mason Rudolph QB. His comment: I always did like reaching. @ 45 A-Rod has a voice; Danica Patrick says with the 45th pick: Ronald Jones Rb. MM says finally a guy who can bring the speed. @76 Mark Murphy calms the packer crowd. E. St Brown Wr. @101 A- Rod has problems with no Lineman being Selected. He takes to Face book. Bennet responds: They just took Ian Thomas TE. @ 133 Donald Driver shows up. Announces a new dance partner, Daurice Fountain Wr... Pets ticked, he finally gets defense. Moss appears and says @138 M. Haynes OLB. Gute responds Like TT! @172 JC Jackson CB. @174 taron Jackson CB Brett Favre calls A- rod and says the writing is on the wall , Better Retire @186 Kyle Lauietta QB. Leroy Butler shows up @ 207 DJ Reed CB. MM calls Gute. We Need pass Rushers. Gute responds: It's a little Late for that. @ 232 Tavarius Moore S. @ 239 Q Henderson Wr/KR .

Cory Jennerjohn's picture

Because veterans will feel like they won’t be respected in the twilight of their career.

4thand1's picture

They aren't.

Cubbygold's picture

Yup, a completely false narrative. Did jarvis landry sign with the browns because they have a tradition of respecting vets? No, they offered the best deal. Same with every deal that gets made. How much $ and is there a chance to win

Bearmeat's Phantom Downvoter's picture

Cory,

I don't like to be "that guy," and I know you get paid peanuts to nothing for this content. And I'm appreciative. I really am. But I've got to ask, have you looked at your last 3 articles in a row on the same screen? They're all over the map, man.

Here are the titles:

1. Make Aaron Rodgers Comfortable
2. Temper your Super Bowl Expectations
3. Aaron Rodgers is the QB, not the GM

So, which is it? What's your view on the upcoming team? Where's the thesis statement?

Since '61's picture

Bearmeat - I feel your pain and agree with you. But as a professor yourself you know that a thesis requires a well defined topic to focus on, viable assumptions, research from legitimate sources, and the ability to effectively communicate how the research supports the assumptions that lead to a viable conclusion (at least that is what I remember from my thesis days).

While I agree that Cory is all over the place lately topic wise, remember this is the offseason and I further submit, speaking for myself, that we don't have enough data yet on this team or Gute's approach to define or prepare a "thesis statement". As for Cory, maybe he is waiting until after the draft to prepare his thesis or maybe he will just continue to be all over the place. Thanks, Since '61

Packer Fan's picture

I like this. I am done with fantasizing and reading mock drafts. Tired of saying what the Pack should do. And the 27th can't come fast enough.

worztik's picture

Why wait till the 27th??? All the GOOD players will be gone on the 26th!!!... just sayin’...

WKUPackFan's picture

Cory is probably the most thought provoking author on this blog. I believe that he has license to write articles that may appear to be inconsistent to some people.

A comment accusing an author of inconsistency is usually bait hoping to elicit a response that can then be further criticized. It is a backdoor attempt to undermine the author's credibility, in the hope that subsequent criticism of the immediate article appears to be more reasonable.

Cory Jennerjohn's picture

I really appreciate that WKU. That’s exactly what I try to do. I try to elicit thoughts and push people to think things they might not have thought before.

Bearmeat's Phantom Downvoter's picture

So you're taking on viewpoints for the benefit of discussion? Even though you may not be persuaded of their legitimacy yourself? Playing the devil's advocate?

John Kirk's picture

I'd love the answer to this one.

I do it all the time but only in question form. I don't make statements. IE: Do you think Pettine is happy to be in Green Bay after seeing what Brian has done this off-season leaving the cupboard bare. VS. Pettine has got to be unhappy with signing on here after seeing what Brian has done this off-season leaving the cupboard bare. One is a question to stir debate, the other is a statement reflective of my opinion.

I will have to agree that moving 88 to TE was something I hadn't thought of before.

Finwiz's picture

Is the educational system in Western Kentucky somewhat "substandard"? You should reread the 1st paragraph and tell me if that would pass the review of an 8th grade English comp teacher.

Annoying sports fans, day in, day out.

WKUPackFan's picture

Well, to my knowledge Kentucky does not have any ground flight training schools conferring meteorology degrees like yours does. Apparently your meteorology curriculum there is more challenging than the University of Wisconsin's Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Science, whose Master of Science program is the 7th ranked in the country.

We also have the ability to recognize when an extraneous word (since deleted) is mistakenly inserted in a comment.

John Kirk's picture

The title of the article made me think Rodgers was on hospice. I'm glad he's okay.

I think I finally fully understand WKU. Had I done in the comment section what Cory had with his articles, and I have, the response would be completely opposite all based on factors that have little to do with what is posted.

This response purports to render any and all criticism irrelevant because "WKU said so". The comment stifles the free exchange of ideas under the guise that by doing so and one falling on the "negative" side is some agenda based comment. The irony being that his commentary here is the true agenda based commentary. He's put everyone on notice that if they dare question this piece or even future ones that they're just trying to cause problems and then you'll likely be stalked for the remainder of the time you're here.

Here's my opinion on Cory... he writes some good and some not so good articles. Some are repetitive rewrites from a previous piece just days earlier. The scope can be very narrow. Other times he writes a standalone piece that is good for conversation. Once in awhile he takes considerable risk and license by proposing something really out there that I don't believe he even believes such as the converting a player to a different position. I can't even remember, now, who he suggested be converted and to what position but it was a doozy. I believe the position was TE. He got hammered for it but he did inspire response. EDIT: It was moving Ty Montgomery to TE. Did you really believe that or just believe it would cause a stir in writing about it? :)

Make Rodgers comfortable? Good premise for ALL Packers players. Aaron deserves no more comfort than any other guy on the roster. The moves made should never be about a singular player's comfort. The moves should be made with winning a SB in mind and Aaron's comfort be darned in making them.

Cory Jennerjohn's picture

You’re right, my last three haven’t been mapped out. Some of that is because it’s April and some of that is because I’m tired of mock drafts as well.

But what I am saying is what you already know: Rodgers is the gatekeeper for success as long he truly understands his role.

And finally, it’s fine to have the Super Bowl as the goal — all teams do. The difference this year is that when that goal isn’t met, there shouldn’t be a lot of disappointment.

I didn’t know you were a professor. You sound like two of my professors. I’m currently going to grad school.

John Kirk's picture

It's "fine" to have the SB as the goal? No, it's imperative and should be the singular driving focus. It's much more than fine.

When that goal isn't met like it hasn't since 2010, there will still be disappointment not because I expect it with this current situation, but rather that the current situation is our current situation. There's no reason we should be where we are so being accepting of it gives consent to it. There's no consent from me. It's a travesty we're here. We should be gearing up for a legit chance with a QB hungry to prove something coming off last year's disappointment. Now, we're going to waste the hunger and fire he has for this season with this roster. Had we paired that fire and hunger that will be extra this season with a solid roster we'd be odds on favorites to win it. Sadly, we're just as we were for much of the Favre era...in the conversation due to the QB but no real threat.

Bearmeat's Phantom Downvoter's picture

I responded to your answer above, Cory.

Yes, I'm a professor. CHTV and football, in general, is my timewasting activity of choice.

What are you majoring in?

worztik's picture

Uh Oh!!! Now we’ll ALL be super critical of everything you write, Bear!!! Just kidding!!! However, I hope that you as an educator are an exception to the Status Quo of the other “profs” that are turning out these ignorant, me me me, no common sense “graduates” that couldn’t write a comment here to save their souls... or is that soles??? You know what I’m saying, buddy!!!

Bearmeat's Phantom Downvoter's picture

Spoken as a college educator, who has viewed his fair share of institutional/political stupidity... I think the future of our country is very bright. I get to work with young adults every day who are respectful, hungry to learn, and who own their mistakes.

worztik's picture

I hope so Bear, for the countries sake!!!

dobber's picture

Spoken like a college educator at the end of the term.

Bearmeat's Phantom Downvoter's picture

;)

John Kirk's picture

Bear... CHTV writers are unpaid. All of them give of their time freely due to their love of Packers or writing or both.

This site is unique in that it's really just a controlled forum. It assigns a handful of regular fans like you and me to come up with all the topics, keeping topics out of the "hands of everyone" into the "hands of the chosen few". Some of that is good, but there is some downside as in repetitive ideas and no ability to offer new ones as they sound discordant in the comment on a piece that has nothing to do with your idea.

I wish this site did have a secondary forum where everyone could offer topics as I think that's the worst part of the site. Having a few people come up with so few ideas it leads to stagnation much like with the Packers org over the last several years. Allowing TGR his shot was good as it expanded the arsenal and he brought a new fresh perspective to a specialized area few here have knowledge of.

PW does a great job of coming up with things on a daily basis. I see ideas there copied here. The presence would be expanded and diversified in a secondary forum, here.

Bearmeat's Phantom Downvoter's picture

I know that, JK. And that's why I'm not yelling: "UR DUM CHTV SUX!" above. CHTV is IMO the best Packer fan blog out there. And it's free!!! So, Cory gives of his time freely. Coming from someone with 2 children under 3, and a 2 parent working household, I realize that this worthy of appreciation.

However, I also find it not helpful to just clam up and say nothing all the time. The idea occurred to me that I might bring up a reasonable point without being a jerk above, and I did so.

It's yet to be determined whether or not I live to regret it. ;)

John Kirk's picture

I think any idea is fair game to be praised or panned regardless of the title or pay of the person offering it. There are many posters out in the Packers universe that are just as good, or better, than the ones here. A site wins when it taps as much of that oil as possible. Limiting to a chosen few creates friction due to the dearth of idea expansion.

You and I will take criticism here with maybe some intermittent praise at least in my experience. :) Nobody is ever going to say, well, Bear is just a fan so his comment can't be called dumb. No! It will be slammed criticized and you as person might be questioned. It's happened to me with WKU repeatedly on this site. It's all the price of doing business in this arena. If a commenter can be torn apart six ways from Sunday, I don't understand how a writer of a piece should be afforded protection because he or she does so unpaid. I was an intern, unpaid, back at the start of my career. There was no less expectation put on me because I was an upaid intern than there was for the paid staff that I worked with. That made me better. I think constructive criticism is incredibly healthy and necessary for someone to grow and get better. What WKU posted will never drive anyone to be better, nor you. Now, I think ruthless unwarranted mean spirited criticism is worthless as it emanates from a place of invalidity within a troubled soul. We should all aspire to be fair to each other here. It won't happen but it should. Cory takes heat...Cory takes praise. The balance seems about right when I look at what I've read written of him. Everyone will have fans and everyone will have detractors...look at your moniker. :) The unbridled fandom and hatred is the issue. Balance. Perspective. Integrity and a right spirit...bring those.

Bearmeat's Phantom Downvoter's picture

I don't know if you have done a lot of writing in your career, JK. Just in case you don't have personal experience with it, writing publishable content in a readable manner is extremely difficult and time-consuming. This is why I haven't joined the "U R DUM" comments that occasionally pop up here.

If I were Cory's teacher in a journalism program (which I decidedly am not, and this is again, why I don't often join the pitchfork crowd) the standard I'd expect to see would be high and be growing over time. If, on the other hand, Cory (or any writer) is training to be an auto-mechanic, I'm not sure it matters. Consider the source.

I do agree that mean-spirited content from fan or blogger is uncalled for and unhelpful. The moniker, btw, is just a gentle troll back in the direction of our dearly beloved ViQueen fan lurker.

John Kirk's picture

A nice comment. Rare. I hope to read more from you.

I did learn something from your post. I didn't know Bearmeat was a Vikings fan. I've been accused of that myself. Is he really a Vikings fan or is that just the thought on him? I like the shot at him, if true. BTW, I'm not a Vikings fan. I did once upon a time work for their flagship but have a healthy "hatred" and "respect" for them.

Bearmeat's Phantom Downvoter's picture

"Bearmeat" is me, my friend. I changed my screen name to "Bearmeat's Phantom Downvoter" (until training camp) because I wanted to point out the repeated -1 to every single post I've written in the past 12 months. That's GOT to be a Vikings fan. heheheh.

Actually, there was a guy here, Ben was his "screen" name. When BLF moved to the Jets, he became a Jets fan. Then a Vikings fan. And he's stayed purple. He occasionally shows up to stir the pot with his stupid purple stew, then he disappears back into whatever universe fake fans and true trolls live in. I wonder if he's the -1 guy? LOL!

John Kirk's picture

:) I wondered where ol' Bearmeat had gone? Now, I know. I sometimes think if I pulled a Kevin Durant or Jane Slater, I wouldn't be downvoted by multiple haters every chance they got, but I've grown to appreciate their hate. You should, too.

Glad I know it's you. I never thought Bearmeat was a Vikings fan, that's why I asked if he really was? Stupid question as if you ask the wrong crowd, I think you'd find someone tell you the devil himself was here if he ain't posting Packers flattering posts.

Not much cheaper and childish than labeling a Packers fan a Vikings fan because you don't agree with viewpoints. I guess it's a flight mechanism on the fight or flight stress spectrum. The weak ain't looking for a fight...they're looking for flight and an anonymous down vote which is the cheap way out. I will downvote what I consider ridiculous viewpoints but I usually follow up the downvote with a response.

CheesyTex's picture

John Kirk: Thank you.

CheesyTex's picture

John Kirk: Interesting to note that 2 of 3 dislike my thanking you for your desire to bring "Balance. Perspective. Integrity and a right spirit..." to comments this site.

While not a "regular" on this site, I find your posts to be balanced, with good perspective, and straight forward. Please keep on, and don't be discouraged by the mean spirited.

John Kirk's picture

Thank you, CheesyTex... I appreciate the kind words. Pretty amazing a thank you directed my way could be downvoted but that's how this site rolls.

I'm not dissuaded by the downvotes. I know they're the price of doing business. At times, I'm actually emboldened by them. No question what I type is upsetting to the full blown homer. If I see a -7 on one of my postings, like somewhere above, I just count it as 7 homers being upset. I also believe my posts aren't even read by many of the angry homers here. They just see it's from me and the auto downvote is given. I won't stoop to their level. I couldn't live with myself being like that.

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

I want AR to be comfortable on the field. I am not sure whether I care if he is comfortable in his contract situation.

Therefore I do think it is important to have an OL that can block at an above average level. I do think it is important to have a #2 WR who can actually get open within 2.5 seconds of the snap. Ditto for the TE/slash large slot receiver.

I think it is important for AR to play within the offensive scheme more. Does giving him $100M in guaranteed money make that more or less likely? I have really never read a good argument for extending AR, certainly not strictly in terms of dollars and cents. The best argument for extending AR appears to me to be one that posits he'll still be playing at a high level in 2022 and beyond. The next best argument is one I've never read anywhere: while the first franchise tag would fall in 2020, the second franchise tag would be in 2021, and no one knows what the rules for a second franchise tag will be under a new CBA.

4thand1's picture

5 DAYS, 10 HOURS, 31 MINUTES.

Since '61's picture

Tick, tick, tick. All this waiting and then it's over in a flash. Thanks, Since '61

worztik's picture

‘61... isn’t that the longstanding definition of sex??? 98% anticipation and 2% participation!!! lol

Bearmeat's Phantom Downvoter's picture

wow dude..... no words here.

Since '61's picture

I'm more concerned about the Packers shoring up the right side of the OL than I am about acquiring a speed WR. Yes, the receiver is important but Rodgers can't throw the ball deep if he is crushed before the WR can get down the field.

A solid OL not only protects Rodgers but moves our ground game which further protects Rodgers and simultaneously forces DCs to pick their poison. Stop our ground game or let Rodgers chew them up. I would still like to see the Packers sign Evans for depth, if nothing else, draft an OT by round 4 if not sooner, and an OG/C in the 5th maybe 6th round at the latest.

The Packers may believe they have enough OL depth with Spriggs, Murphy and Amichia but I don't want to rely on any of them to start. Maybe Murphy will come on during TC but I am managing my expectations on that. Thanks, Since '61

Royalty Free GM's picture

S61 - Which OL players would you consider taking with our 2nd or 3rd pick?

Since '61's picture

Royalty - I don't think this is a great class for OTs. But if Miller from UCLA or Brown from Oklahoma make it to the 2nd round I wouldn't mind if the Packers took either one. After them I'm not sure about the other OTs available.

But who knows? When the Packers drafted Bakh no one predicted that he would become one of the best LTs in the league. We don't need that at RT just a solid player to anchor that spot. Thanks, Since '61

Royalty Free GM's picture

This is doable and realistic draft. It would make Packers better team in many different levels.

1st pick WR CALVIN RIDLEY ALABAMA

2nd pick CB HUGHES/DJACKSON/DAVIS

3rd pick OT ORLANDO BROWN OKLAHOMA (trade up)

4th pick LB HERCULES MATA'AFA WASHINGSTON ST

Since '61's picture

I admit that I am not sold on Ridley as our first round pick. I would prefer a pass rusher if we're not going CB in the 1st round. After that I would be happy with your 2nd, 3rd and 4th picks. Given the dearth of OT talent this year I don't know if Brown would make it to our 3rd pick even if we trade up. We'll know soon. Thanks, Since '61

Royalty Free GM's picture

So with the first four picks, you would give offense only one pick! and that would be OT. Where this hate against drafting offense comes?
We have been drafting defense for years and years with bad results.
We haven’t even tried to draft offense.
Are you guys so afraid of change?
It’s time to end this status quo and try something new.

Since '61's picture

Royalty - I have nothing against taking more offensive players in the early rounds but I don't follow college football enough to comment on which players we should take at any position in any round.

Having said that, I believe that we have greater needs on defense than we do on offense with the exception of the right side of the OL as I originally posted.

Yes, we have spent plenty of capital on defense in recent seasons but is the fact that our defense hasn't improved the fault of drafting 24th or higher every season, poor players chosen, injuries, poor coaching/scheme (Capers) or all of the above (most likely).
If we want to try something how about acquiring better defensive players so that we can play better defense. That would actually be something new.

As for the offense I'd be fine if the Packers drafted an OT, game break WR and a OG/C if they are the best players and if we can still improve our defense with late round picks. I just don't think it's going to play out that way and I don't think we're going to improve our defense with that approach. What is the point of having an offense that scores 40 points a game when the defense is allowing 45 points a game.

With Pettine we have a chance to totally revamp the defense. Let's give him a decent chance to start off on the right foot. Just because previous defensive draft picks have not worked out doesn't mean they will not work out this season. It also doesn't mean that players like King and M. Adams and other recent picks will not evolve into solid contributors. All of this just proves that the draft is a crap shoot. Thanks, Since '61

Royalty Free GM's picture

How did the Vikings secure the NFC North last year?

They took our best player out with the late hit... early in the season.

worztik's picture

By a defensive nitwit!!!

stockholder's picture

It's all about the Bucks. Or $$$. Not the packers anymore. If we Can't dream about making the super-bowl; Don't tie up the money! We question the news now when it comes to Rodgers. But why does a QB keep putting himself in the spot light. The packers have to handle Arron Rodgers with kid gloves now. I believe were focusing on Rodgers more than football. He's becoming a distraction, and that just isn't good for the Green Bay Packers. He's showing he has the money. He's showing he has the girl. He's Showing it's all about me. He's older and can afford the right advisors. But the waves he's making, do not carry the fire we need to see. He sees his future. But what about the packers future? Are we really seeing a QB that works for the Packers?

Cubbygold's picture

Stockholder, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I've ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent post were you even close to what could be considered a rational thought. Everyone on this site is now dumber having read your comment. I award you a thumbs down, and may god have mercy on your soul.

stockholder's picture

Post: Lets focus on the future! The Cap, The Draft. We don't need the National Enquirer to tell us about Arron Rodgers. I care about the packers. Not Arron Rodgers Life. He was a great football player in his day. But the window is closing. Deal with it.

The TKstinator's picture

Cubby,
Billy M and I applaud you.

WKUPackFan's picture

"He's older and can afford the right advisors".

AR has employed the same agent, David Dunn, throughout his entire career.

stockholder's picture

The word, "Right". Financial, PR,Lawyer,Acct. etc. Every player has an agent.

LayingTheLawe's picture

A draft and develop team had some bad drafts and didn't resign players who developed into pro bowlers with other teams, that's going to leave some holes in your team for sure.

But the bigger problem for the offense has really seemed to be the playcalling. When Philbin was last the OC he and McCarthy created a passing juggernaut that was one of the greatest the league had ever seen. A team with no running game at all was able to win one Super Bowl and then score a near NFL record point total going 15 - 1 the next season. But they based this mostly on having incredible receiver depth. The Packers "running" game of 2011 was having the ability to throw to so many different receivers that you could not cover them all. The whole Super Bowl winning gameplan was that the Packers number 3 and 4 receivers were going to be able to beat anyone the Steelers could cover them with.

That depth might not exist now, but hopefully an OC with a proven track record of using the skills available on the team can create a juggernaut once again.

LambeauPlain's picture

The OL is solid on the left, C and RT when Bulaga is healthy. The Whale is one of the best RTs in the NFL when playing.

I believe we have a starting LG in either McCray or Patrick...maybe even Murphy. But it would be wise to resign Evans for insurance...unless Q. Nelson drops to Gute at #14...which he most likely will not.

Spriggs has alot to show and actually played better as a rookie vs last year.

This is a good year for the Pack to have so many picks 4th round and later. I could see Gute drafting 3-5 OLmen and hope 2, maybe 3 pan out.

Bure9620's picture

Updated Mock on first-pick.com

Round 1 Pick 21 (CINN): Williams, Connor, OT/OG, Texas (B+)
Round 2 Pick 2 (NYG): Hughes, Mike, CB, Central Florida (A)
Round 2 Pick 13: Miller, Anthony, WR, Memphis (B)
Round 3 Pick 36 (CINN): Sweat, Josh, OLB, Florida State (A)
Round 4 Pick 1: Thomas, Ian, TE, Indiana (A+)
Round 4 Pick 33: Bates III, Jessie, FS, Wake Forest (A+)
Round 5 Pick 35: Armstrong Jr, Dorance, DE/OLB, Kansas (A-)
Round 6 Pick 6 (T.B.): Ford, Mike, CB, Southeast Missouri (A+)
Round 6 Pick 12: Wadley, Akrum, RB, Iowa (A+)
Round 6 Pick 28 (T.B.): Jones, Justin, DT, North Carolina State (A+)
Round 6 Pick 29 (JAX): Robertson, Korey, WR, Southern Miss (A+)
Round 7 Pick 21: Ramesh, Austin, FB, Wisconsin (A+)

As I have said, IMO, tackle is one if the biggest needs for the Packers, traded back and got Connor Williams, he satisfies the RW athletic thresholds and is likely the most athletic Tackle in the draft.

BG seems to have an affinity for Hughes, he's under 5'10 1/2" but the guy can cover

Miller is good. He can jump, good speed and his red zone production was ridiculous even with defenses knowing he was getting targeted. He can slide in as #3 receiver.

Josh Sweat may not be here, he was mis-used as a DT at florida st. He can rush the passer

4thand1's picture

5 DAYS-5HOURS-6 MINUTES

Since '61's picture

Tick, tick, tick. Be nice to find the rewind button on this thing, just keeps going seemingly faster and faster in one direction. Thanks, Since '61

4thand1's picture

5 DAYS 3 HOURS 7 MINUTES.

Since '61's picture

Tick, tick, tick. Thanks, Since '61

Royalty Free GM's picture

Making Rodgers uncomfortable by drafting defense again and again and again... is TThe solution.

sonomaca's picture

They way Rodgers has been treated is a bit strange. Is this just clumsiness, some sort of power play, negotiating ploy?

If Rodgers wants out, now is the time. He could be sent to Cleveland for #1, #4, and #33. Packers can get Darnold and trade back a bit.

John Kirk's picture

Can anyone who is gung ho thinking the 1st round pick HAS TO BE DEFENSE please explain the logic a little better to me? Why?

This org has drafted defense SIX YEARS IN A ROW. How has that worked out for us? Each year..draft defense! We need defense! You've gotten it, and for what? An abysmal unit.

I would hope after 6 years of using the 1st selection on defense would teach you something. It should teach that a first round pick is NOT the solution to our defensive woes. Ted is pedestalized by many clamoring for defense with 14. How could a guy on the pedestal Ted is perched upon draft D six years straight and have this defense so poor? Oh, right, it's Dom Capers fault. Now, that Pettine is here it makes sense to draft defense, again? No.

Defense does not win championships any more than offense does. Our defense does happen to be poor, that I agree with, however, I do not agree the 1st selection HAS TO BE defense. Should it be? Not necessarily. Who is there? We have some draft Monday Morning QB's who have been so for months, now. When the 13th pick is in, and we're on the clock at 14, if you think the best player on the board left happens to be a defensive player...fine...take him. The thing is no one here knows that so saying it has to be defense is one of the more ridiculous statements I've read on forums, and there's plenty.

You win in this league by having horses. It doesn't matter if the horse is offensive or defensive. You need stallions. If the stallion happens to play offense why would you groan? There are 11 other picks after 14 and that "let's see what Gute does with the remaining months before the season starts before we criticize what he's doing" to fall back on. 14 can be offense and you can just slide into that mindset that it isn't September yet and there's still time to fix the D. Don't dismiss picks 2-12 all being defensive. It could happen.

Just stop with the ridiculous notion that the draft has to go any certain way. It doesn't. I just hope we find a couple of stars like the Saints. That team needed D badly, too, did they draft defense? Yup...and they used the other 1st rounder on O. Took 2 on O and 2 on D out of the first 4...got a couple of stars.

A fun note... The Patriots have drafted D for six straight seasons, too. Their defense is ranked as poorly as ours. One offensive pick since 2007...and that was an OT.

Just stop with the hysteria about the pick needing to be D. It doesn't. 6 years should be enough to show you that.

worztik's picture

John, I was gonna read yer post but, I didn’t quite have the time! I chose to read “War and Peace” and I finished it sooner than I would have your post... just sayin’...

John Kirk's picture

:) Two minutes, or less. You can read W & P in 2 minutes or less? What are you quibbling for? :) This one was far from a novella.

4thand10's picture

My thoughts were originally draft on D. Until Nelson was released. Mostly because the Pack are going to have to contend with good running backs in the division... J Howard, Cook and Murray who knows who Detroit is going to trade for. None of the QBs in our division really scare me, but the running game is really important to our division foes. So personally if there was a Da'Ron Payne or Vea sitting there at 14...thats the way I would go. There would be plenty of big dudes in the rotation. Naturally a Edge and CB needs to be addressed as well.
Sadly, I think WR, OL, TE and special teams are equally important now. Mostly because we have NO #2 WR...and counting on Graham to be healthy. Evans was productive, but he is old. The Whale is injured frequently. I'm anxious to see the Picks and if we go FA again. Going to be an exciting year.

4thand1's picture

4 DAYS, 22 HOURS, 45 MINUTES

PatrickGB's picture

BPA and go to a quicker passing scheme. Make the defense clear and accountable. All this has nothing to do with Aaron. He will play the plays that we give him unless something breaks down. I wish we would move on from discussion about him and work on how the REST of the team can get better.
I think that we will.

Nononsense's picture

Im gonna blow all your minds and say with the 14th pick in the draft, the Green Bay Packers select Lamar Jackson QB, Louisville. Now before you freak out and call me an idiot lets discuss the possibilties that come with drafting this guy. This is of course if none of the top 10 defensive players are left on the board and no one calls us to trade for our pick.

Now if he gets past Miami, Buffalo and Washington and they dont draft QBs with those picks, behind GB is a few teams im sure would have interest in trading for him along with the 3 just mentioned. Maybe we get the guy we want at 14 plus some extra picks in a trade with Arizona, Baltimore or the Chargers right behind us or later Buffalo, Jacksonville or the Patriots. Maybe a team like Buffalo would be willing to give up 22 and a 2nd this year or next years 1st for the guy or something like that from another team. In a draft where there are no true HOF type prospects, and few all pro prospects and especially none within our reach, doesnt it make sense to try leverage our position at 14 into possibly a higher pick next season where there may be better players or even just more picks this year.

Its a calculated risk for sure but say no one decides to pony up anything for him and we get stuck with him. Well first of all we did just get to see for a 2nd time what life is like when Rodgers goes down. Yes now we have Deshone Kizer and Hundley behind Rodgers so we at least have options should he go down again but neither guy is the kind of elite athlete that Jackson is. Do they plan on Kizer running the same offense as Rodgers should he go down or will they tailor the offense to his strengths. If they tailor an offense to his strengths then certainoy they couod do that with Jackson.

I personally think Jackson could give us a very dangerous and versatile weapon to use on offense from day 1 with a healthy Rodgers. This may not be the best way to make Rodgers comfortable as the article suggests but it could make the offense a bigger strength than it is now. Yes the defense is still lacking playmakers but I would rather risk 14 on a dynamic athlete like Jackson than reach for a need or overdraft a guy who could be had later in the round.

Now having said all that I highly doubt it happens but I just think it could be worth the risk. Either Gute ends up looking really clever with this move and gets a bit of a windfall out of the deal or he just bought a very expensive insurance policy at QB and possibly a dynamic RB/chess piece to make defending the offense harder than its been in years. I know Jackson will want to play QB wherever he gets drafted but would he decline the chance to play in the games at a position other than QB if it means he gets on the field sooner here or elsewhere?

What say you?

Royalty Free GM's picture

Why are you trying to get rid of Rodgers so badly?
It’s better to keep HOF level QB and feed him with some weapons. He can still play for 6 years or more, if we give him some help. He has carried this team to playoffs for so long without top offense draftees.

Now he has to scramble left and right waiting for league’s slowest receiver corps to get open...
Draft him the best WR and we are talking, not just getting into playoffs, but about winning multiple Superbowls.

By drafting his replacement or defense, he might switch to NBA this year.

Lare's picture

The challenge with any elite QB is being able to build a contending roster around him while devoting a significant portion of the salary cap to that one position.

This last playoffs and Super Bowl show that teams can be successful using both cheaper and higher priced QBs. It ultimately comes down to team depth and the quality of the talent around him.

stockholder's picture

I think Mason Rudolph will be a better QB. But the Packers can't take a QB rd.1. You don't want to ink A-rod and still draft his replacement. They made a hole with trading Randall. Back up is Kizer, and a rookie QB later in the draft. Josh Jackson still makes the most sense. Especially since it took them so long to sign House. The best draft still is CB, OL, WR, WR. = WR is a huge need and this drafts best value.

Oppy's picture

I won't sit here and say the Packers shouldn't be looking to improve the offensive line (they always should be.. always).

However, there are a few things that Aaron Rodgers can do to make the situation better:

1) Utilize the run game

2) Take the open WR instead of locking in on the WR you want to hit

3) Get rid of the ball on time (see above) more frequently instead of holding onto the ball too long looking for the 30 yard bomb on every other play.

All of these things will effectively improve the play of the OL, and the offense in general.

Aaron Rodgers is a historic talent at QB, but he has definite areas of his game where he could improve his production, protect himself, and positively impact the offense as a whole. It's almost frightening to think how much better he could be if he actually worked on the above three items.

I am interested to see if the new offense is designed to somewhat force these things to occur.

DD's picture

Oppy: people say Rodgers shouldn't be involved in management decisions. I agree, but he at least has earned the right to discuss and make his case before throwing out his top two guys. Also, the o-line played pretty damm well last year I thought. Also, they don't involve Rodgers in the decision making, yet you're criticizing him to improve MM play calling with no schemes or creativity. We all watch tape over and over, but the schemes and play calling by MM are the same, no fool any defense. Defenses play us real tight always because of the routine plays called. So to say Rodgers has to improve little things may be right, but he can deliver given the right play. No schemes or creativity by MM causes school yard plays. Problem is MM, not Rodgers!!

Flow49's picture

Confused by the down votes here proof is in the pudding. A 3 time NBA finalist team is very much at risk to get bounced by a team that was forced to blow up its core and restart everything this year. Players should voice their opinions but having as much impact on personnel as Lebron does not equate to better management.

Oppy's picture

I agree the OL played out of their minds good last season considering how deep down the bench they had to go. Great job, they have some depth. They had 3rd string guys playing positions they've never played and making it work. I think it was a great sign and indicator that the depth of the line is better than we thought. So we agree on that..

Every play that goes in to Aaron Rodgers has built-in adjustments for Rodgers to call at the LOS based on match ups. Every play that goes to Aaron Rodgers has built in run/pass check outs designed into the play call. Most importantly, Aaron Rodgers has been given complete authority to entirely change the play- call of the current play and change to any play he wants in real-time at the LOS, and this has been the case for years and years.

Also for years and year, MM saying we need to run the ball more. We need more touches. We need more attempts. I'm putting two and two together here. I firmly believe that MM is calling in a good deal of run plays and they are never seeing the light of day come time to snap the ball, and there's no question that Rodgers could be delivering the ball on time- it's a choice not to.

sheppercheeser's picture

When I think of AR weighing into GM decision making, I only have to think of LeBron James forcing management to retain expensive players, which turned out badly and now the Cavs have bench-riders consuming precious, large chunks of cash. I think players tend to make more emotional decisions, whereas management is more info-based.

DD's picture

MM got tired of Sittons mouth? We'll, I think many of us are tired of MM mouth with the same old excuses and lack of a creative playbook. Sitton played very well, as did Lang!! Now they say the o-line needs help? Kept injured Baluga? Plug the right side? Total BS by MM i feel.

Oppy's picture

Sitton was becoming a locker room cancer, and was let go. He was a great player, but he was entering the back side of his career and had started to develop some back issues. Lane Taylor stepped in and the Packers hardly missed a beat.

TJ Lang made a DECISION to move onI . I don't blame him; this is perhaps his last contract and he had children just starting school. He's from Michigan and going to DET made sense for him and his family considering. Oh, plus, there's the fact that the Lions payed Lang more guaranteed money than the Packers gave Bakhtiari, (19M) and are paying Lang over 9M a year.

What does keeping Bulaga, and Lang going to DET have to do with MM?
That's general manager stuff.
But, I get it. You don't like MM.

4thand1's picture

4 DAYS 5 HOURS 52 MINUTES

Log in to comment, upload your game day photos and more!

Not a member yet? Join free.

If you have already commented on Cheesehead TV in the past, we've created an account for you. Just verify your email, set a password and you're golden.

Or log in with Facebook

 
 
 

Quote

"The Bears still suck!"
"I firmly believe that any man’s finest hour, the greatest fulfillment of all that he holds dear, is that moment when he has worked his heart out in a good cause and lies exhausted on the field of battle – victorious."
"A school without football is in danger of deteriorating into a medieval study hall. "