Gut Reactions: Raiders beat Packers 22-21

Aaron's gut reactions to the Packers preseason loss to the Raiders. 

  • What a joke of a game.
  • The NFL should be embarrased. 
  • Trevor Davis announced his presence with authority tonight.
  • Boyle made things interesting. 
  • Montravious Adams played his ass off. Great initial burst, great hustle for the entire time he was out there. 
  • Hate to see the injuries. 
  • You hate to see the NFL play a game in a sub-standard stadium for that matter.
  • Glad none of the starters played, including Rodgers. 
  • Go Pack Go
8 points

Comments (93)

Fan-Friendly This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.
Tundraboy's picture

August 22, 2019 at 10:21 pm

Had to be the worst 2nd half I ever witnessed.

+ REPLY
3 points
3
0
Kinger2's picture

August 22, 2019 at 10:21 pm

And thank God none of the starters played.

+ REPLY
5 points
5
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

August 22, 2019 at 10:21 pm

Lazard and Shepherd made some plays. Crosby didn't have a meltdown. Scott seemed to have a good night.

Injuries. Hope they're all going to be short-term.

+ REPLY
7 points
8.5
1.5
Coldworld's picture

August 22, 2019 at 10:29 pm

Bolton was on crutches. Not good.

+ REPLY
1 points
3
2
GatorJason's picture

August 23, 2019 at 12:20 am

This WR analysis was done last week but I wanted to see pre-season game 3 results before posting. Glad I did. WR picture cleared up significantly with St Brown game performance and injury and return of healthy Trevor Davis. WR evals are based on performances thru pre-season game three. I also included 2018 NFL Season Stats with “Catch %” based on catches/targets.

Grading Scale:
10. NFL All Pro
9.5 NFL Pro-Bowl
9.0 NFL No. 1
8.5 NFL No. 2
8.0 NFL Rotation player on game day
7.5 NFL game day active primarily for ST
7.0 NFL inactive reserve or PS player
6.5 NFL FA on speed dial
6.0 NFL FA with potential. JAG
5.5 Tryout player with limited NFL potential.
5.0 Grocery bagger with big dreams

Post-preseason Game 3 Evaluation. Pre-cut-down
10. D. Adams: Rodgers to Adams = league top 5 combo.
8.6 G. Allison: Elusive. V reliable w G hands. Limited ST value.
8.4 MVS: VG size/speed, explosive but low catch%. Good ST
8.4 J. Kumerow: 2nd best hands. G size/speed. Good ST.
8.4 T. Davis: VG speed WR “when healthy”. Fragile. VG PR/KR.
8.2 D. Shepherd: V elusive “slot” w VG hands. Good PR/KR.
-------------------------- Six locks for 53 ------------------------------
7.4 A. Lazard: Physical WR/TE tweener. Good hands. Good ST.
7.2 ESB: VG size/speed, not elusive/physical. Good hands/ST.
------------ Bubble Boys for last WR Spot or PS -------------
6.7 J. Moore: V elusive WR with G size/speed. Unreliable hands.
6.5 T. Redding: Good WR that flashed. Unreliable ST PR/KR.
6.0 M. Taylor: Good Size/Speed WR. No standout traits. JAG
------------------------------- Longshots ----------------------------

================================================
2018 Green Bay WR + TE Jimmy Graham Stats

Player............Catches...Targets...Catch %...Yards ..Yds/Tgt....TD
D. Adams.........111.........169..........65.7.......1386.......8.20.......13
J. Graham..........55............89..........61.8.........636.......7.15.........2
MVS....................38............73..........52.1.........581.......7.96.........2
R. Cobb..............38.............61.........62.3.........383........6.28........2
ESB......................21............36.........58.3.........328........9.11........0
G. Allison ...........20............30..........66.7.........303......10.11.......2
J. Kumerow...........8............11..........72.7.........103........9.36.......1

2018 WR Stats Assessment
D. Adams was elusive, sure handed and best option by a mile.
J. Graham was essentially a jumbo-sized split end.
R. Cobb was WR/RB whose quicks helped get short first downs.
MVS was home run option but had lowest catch % of all WRs.
ESB had low catch% and zero TDs for reasons to be explained.
G. Allison had short season but clear 2nd option when healthy.
J. Kumerow stats pop in a small sample, just like we see today.
T. Davis is not on list due to injuries. Availability is/was his issue.

Many fell in love with 2018 4th, 5th, 6th round WRs’ athleticism.
Two may be keepers but have a ways to meet “high ceilings”.
Moore fell to the side because he is a body catcher who cannot
catch with his hands. MVS and ESB both have great size/speed.
MVS gets good separation with his “burst” but his catch % is too
low. His burst creates separation but also causes timing issues
with the QB. It’s tougher to gauge where he’ll be on a route.
ESB on the other hand rarely gets good separation. ESB is tall
but not physical, fast but not sudden, agile but not elusive.
He’s got good athletic traits but is usually blanketed by CBs/LBs.
It’s the main reason he is often the third option on the field and
why he was still available in the sixth round of the 2018 draft.
Now ESB might go to IR versus vying for a possible 7th WR spot.

Why are FA WRs outshining draft picks?
Kumerow and Allison are elusive, “snatch” the ball from the air
and are consistently where they are expected to be on routes.
Darius Shepherd is cat quick, instinctive, elusive, catches balls
against e-v-e-r-y-o-n-e. Lazard might not make the 53 but is a
legitimate physical target who runs great routes. PS candidate.

+ REPLY
3 points
16
13
Tundraboy's picture

August 22, 2019 at 10:34 pm

The game,now this. My brain hurts.

+ REPLY
11 points
11
0
Doug Niemczynski's picture

August 23, 2019 at 08:12 am

I feel stupid. I'm going to go and crawl in a whole now. Thanks.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Doug Niemczynski's picture

August 23, 2019 at 08:12 am

hole...dang it..

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
johngalt's picture

August 22, 2019 at 10:38 pm

y r u y u r?

+ REPLY
-1 points
3
4
holmesmd's picture

August 22, 2019 at 10:49 pm

What the hell is this post?!:(

+ REPLY
3 points
4
1
kevgk's picture

August 22, 2019 at 10:59 pm

youre gonna get crap by some people who disagree (some rightfully so), but props for being thorough and detailed in your opinion. Putting some work in irons out some of the initial biases and emotional reactions

+ REPLY
10 points
10
0
GatorJason's picture

August 23, 2019 at 12:11 am

kevgk, thanks. When I first posted on the board, it did not allow tab spacing from WORD so it looked like a real mess. I understood the "WTF" initial responses. It took some time to clean up.

I think the other negative thumbs down are primarily due to my harsh commentary on the 2018 WR draft class, especially ESB. The good news/take away is that the Packers have several UDFA gems who provide excellent skill sets and are performing at a very high level today. Some people prefer the promise of "high ceilings". I prefer performance and do not set preconceived limitations on a player because of where they came from or because they lack elite athleticism. Heart, brains and attitude often play a much larger role in a player's success than their athleticism or collegiate pedigree.

+ REPLY
3 points
3
0
porupack's picture

August 23, 2019 at 06:51 am

>>>I prefer performance and do not set preconceived limitations on a player because of where they came from or because they lack elite athleticism. Heart, brains and attitude often play a much larger role in a player's success than their athleticism or collegiate pedigree.<<<<

What? How the hell are we supposed to keep control over the this situation if we don't label it, and keep it in specially-made preconceived boxes? :-)

Gator, please post more.

I would have a hard time letting ESB go. I have preconceptions on his ceiling, admittedly. So, you convinced me with your 6 locks, maybe in part with ESB's injury. Really sorry for ESB.

+ REPLY
7 points
7
0
imnion's picture

August 23, 2019 at 01:00 am

I agree with this assessment. I was never that high on the 3 draft picks from 2018.

+ REPLY
-1 points
2
3
J0hn Denver&#039;s Gavel's picture

August 23, 2019 at 01:16 am

I personally think you are WAY too high on everyone but Adams, mostly because I feel a WR #2 actually has to have at least 1 year of great #s but thanks for your assessment!

+ REPLY
3 points
3
0
GatorJason's picture

August 23, 2019 at 01:36 pm

Yes! Thank you. I lacked the courage of grading without my Green and Gold sunglasses on. If you agree with the grading scale, those glasses added 0.3 to 0.5 points to all the scores, including Adams.

I had 3 people bunched at 8.4 even though they made that score for different reasons. For example, MVS and Davis are both speed receivers. MVS is more durable and will likely take more snaps than Davis. I believe Davis is more versatile and will have more productivity per snap when he is on the field. I have Kumerow primarily playing behind Adams so his snap count may be low as well but believe he can still be productive in a reduced role due to his route running savvy and excellent hands. As you and others have pointed out, there is limited reference data on most of these guys so we have to see how this season plays out to see who are for real and who only looks good because they are not playing against starting caliber defensive players.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
dobber's picture

August 23, 2019 at 05:18 am

Why do we continue to state that Allison has limited ST value? He played more than 1/3 of ST snaps as a rookie in 2017 and played a meaningful # last season before getting hurt.

Besides: if he's really in your top 3 WR, do you want him playing much ST?

+ REPLY
6 points
6
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

August 23, 2019 at 09:01 am

Thumbs up, Gator. Your grades are too high, imo, but I have them in pretty much the same order.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
Since&#039;61's picture

August 22, 2019 at 10:29 pm

Game should not have been played. Stupid decision by the league. We have better fields for high school football.

How can the league send their players to a substandard field. No excuse, totally unnecessary.

I hope that none of our injuries are serious. Gary has already tweeted out that he feels fine and is OK. I hope that is true.

Another reason for reducing or eliminating preseason games. This game should have been switched to a scrimmage. Thanks, Since ‘61

+ REPLY
8 points
12
4
flackcatcher's picture

August 22, 2019 at 10:59 pm

Worse than I expected. Lucky both teams came away with as few injuries as they did. Never thought I be saying this, but please end this preseason already.....

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
dobber's picture

August 23, 2019 at 05:19 am

"This game should have been switched to a scrimmage."

It was.

+ REPLY
4 points
4
0
staffordsneckfat's picture

August 23, 2019 at 06:46 am

Hey Since '61,

Really respect your opinion here but your profile picture made me think of something...

Do you think Nitschke would have ever sat out a game because the turf was "substandard"? I think not.

The packers have rolled out a soft 57 for several consecutive years now. It's wishful thinking in this day and age, but I'd love to see even a fraction of the grit of the old style guys in today's team.

Thanks,
-StaffordsNeckFat

+ REPLY
2 points
4
2
LeotisHarris's picture

August 23, 2019 at 08:27 am

Disagree with your post, StaffordsNeckFat, but love your screen name. In the plethora of screen names on CHTV, yours is arguably second only to the aforementioned Ezra'sHotDog.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Since&#039;61's picture

August 23, 2019 at 09:09 am

Staffordsneck, I appreciate your response. Nitschke would never sit out a regular season game that’s for sure. But if he was one of 33 players told not to dress for a preseason game he would have done as he was told, especially by Lombardi.

As for that old time grit I miss it as well. But the game is a very different game now then it was back in the Lombardi era. Rule changes to the point where no one knows what a tackle is, plus big money causing players to play for their next contract so they play to stay healthy.

From the Packers perspective, does either MLF or Gute want to go into their first full season together without their key players. MLF was hired to win games like all HCs, but the Packers know, as we all do, that they can’t win without Rodgers so they hold him and his weapons and his protection out of the preseason dress rehearsals. Same with their key defenders.

Once the regular season starts there are no excuses so why start out short handed. It’s the smart move by Gute and MLF and the Packers are long overdue for some smart moves. Thanks, Since ‘61

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
Qoojo's picture

August 22, 2019 at 10:30 pm

I thought Boyle did more to start the game, than Kizer did at the start in the previous 2 games.

- 80 yard field. Sure it's preseason, but 80 yard field.
- This was a 4th preseason game by previous seasons standards. Seems like they have all been that way, although game 2 had a few starters for a series or two.

+ REPLY
4 points
4
0
LeotisHarris's picture

August 22, 2019 at 10:31 pm

There was some good football amidst the ugliness. Captain Touchback will have to form an ad hoc committee to look into the turf issue. Those kinds of things can sneak up on you when you're focused on player safety and world domination.

John Kuhn does a really nice job, as do Lofton and Harlan. Anyone out there care to explain how on earth Lance Allen keeps this gig?

+ REPLY
1 points
2
1
flackcatcher's picture

August 22, 2019 at 10:56 pm

Pictures baby. Pictures....-:)

+ REPLY
0 points
1
1
Oppy's picture

August 22, 2019 at 11:11 pm

Lofton isn't horrible, but he's not anywhere near professional broadcast level. He should be doing color commentary at the college level at best.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
jeremyjjbrown's picture

August 22, 2019 at 10:31 pm

If the NFL is trying to convince us Football outside the US is a good idea, they blew it. Totally blew it.

+ REPLY
10 points
12
2
Swisch's picture

August 22, 2019 at 10:33 pm

I'm wondering if Aaron Rodgers needs to show some more leadership by showing some more grit, especially with Tom Brady and Eli Manning playing tonight.
As our top player and team leader, he sets the tone for all of the players, and the Packers as a team.
I'm not so sure Rodgers is showing that he's the man.

+ REPLY
-15 points
6
21
Branden Burke's picture

August 22, 2019 at 10:48 pm

You're right. Terrible leader talked 33 others, mostly starters, into not playing too. Green bay would be so much better off without him...

+ REPLY
12 points
13
1
kevgk's picture

August 22, 2019 at 11:00 pm

dumb troll bait guys, don't respond

+ REPLY
2 points
3
1
Swisch's picture

August 22, 2019 at 11:14 pm

So even questioning Rodgers is trolling?
Do you think Brady and Manning were idiots for playing tonight?
After all, how many Super Bowls do they have?

+ REPLY
-12 points
3
15
Jonathan Spader's picture

August 22, 2019 at 11:31 pm

What were the field conditions for Eli and Brady tonight? Think they would have started in Canada? Why single out Rodgers when 33 players were benched?

+ REPLY
9 points
10
1
Swisch's picture

August 22, 2019 at 11:55 pm

Jonathan, what was wrong with the field other than the problems with the end zones?
Was it really so hard and treacherous that poor Aaron couldn't have led his teammates with a little toughness for a series or two?
Perhaps Rodgers set the tone for the other 33 players sitting out. Why should the coach make them play if his leader is skipping out?
I'm all for being careful with players, but this seems to be wimpiness -- and I'm tired of the Packers being wimpy!
In the unlikely event that Rodgers was injured, it would have only been a game or two earlier than he was injured the past two seasons. We can't bubble wrap the guy.
Plus, being in rhythm with his offense against the brutal Bears would seem to be a good way of avoiding injury in our first real game.
Maybe I'm a little touchy after watching Brett Favre seemingly become a prima donna for his last ten seasons or so, to the detriment of his legacy and disappointments in team performance.
Rodgers may think he's the smartest guy in the stadium, but he hasn't done much for the Packers and us as fans of late.
Maybe the coaches and players are all good with Rodgers, but he's not instilling much confidence in me. I'm glad if I'm wrong.
P.S. I'm a big fan of Rodgers, and for that matter, of Favre.

+ REPLY
-2 points
5
7
Jonathan Spader's picture

August 23, 2019 at 12:19 am

Swisch,

MLF is the one who deicded to bench the 33 players not Rodgers. I really don't get your logic here. Rodgers probably is the smartest guy in the stadium. As for what he's done lately he played through 2018 injured and only threw 2 Interceptions. He also only threw 25 TDs. Preseason is fairly meaningless besides determining depth players.

What I took away from tonight is Davis isn't just camp hype and neither is Montravius Adams. That's what preseason is for showing players who step up and UDFA gems like Kumero and Sheperd. Not getting one of the highest paid NFL players exposed to injury in a meaningless game.

+ REPLY
1 points
3
2
D.D.Driver's picture

August 23, 2019 at 06:55 am

The issue here is Rodgers contract and it's % of the salary cap. Look at it this way, if you went out and bought a 100k sports car, are you going to take it out tearing ass down gravel roads on a muddy and raining day?

+ REPLY
0 points
2
2
D.D.Driver's picture

August 23, 2019 at 07:27 am

...

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
porupack's picture

August 23, 2019 at 06:59 am

Swiish;
assumptions, assumptions, assumptions, assumptions, assumptions. Maybe, maybe, maybe, maybe. May, might, if, perhaps, would-a, shoulda, ought-a.

What else ya got?

+ REPLY
-1 points
0
1
Since&#039;61's picture

August 23, 2019 at 09:24 am

Switch you are looking at this the wrong way. First, Rodgers and 32 other players were told not to dress. Given the situation that was a smart move by Gute and MLF. Why?
Because they are beginning their first season together.

They are hired to win games, actual regular season games that count. So why should they risk starting out short handed due to injuries to their key players during the preseason which doesn’t count. Think of it from their point of view.

As for Rodgers leadership he played through 2 injuries last season and kept playing long after the Packers were out of the playoff race. That’s leadership. That is joining and leading your team mates. Beyond that Rodgers doesn’t need to prove anything to anyone. But he does need to be available to play during the regular season if the Packers are going to have a chance. Thanks, Since ‘61

+ REPLY
0 points
3
3
dobber's picture

August 23, 2019 at 10:07 am

By all accounts, Bears fans are also simultaneously concerned and reassured by how little their 1s are playing this preseason. Sounds familiar.

Week 1 could amount to preseason week 5...

The diminished reps to 1s in preseason makes it increasingly easier to eliminate PS games with the next CBA.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
Bure9620's picture

August 23, 2019 at 04:28 am

You do realize it is not a players decision who plays? There are these humans on the sideline that make those decisions, they're called coaches

+ REPLY
1 points
3
2
Oppy's picture

August 22, 2019 at 11:14 pm

He's not entirely wrong.
Rodgers may be the only NFL QB who has become so big for his britches that he whines and complains about the thought of taking snaps in the preseason.

This is a team that has historically started seasons on the slow side. Year in and year out we've commented on how the team doesn't seem quite in sync until week 6 or 7. Year after year, Rodgers takes fewer and fewer live snaps in the preseason.

This year, he'll take Zero. ZERO. new offense, many new players.. ZERO snaps.

Awesome.

+ REPLY
-4 points
9
13
dobber's picture

August 23, 2019 at 07:23 am

I wonder if the Oakland fans are bitching about Carr and his big britches this morning... ;)

+ REPLY
0 points
1
1
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

August 23, 2019 at 09:12 am

Carr played a series or so during the 2019 preseason.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
Since&#039;61's picture

August 23, 2019 at 09:31 am

And yet with only about 10 snaps last preseason he was able to bring the Packers back against the Bears in the opening game on one leg in the second half. So exactly what does the lack of preseason snaps mean? Or better yet what difference does preseason snaps make. Rodgers knows how to handoff. He knows how to read defenses. And he has the highest QB rating of all time even with his limited preseason snaps. So what is the point of preseason snaps? Thanks, Since ‘61

+ REPLY
2 points
4
2
dobber's picture

August 23, 2019 at 09:37 am

I think I would be 100% on board with you here if it weren't for the change in offensive scheme.

+ REPLY
1 points
2
1
Since&#039;61's picture

August 23, 2019 at 11:35 am

Dobber you are correct, the new offensive scheme is a factor. I think the decision not to play the 1s was a matter of risk management.

We’ll never know for sure but I think that if the game was played at Lambeau or any other legit NFL field the 1s would have played a series or two last evening. How much those snaps would help for the real games is anyone’s guess. Thanks, Since ‘61

+ REPLY
0 points
1
1
Oppy's picture

August 26, 2019 at 08:14 pm

Bend whichever way for Rodgers. He can do no wrong.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
J0hn Denver&#039;s Gavel's picture

August 23, 2019 at 01:20 am

If GB put Rodgers under center on that "football field," Id question the sanity of anyone involved in that decision!

+ REPLY
6 points
6
0
dobber's picture

August 23, 2019 at 07:26 am

The uproar around here would be tremendous...and that's just among us quasi-knowledgable fans. Imagine what the media would do with it?

Virtually every key player for the Packers got out of last night's game healthy. How many people here were saying over the last couple days that would be the best possible outcome?

Not to mention, they still got to look at a bunch of 3s and 4s, some of whom might have locked up a spot on the roster. For all the complaints about the circus atmosphere to the game, there were more pluses than minuses last night.

+ REPLY
2 points
3
1
holmesmd's picture

August 23, 2019 at 07:54 am

EDB & Bolton are significant injuries, no?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

August 23, 2019 at 08:26 am

Any preseason injury sucks, but I guess it depends on the actual severity of the injury and how you view the player...

ESB was sizing up to be the #4 (at best) or 5-6 WR. Yes, significant because he's hoped to develop into a major role on this team as he matures. I certainly don't want to see that development stunted, but for 2019, he's looking to be a depth piece mired behind Adams, Kumerow, MVS, and Allison on the depth chart.

As for Bolton, he's a UDFA filling in for Burks as he heals. Depth at that other ILB spot is shaky, yes, but that spot is often the first subbed when the team leaves base and can be schemed around. The dropoff to the next player isn't terrible. He's not played a lot of snaps against 1s...so he's as much a speculation as Summers or Crawford.

I think these are both manageable.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
J0hn Denver&#039;s Gavel's picture

August 23, 2019 at 03:03 am

dp

+ REPLY
-1 points
0
1
Alberta Packer's picture

August 22, 2019 at 10:34 pm

"Boyle made things interesting"? No game has ever been more of an indictment that Kizer is not a NFL quarterback. And please no "that he was playing with 3rd stringers." - so did Peterman who thoroughly out-performed Kizer. Little doubt Boyle should be no.2 and Packers should go with only 2 qb's for the season.

+ REPLY
15 points
16
1
Tundraboy's picture

August 22, 2019 at 10:39 pm

That's for sure. Kizer is proving at every opportunity that he is not an NFL QB.

+ REPLY
3 points
4.5
1.5
JHitTheB's picture

August 22, 2019 at 10:39 pm

"show more leadership and grit"

Dude played on a fractured leg last season lol. I think that says quite a bit

+ REPLY
5 points
7
2
Tarynfor12's picture

August 22, 2019 at 10:41 pm

Agree....but they'll find a way to keep Kizer over Boyle because this may be one part of the old culture that hasn't changed/removed...keeping the wrong guy(s).

+ REPLY
1 points
3
2
Branden Burke's picture

August 22, 2019 at 10:50 pm

Kizer can't play. He was a downgrade from Hundley. Need to move on sooner than later.

+ REPLY
10 points
10
0
dobber's picture

August 23, 2019 at 07:27 am

He IS Hundley...different day, same s#!t.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
CAG123's picture

August 22, 2019 at 11:13 pm

What moves have they made lately for you to even think such a thing?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tarynfor12's picture

August 22, 2019 at 11:31 pm

None as yet since cuts haven't been made, but keeping Kizer as QB2 will be the biggest one to allow me to think and say such a thing with more coming if this becomes the mindset in GB.
As I said....may be the part that hasn't changed/ended.

+ REPLY
0 points
1
1
porupack's picture

August 23, 2019 at 07:03 am

or, you could wait and see before diagnosing rot.

+ REPLY
0 points
2
2
CAG123's picture

August 23, 2019 at 02:10 pm

Once again with the release of Mike Daniels, letting Clay and Cobb walk what moves have they made for you to think such a thing? Cuts or not this clearly isn’t the same Packers mindset.

+ REPLY
-1 points
0
1
D.D.Driver's picture

August 23, 2019 at 07:29 am

Gudekunst cannot admit his mistakes. That's why Kizer made the team last year. Hundley clearly outplayed him, but cutting Kizer would require Gudekunst to admit he made a mistake by trading for Kizer. Cutting Daniels or cutting Graham would have resulted in very similar cap savings. But Gudekunst cannot admit that Graham was a mistake so bye bye Daniels.

I would still expect that Kizer will be the back up. So far at least Gudekunst doubles down on his mistakes.

+ REPLY
-3 points
1
4
dobber's picture

August 23, 2019 at 07:38 am

Kizer ended up the #2 because BG could deal Hundley for a pick and Boyle wasn't ready. That move was smart. Not improving the backup situation? ...not so much.

+ REPLY
5 points
5
0
D.D.Driver's picture

August 23, 2019 at 08:58 am

So are you saying Gude traded for a player (Kizer) that had no trade value?!

+ REPLY
0 points
1
1
dobber's picture

August 23, 2019 at 09:14 am

Huh?

My assertion is that they could've likely traded either player (Kizer or Hundley) and chose to keep Kizer. I think that made sense at the time as Kizer was moving into a new system and it was reasonable to expect that --as a second year guy--he had room for growth and they knew what Hundley was...besides a running joke with the fans.

The issue is that having seen Kizer last season, they stood pat at QB.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
D.D.Driver's picture

August 23, 2019 at 11:10 am

For the life of me, I don't see how anyone could have watched Kizer at Cleveland or at GB last preseason and thought "now there's a fella with tremendous upside." He was thoroughly outplayed by Hundley (it wasn't a close competition). Gute kept Kizer because he had to keep Kizer, not because it made any rational football sense. I still expect Kizer to be on the roster in 2 weeks.

+ REPLY
-1 points
0
1
D.D.Driver's picture

August 23, 2019 at 11:06 am

,,,,

+ REPLY
0 points
1
1
kevgk's picture

August 22, 2019 at 11:01 pm

I really thought Kizer would keep the battle close, but he sealed his deal as number 3, and his contract might be too big to keep around. Props for Lafleur to start Boyle and props for Boyle to step up and show some flashes

+ REPLY
5 points
5
0
Bure9620's picture

August 23, 2019 at 05:36 am

Kizer is on a rookie contract making $900,000k with zero dead money. He is as cheap as a QB can be.

+ REPLY
3 points
3
0
dobber's picture

August 23, 2019 at 07:28 am

If they have any fears about #12s back or current health, it will be reflected in the number of QBs they choose to keep on cutdowns.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
IshpemingPackAttack's picture

August 22, 2019 at 10:45 pm

The CFL should be embarrassed by the condition of that field. I hope that the NFL learned a lesson. Who the hell did they send to check the field Mr. Magoo??

+ REPLY
10 points
10
0
Oppy's picture

August 22, 2019 at 11:21 pm

I'm sure the NFL learned its lesson.

Just like they did last year, when they scheduled an NFL game to take place in a stadium in Mexico City..

And then the field was in such shit shape, they had to scrap the whole deal at the last second.

You'd think they would have told both participating teams to send their groundskeeping crews up to Winnipeg for a week or two to oversee and consult with the locals. Nope.. The NFL doesn't learn lessons.

+ REPLY
6 points
6
0
Tarynfor12's picture

August 22, 2019 at 11:33 pm

Lesson not learned...KC and LAR play in Mexico City this year also.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
Mojo's picture

August 22, 2019 at 11:01 pm

Boy, it must feel great to be one of the 33 shut-down for the game. Anyone of those who was not scratched due to injury pretty much has a roster spot.

Despite recent commentary about a possible surprise cut, Lane Taylor is safe.

+ REPLY
3 points
3
0
Mojo's picture

August 22, 2019 at 11:19 pm

Davis had the best game of his career. Looked like a legit NFL receiver. No fluky catches, he earned them.

With his ST ability he might have edged out the other WR's fighting for the five spot.

+ REPLY
5 points
5
0
GatorJason's picture

August 23, 2019 at 12:03 am

Davis is a very skilled, fast and explosive. He has been an outstanding performer during practices and in preseason when healthy. Staying healthy is his only issue. His slight build makes him vulnerable in a very violent, physical sport. When healthy, he is a dangerous/productive receiver and runner as was displayed tonight.

+ REPLY
-2 points
2
4
Jonathan Spader's picture

August 23, 2019 at 12:24 am

Not even close to true Gator. Davis has next to nothing in terms of productivity even when healthy. He hasn't looked like an NFL receiver until tonight. Who cares? Trevor Davis showed tonight he's more than just camp talk in 2019. He earned a place on the 53 and has 2019 to earn a 2nd contract. That doesn't mean he's had productivity as a WR in GB in the past.

+ REPLY
7 points
8
1
GatorJason's picture

August 23, 2019 at 12:47 am

Jonathan, it's true he was not a productive WR in McCarthy offenses. He is in the Matt Lafleur offense. Coach Lafleur and Packer teammates say he looks like a great fit in Packer RPO style of offense. He dominated in workouts without pads (I know, so what). He continued to be the top WR performer in pads until injured. That was a very good sign. We'll see this season who is right. "If" he can stay healthy, I believe he will be a dangerous and valuable weapon in this style of offense. Time will tell. Thanks for feedback.

+ REPLY
3 points
4
1
D.D.Driver's picture

August 23, 2019 at 04:25 pm

My recollection (not always reliable) is that Davis got in Rodgers doghouse and has yet to get out.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
ShooterMcGee's picture

August 23, 2019 at 01:22 am

And to think we drafted Davis 2 picks before Tyreek Hill.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Somedumbname's picture

August 23, 2019 at 02:27 am

Tyreek Hill is a dirtbag. Wouldn't want him on my team.

+ REPLY
2 points
4
2
porupack's picture

August 23, 2019 at 07:08 am

So, you're saying hindsight is 20-20? Quite an insight. I wonder who else bad was drafted ahead of who else good every draft.

+ REPLY
3 points
3
0
dobber's picture

August 23, 2019 at 07:30 am

Yeah...he came out of college with a history of domestic abuse. That's who I want on my roster. How's he done since?

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
Cartwright's picture

August 23, 2019 at 04:30 am

Haven't missed many Packer games but I missed this one and I'm glad because I can still say I never watched a 100 yard football game played on an 80 yard field. What a joke, another case of putting money before integrity. Sorry no refunds for you, we robbed you fair and square.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
Lphill's picture

August 23, 2019 at 05:35 am

Gruden is online saying the field was fine it was the Packers complaining .

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
dobber's picture

August 23, 2019 at 07:39 am

How many of his regulars did Gruden play last night? A few on defense, but offense?

Chucky was posturing. Thanks, Hard Knocks.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
Lare's picture

August 23, 2019 at 08:53 am

If the field was fine, why did Gruden agree with going to an 80 yard field?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
flackcatcher's picture

August 23, 2019 at 09:24 am

Says the coach who took a good core of players and destroyed them in two years. (Par for the course. Rotten fruit doesn't fall far from the tree)

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

August 23, 2019 at 09:27 am

The holes left by the goalpost wouldn't affect OL, DL, or QBs because those position players are extremely unlikely to go anywhere near those areas. It seems to me that the starting OL and QB could have played unless the general condition of the field (hardness, the weave of the "grass") was also an issue.

Overall, I am okay with AR and the starters not playing. It does seem to me that the NFL and the NFLPA have no concern for the quality of the product on the field or for the quality of the field itself.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Qoojo's picture

August 24, 2019 at 10:39 am

They did have a play from the "2 yard line" which would have very much put the OD, DL, QB, RB right over the hole, if it was the true 2 yard line. The hole was right in the center of the field and center of the end zone I believe.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0

Log in to comment 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.