Packers Snap Counts Vs. Arizona: Week 7
The Packers manage to score 27 points without looking good in a hard-fought victory.

The Packers activated Center Jacob Monk from injured reserve. Monk was active but did not play. The Packers elevated DE Aron Mosby and RB Pierre Strong from the PS. Josh Jacobs was able to play so Strong was actually inactive. OT Anthony Belton, Kicker Brandon McManus, DE Devonte Wyatt, and DE Lucas Van Ness were inactive due to injury. CB Kamal Hadden and OL Donovan Jennings were healthy scratches.
OFFENSIVE LINEMEN:
| Player | Snaps | % | STs |
| Jenkins | 56 | 100 | 5/20% |
| Walker | 56 | 100 | 5/20% |
| Banks | 56 | 100 | 5/20% |
| Tom | 56 | 100 | 5/20% |
| Morgan | 56 | 100 | 5/20% |
| Rhyan | DNP | 5/20% | |
| Kinnard | DNP | 5/20% | |
| Monk | DNP | DNP |
The Packers averaged 4.09 yards per carry overall, but the running backs only managed 3.60-yards per attempt. It looked like Banks and Tom are playing better as they get healthier. Jordan Morgan became the full-time starter at right guard, as Rhyan got zero snaps. I thought the lights came on for Jordan Morgan as a run blocker last week, but I guess not. I watched Jacobs and Wilson run into the back of the offensive linemen all game. This team needs high quality running backs to have a running game.
The pass protection was good. Rasheed Walker gets beaten badly once or twice a game. For the most part, Walker was fine in pass protection, though not as a run blocker. I still don't want to pay Rasheed Walker $20M per year, but I do not immediately perceive a likely successor. The interior linemen allowed a little too much push at times but everyone was good to very good. Love had plenty of time.
RUNNING BACKS:
| Player | Snaps | % | STs |
| Jacobs | 31 | 55 | |
| Wilson | 19 | 34 | |
| Brooks | 7 | 13 | 9/36% |
Josh Jacobs finished with 55 yards on 13 carries for a 4.23-yard average and 2 touchdowns. Jacobs was on a pitch count in the first half (just 4 carries for 21 yards). Emanuel Wilson managed 17 yards on 6 carries for a 2.83 average.
QUARTERBACKS:
| Player | Snaps | % | STs |
| Love | 56 | 100 | |
| Willis | DNP |
Love completed 19 of 29 (65.6%) for 179 yards (6.17 yards/attempt) and 1 touchdown. He had a passer rating of 93.9. He gained 22 yards on 4 carries, one of which looked like a designed run. He had no big-time throws or turnover-worthy attempts.
Love plays hard and fearlessly. He has to stop taking big hits when he runs. Love recovered both of his own fumbles, fortunately. He had ample time usually. I watch the opponent's quarterback unleash passes the moment his back foot hits the ground on their back pedals. That just does not happen for Love. Love drops back, then scans the field and only then decides where the ball is going. There never seems to be a rhythm to the passing game, making the offense seem disjointed. That said, the Packers scored 27 points (again!), so what they are doing at present mostly works. The Packers are scoring 26.2 points per game, good for 8th best in the NFL, so they are doing a lot right.
TIGHT ENDS:
| Player | Snaps | % | STs |
| Kraft | 50 | 89 | DNP |
| Musgrave | 24 | 43 | DNP |
| Fitzgerald | 16 | 29 | 6/24% |
Tucker Kraft caught 5 of 10 targets for 58 yards and a touchdown. A lot of those yards came after the catch. Fitzpatrick caught 1 pass for 6 yards. Musgrave was not targeted. The Packers played 1.61 tight ends per play on average and still could not open holes in the running game. The back end of the TE room needs an overhaul next year.
WIDE RECEIVERS:
| Player | Snaps | % | STs |
| Doubs | 50 | 89 | 1/4% |
| Golden | 42 | 75 | DNP |
| Heath | 23 | 41 | DNP |
| Wicks | 15 | 27 | DNP |
| Williams | 4 | 7 | 6/24% |
Doubs caught 6 of 8 targets for 72 yards. Love missed Doubs on a deep pass in the end zone or Doubs' statistics would be even better. Golden caught all 4 of his targets for 37 yards. Golden caught 3 passes for 20 yards on the Packers first possession, and then largely disappeared, catching 1 pass in the third quarter. Doubs is so reliable, a guy who can move the chains. Green Bay needs Golden to add volume to his statistics, at least until Watson and Reed return. Wicks caught 1 of his 2 targets for 5 yards. He is coming back from an ankle injury and there are reports that he was seen in a walking boot after this game. Nobody else did anything. That is just not enough yards from the wide receivers. The return of Watson and Reed cannot come too soon.
DEFENSIVE TACKLES:
| Player | Snaps | % | STs |
| Brooks | 52 | 68 | 11/44% |
| Wooden | 42 | 55 | 6/24% |
| Brinson | 33 | 43 | 4/16% |
| Stackhouse | 14 | 18 | 1/4% |
Wooden is making me rue some things I wrote. He had had 6 tackles (3 solo) and a tackle for loss. PFF credited him with 3 stops and 4 pressures, including a QB hit. Brooks had 1 assisted tackle and a QB hit. PFF credited Brooks with 5 pressures (4 hurries and a QB hit). He continues to be productive as a pass rusher if a little deficient in run defense. Brinson had 4 tackles (1 solo) and PFF credited him with 2 hurries. Stackhouse had 2 assisted tackles. Arizona only managed 3.4-yards per carry. Those are good pressure numbers for interior defensive linemen, considering how fast and in rhythm Brissett got the ball out.
DEFENSIVE ENDS:
| Player | Snaps | % | STs |
| Parsons | 54 | 71 | |
| Gary | 47 | 62 | 5/20% |
| Enagbare | 32 | 42 | 9/36% |
| Sorrell | 30 | 39 | 6/24% |
| Mosby | 13/52% |
Parsons had 5 tackles (3 solo) and 3 sacks. PFF credited Parsons with 10 pressures (4 sacks, 2 QB hits, and 4 hurries for a 31.3% pressure rate). That is a monster game, plus a lot of the pressures and sacks came late in the game when the outcome was uncertain. Gary had 2 solo tackles, a tackle for loss, a sack, 2 QB hits, and a big forced fumble that led to a recovery by Evan Williams. PFF credited Gary with 4 pressures (1 sack, just 1 QB hit, and 2 hurries). Enagbare added 5 tackles (2 solo), a half sack, 1 QB hit, and a tackle for loss. Sorrell had a goose egg in a lot of snaps. Mosby contributed a penalty on special teams.
LINEBACKERS:
| Players | Snaps | % | STs |
| Cooper | 74 | 97 | 6/24% |
| Walker | 68 | 89 | 5/20% |
| McDuffie | 32 | 42 | 20/80% |
| Hopper | 3 | 4 | 16/64% |
| Niemann | 14/56% |
Cooper had 5 tackles (3 solo) with a pass defensed. PFF credited Cooper with 3 stops and a 98.2 passer rating allowed (4 of 5 completions for 38 yards). Quay Walker had 9 tackles (5 solo), with 3 QB hits, a tackle for loss, and 1.5 sacks. PFF credited Walker with 5 pressures (2 sacks, 2 QB hits and 1 hurry) but also listed him with a 120.8 passer rating allowed. I loved watching Quay overpower Arizona's running back when he pass rushed. McDuffie had 7 tackles (3 solo) and was fine in coverage (1 completion for 3 yards and a 56 PRA). Hopper had a solo tackle for loss.
DEFENSIVE BACKS:
| Player | Snaps | % | STs |
| McKinney | 76 | 100 | 11 |
| Hobbs | 76 | 100 | 6 |
| Nixon | 76 | 100 | 6 |
| Williams | 64 | 84 | 8 |
| Bullard | 61 | 80 | 5 |
| Valentine | 2 | 3 | 1 |
| Melton | DNP | 0 | 14 |
| Olapado | DNP | 0 | 10 |
| Anderson | DNP | 0 | 10 |
A lot of articles are zeroing in on Nate Hobbs as a problem. I note that I have advocated for moving Hobbs to the slot so Nixon and Valentine can play on the perimeter. That leaves Bullard on the bench. That said, everyone in the secondary was bad, except for Bullard, at lest according to PFF. Hobbs had a 109.7 passer rating allowed (4 of 6 completed for 86 yards). That is a lot of yards, and some of them were back-breakers that converted 3rd and 4th and long (really long sometimes). Evan Williams had a 118.8 PRA (2 of 2 for 40, including a pass interference penalty). Nixon had a 116.7 PRA (3/5 for 30 yards), and McKinney had a 108.3 (3 of 3 for 30 yards). Bullard allowed 3 completions on 3 targets but they went for just 14 yards (86.1 PRA).
Mckinney had 8 tackles (2 solo) and a pass defensed. Evan Williams had 7 tackles (3 solo), a pass defensed, a Pass Interference penalty, and he recovered a fumble. Bullard had 7 tackles (3 solo). Hobbs had 6 tackles (3 solo). Nixon had 2 solo tackles and a pass defensed.
When 4 of your 5 defensive backs and 2 of your 3 linebackers are bad in coverage, that strikes me as a systemic problem rather than a personnel issue.
SPECIAL TEAMS:
Whelan punted 3 times for a net average average of 53.67 yards per punt, with 1 inside the 20 yard line. Havrisik made 2 field goals including a 61-yarder with 2 seconds left in the half and all three extra points. There were no major mistakes on special teams.
Photo courtesy of Joe Camporeale of Imagn Images.
RB: 1.02
TE: 1.61 (high)
WR: 2.39
DT: 1.86
DE: 2.14
LB: 2.33
DB: 4.67
PLEASE SUBSCRIBE TO OUR CHEESEHEAD NATION WEEKLY NEWSLETTER HERE.
__________________________




Comments (45)
Thegreatreynoldo
October 20, 2025 at 06:12 am
It seems to me that Flacco and Brissett have shown that the way to beat GB is to take advantage of the cushion given by getting the ball out as soon as the back foot hits the ground on the back pedal. That keeps them in rhythm. Brissett is a veteran backup QB that teams pay decently, $6.25M per year in Brissett's case with 75% of it guaranteed and Flacco is a definite starting QB in the NFL, even at his age.
GB is 8th in scoring and 10th in points allowed. They are doing a lot of things right. Indeed, my evaluations of the personnel on an individual basis wouldn't lead me to viewing the Packers as a 11 or 12 win team. That being the case, since they have been winning 11 to 13 games in many years, I concluded that the coaching is pretty good.
The team has a lot of players who do some things very well but are not so hot at other things. For example, he IDL guys can rush well but they haven't been so hot against the run. [That is improving but my verdict is out still.] This leads the team to look disjointed sometimes.
I don't know that Hobbs is the problem though I am a long time fan of Valentine. At $12M per year, I expected a very average CB. PFF has him at 65.4 (i don't know if they includes the crappy game he just had against ARI). That is kind of what we have gotten. PFF generally graded him in the lowish 60s, IIRC. I don't know that Hobbs is the solution, either.
NickPerry
October 20, 2025 at 06:31 am
As good as Gute has been when he dives into Free Agency in the past, he was equally as bad with the FA he signed this past offseason.
Hobbs and Banks have been well, turds. Neither of them have been worth a fraction of what they've paid them IMO. I don't know what they had done so great that Gute felt he needed to pay them the contracts he did.
This offense NEEDS Reed and Watson to return. People are thinking the offense will really take off when Watson comes back. Maybe, I'm not so sure. IMO getting Reed back is more important.
It still looks like a great struggle for this offense to get up and down the field most series. BUT, I was happy as hell when MLF didn't kick the field goal on 4th down just before the 2 minute warning in the 4th quarter. The pass to Tuck as perfect.
As critical as I am about MLF, I thought it was a great he had some balls to try to get points with 7 seconds left before the half. AS bad as they had played, MLF still tried to get some points. A 22 yard pass to Doubs and the Packers new secret weapon Havrisik NAILS a 61 yard FG! After the Defense gave up a TD to go down 13-3 Havrisik did his thing!
Coldworld
October 20, 2025 at 09:18 am
Banks seemed decent to me yesterday. It looks like his issue is health if that continues. I’m not going to condemn that signing yet. Hobbs on the other hand is currently either too hampered by injury to be playing or just not physically talented enough to thrive outside (which was his former team’s take).
TGR appears to mildly defend Hobbs, but the reality is that he’s not able to be in contention at the point of the catch. Thus he’s not in a be position to affect the game positively. If that’s health then the question is why is he starting and why was he still in after the first half? If it’s ability then the question is when are we going to accept reality and replace him? We can not carry that level of performance week on week from a starting perimeter corner. He needs to sit until he forces himself in on merit and that should start inside.
Bullard is good after the catch and against the run, but he’s a non factor in preventing completions. If Hobbs is healthy we need to look at whether better coverage (based on his past) inside is a bigger advantage situationally and against teams like the Cardinals who don’t use the run heavily or stick with it.
Speaking of the run, Wooden and Brooks had their collective best games. However, that was in part because the Cardinals didn’t press the run button consistently and lacked their top 3 choices. In turn that meant that Brooks and Wooden could do what they do best and penetrate. I still have significant questions how both will hold up against a good between the tackles runner in an offense determined to run. I still think we need help there if possible. I’m of the opinion we may need it at CB for depth behind Valentine.
Hafley is making mistakes. Last week his safeties provided little help to the corners. This week McBride was regularly left uncovered. That’s schematic issues and on both occasions they went unadjusted. McBride is going to make plays but one can’t leave them to be made uncontested. We did and that’s not something that can be repeated and nor was his usage unpredictable. Hafley needs to rethink some of his approach to the secondary.
On offense, I’d just like to say that wouldn’t it be nice to get Golden and Kraft involved in the same half? Is that really impossible? In addition, if we are not going to use Musgrave and Fitzgerald as weapons, then trot out an extra OL or two as TEs because the idea that either can block meaningfully has well and truly been disproved. Those sets just take a WR or two off the field for little to no upside. Even better, pick up a blocking TE. Those are still out there. He won’t get less yards but he might help others get more.
Gute has some work to do in my view. Hafley has to adjust his backfield usage. As to LaFleur, how about just going uptempo at times and calling more plays with Kraft and Golden as priority reads. Thank you to Love and the O for getting him to go for it late. That last drive from AZ would have been enough to get into field goal position and win. Sure, had it failed we lose but, had a kick succeeded, we very likely do too.
Thegreatreynoldo
October 20, 2025 at 09:57 am
As long as you include the "mildly" in your description, I am in agreement. Maybe GB can sign a better street free agent CB or grab one off somebody's PS, but I wonder if most of them are actually better than Hobbs. Heck, I think GB has a guy who is a better cover CB than Hobbs sitting on the bench. I think if GB gets someone teams will target someone else.
Since 4 of 5 DBs and 2 of 3 LBs had bad days in coverage, I think there is a problem with the scheme, with the matchups, with the technique or amount of cushion being given.... PFF has Nixon as the 18th best cover CB, Hobbs 53rd and Bullard 72nd of 109 CBs.
SicSemperTyrannis
October 20, 2025 at 02:20 pm
I think GB needed a CB and Gutey got the best CB he could in Hobbs. Hopefully he hasn't been so injured that he made anything worse by playing, and he wasn't given snaps solely due to how much they're paying him. The idea that GB is so conservative with injuries that they'd never do such a thing simply isn't true any more.
Gotta figure out a solution to this mess BEFORE the next game, with some gratitude that it didn't cost them another loss.
Guam
October 20, 2025 at 07:59 am
I would add Prescott to that QB list. It was Dallas that showed the world the blueprint against the Packer D - quick rhythm passes underneath.
dobber
October 20, 2025 at 08:57 am
They just built on what Flacco and Cleveland did to the Packers in the second half.
The Packers did finally start sending DBs on blitzes and adding guys to the mix to try to move Brissett off his spot. That takes a secondary that's not built to play man and exposes them a little more.
As always, ARod doesn't get sacked a lot...only 9 times this season. They're going to have to find a way to hold up in coverage so the pressure can get home.
barutanseijin
October 20, 2025 at 09:33 am
Even if they don’t sack him, it’s a win for the defense if they can get him to throw the ball away. The Packers need to harass him.
SicSemperTyrannis
October 20, 2025 at 02:25 pm
Quay Walker is still best when he plays downhill. So is Bullard. Both are good at being QB spy. I'm not sure if #7 is still outright bad in coverage, but Bullard is. AR12 will watch the film of these QBs slicing up our defense and FEAST - unless Hafley can put these pieces together effectively. Somehow.
Coldworld
October 20, 2025 at 05:59 pm
Hobbs got a 47.9 for yesterday with them attributing to him four catches on five targets for 87 yards, two tackles missed and one holding penalty.
Against the Bengals his grade was 58.1 with him again allowing 4 catches on 4 targets and incurring a penalty but he was not charged with missing any tackles.
GregC
October 20, 2025 at 06:18 am
There was a pretty big mistake on special teams on one of those 4th quarter kickoffs, when the Packers allowed a return to around the 40-yard-line, with a facemask penalty tacked on, so the Cardinals started their drive around the 45 yard line of the Packers. But still, I'll take the special teams performance overall. The 61-yard field goal was fantastic. Havrisik seems to inspire his teammates to block for his field goal attempts. And he really nailed that kick. It looked like it had a few yards to spare.
Maybe you have pinpointed why the offense looks disjointed: Love does not throw in rhythm. I think it's because he is always hunting big plays. His approach is mostly working, though. This year he seems much improved in moving the offense at the ends of games.
Until this week, I thought they were doing fine with Doubs, Golden, and Wicks at WR, but the group looked really thin in this game, partly because Wicks went out with an injury after 15 snaps and may have been playing hurt. He's had nagging injuries this year.
The coverage was a mess. Not just little stuff this time, but several big plays. They didn't even cover McBride on his two TD catches. At least they held up on that final drive.
dobber
October 20, 2025 at 08:44 am
Yup. That long return + penalty = go ahead 4th quarter FG for AZ.
T7Steve
October 20, 2025 at 07:11 am
"Wooden is making me rue some things I wrote." I need a reminder on what you wrote please, TGR.
This was another radio game for me. Larry M. blamed Morgan for getting pushed back into Love's face a few times in the beginning but forgave Walker getting pushed back into Love and knocking him down for a sack. Wonder if he's campaigning for Ryan because he seemed to be after Morgan on the run blocking too even on Jacobs' TD runs. He did give some love towards the end (like maybe it was pointed out to him).
Hobbs was the one pointed out in missed coverage the most, but the announcers were pretty exasperated on most of the third down conversions made with long passes with all the DBs taking some blame. it sounded to me like they weren't too confident in a Packer's coming out with a victory.
I've always said that a good team finds a way to win games when they're not at their best, so I'll take this another step in the right direction for this team, and a win is a win. Can't remember Love's last come from behind win where they hadn't had a lead through the entire game. Maybe someone can help remind me?
Guam
October 20, 2025 at 08:14 am
I haven't seen the all-22 so I may be wrong, but the Packer safeties appeared to have a bad game in coverage. They were not even in the picture frame on most of the deep completions by the Cards so there seemed to be little or no help over the top for the CBs. On one of McBrides' TDs, Cooper covered McBride short and then turned him loose to a safety for deep coverage. Unfortunately there wasn't a safety anywhere in sight. Not absolutely sure it was the safety's fault but it was clear Cooper expected help deep and it was the easiest TD McBride will have all year.
I will gladly take a road win, but the Packers trailed all game until the end and nobody watching the game was confident of an ultimate victory.
dobber
October 20, 2025 at 08:52 am
After the Cleveland game, where they led most of the time and found a way to lose, it's nice to see them find a way to win.
SicSemperTyrannis
October 20, 2025 at 02:30 pm
+1
For all the improvements that need to be made, this is the biggest takeaway of the week.
GPG!
T7Steve
October 20, 2025 at 08:59 am
Do you think they're trying to bring or have more out of Hobbs like they did in Valentine? They know whom Valentine's best at covering and let him sit the whole game. Do they think they can coach Hobbs up like they did with Nixon who still has bad moments but has improved consistently since the beginning?
dobber
October 20, 2025 at 09:15 am
Remember that Nixon played very few defensive snaps before he came to GB to follow Bisaccia as a STs guy. It wasn't until his second season in GB that he became a defensive regular. With that in mind, I wouldn't be expecting much of a learning curve with Hobbs beyond learning to play more on the outside.
T7Steve
October 20, 2025 at 09:28 am
I was just hoping they were seeing a higher ceiling they can get out of him as some sort of explanation besides just that they're paying him allot, so they have to use him. Valentine seems like he's good in run support, but I don't know how Hobbs is. They said he was good but, was hitting too hard against our own guys in camp.
dobber
October 20, 2025 at 08:41 am
"Larry M. blamed Morgan for getting pushed back into Love's face a few times in the beginning"
It seemed like Morgan was seeing a lot of Calais Campbell...he's a load.
SicSemperTyrannis
October 20, 2025 at 02:38 pm
6'8" of Calais! Yes, not an easy assignment.
Thegreatreynoldo
October 20, 2025 at 10:12 am
I was drooling over the IDL prospects in the draft. And, I have been criticizing Kenny Clark as overpaid though still better than average for a couple of years now. I thought Wyatt and Brooks were not so hot at run defense but had proven that they could rush the passer. And then there was Wooden, who was undersized to be a run stuffer and was just okay at it while offering almost no pass rush. I did think Wooden probably would have a job in the NFL but as someone's 5th or 6th IDL. While doing numbers, I was keeping Clark, Wyatt, Brooks, rookie high pick, and the better of late draft pick (turned out to be Brinson) or a pure NT UDFA like Mike Pennel back in the day. I concluded that Wooden did not have the potential to get better and wanted to make room for new blood.
When GB traded Clark, I did admit that Wooden should make the team. Not the most rousing endorsement, but at least I was not going to cut him anymore.
T7Steve
October 20, 2025 at 12:13 pm
Thanks. I was trying to remember. Don't ever get old!
Guam
October 20, 2025 at 03:06 pm
Already there................
SicSemperTyrannis
October 20, 2025 at 02:35 pm
Steve, I'm at a complete loss as to why Sean Rhyan hasn't been playing. I haven't seen him play poorly, and they seem to want Jordan Morgan to be our LT starting next year. This seems like a strange way to get there? I understand giving him snaps any way they can, but I think JM plays better on the left side and also plays better at tackle than guard. Neither do I see Walker playing all that great all the time. Rotating him with JM seems like the obvious choice - unless they're getting Sean Rhyan to focus on playing C in case Jenkins doesn't continue to improve?
Film study will be required to analyze the O line play in this game.
Coldworld
October 20, 2025 at 03:20 pm
I think Walker is playing much better than many give him credit for. I see PFF agrees (for what that is worth). Not his best ever football, but still well.
As to Morgan, the prior week was probably the best RG play we have seen in both facets. Not a high bar perhaps, admittedly. . This week he was still reasonable in pass pro but the run game wasn’t there. However, Campbell is big challenge. He’s slowed but he’s strong and knows all the tricks.
The last thing I want is rotation. Make a choice, which they seem to have, and stick with it until play forces a change. Players get better with experience typically. O Lines get better when they know their neighbors traits better too. That comes from playing together consistently.
Thegreatreynoldo
October 20, 2025 at 08:49 pm
I gave Rasheed a "mild" defense as well - LOL. He is fine in pass pro except for a couple of whiffs each game. PFF liked his run blocking as well.
I wrote in the watch party comments that I was tired of watching Jacobs run into Jordan Morgan's backside. PFF gave Morgan a 27.3 run block grade, with a 76.6 pass block grade. The Packers have a type. Run grades were 56.9 for Elgton and 56.1 for Banks. 3 of 5 were below average = not good running game.
PFF leaves me scratching my head sometimes but it seems objective. We can argue about how accurate. I found the coverage grades odd. 73.6 for McKinney and 67.1 for Bullard. Evan Williams 57.9 despite a DPI and giving up yards. Quay had a 69.2 but they hated some other stuff and gave him overall a 58.6. Cooper coverage grade was 61.7 but overall just 49.8. Hobbs 42.1 coverage seems right and Nixon checked in at 56.2 coverage grade. That is with a pretty good pass rush! PFF like McDuffie at 76.8 coverage.
Brooks is odd. A 61.7 pass rush grade and a 73.5 run defense grade combined for a 70.8. I thought and think the run and pass rush grades should be reversed. At least Brinson and Stackhouse (61.4 and 59.5) were average, an improvement for those two.
Guam
October 20, 2025 at 07:54 am
"The return of Watson and Reed cannot come too soon."
Strongly concur TGR. Doubs seems to be the only reliable WR at the moment. Golden certainly has flashes, but then disappears for stretches (typical rookie). Wicks seems often injured this year and Heath and Williams have been non factors. If Watson doesn't return next week I would hope LaFleur might try Musgrave at WR. He can't do less than Wicks, Heath or Williams have been doing.
Banks finally seems to be stepping into his role as LG. Due to injury he has been a non factor this year to date but I thought he played a solid game yesterday. Gute may be okay with this signing - at least he hasn't been playing poorly like the other free agent signing this year.
Would love to know why Valentine only got two snaps with the defense yesterday, especially since Hobbs had a bad day. That was the biggest head scratcher for me.
LambeauPlain
October 20, 2025 at 09:25 am
The anticipation of having a potent "12" personnel with Kraft and Musgrave looks to be moot.
Last season I noticed Musgrave playing timid after returning from his bad luck run of injuries...the punctured kidney, especially.
He has become the invisible man. Just no impact...he doesn't get open or block well...surprising given his size and speed.
He continues to play timid...seemingly going through the motions and is losing the trust of his coaches (who are giving his snaps to the very pedestrian Fitzgerald) or his QB (who rarely targets him now).
This is probably his last season as a Packer.
Guam
October 20, 2025 at 09:41 am
Musgrave has been anything but impactful to date despite being a second round draft choice. I am hoping the Packers can find a key to unlock him but you may well be right, his days in Green Bay will be numbered if he doesn't start contributing.
Coldworld
October 20, 2025 at 03:29 pm
To unlock Musgrave you have to treat him as a WR or at least build a move TE into the offense. We don’t. We can barely engineer 5 targets for Kraft. Instead we use Musgrave as a blocker, which is like asking Golden to play DT. Ok, not quite but almost as daft.
We couldn’t even get Musgrave out there yesterday after Wicks exited, despite Heath being a non factor. Why? Ask LaFleur. We would be better off with a 6th OL playing TE to block or swapping out a TE for a block first TE. That’s all LaFleur uses back up TEs for now and throughout his tenure. We have 3 back ups and our best blocker by far is still Kraft.
Thegreatreynoldo
October 20, 2025 at 10:19 am
Probably the same reason Eric Stokes got 588 regular season snaps in 2024. I don't know the answer to that, either.
SicSemperTyrannis
October 20, 2025 at 02:45 pm
I don't think Golden disappearing is due to Golden. Musgrave is basically a big bodied WR, not sure why he's not been targeted more in his limited snaps. #9 has a 21 day window to be activated, doesn't that expire after this next game? I'd expect him to be given at least some snaps.
Haley's gotta figure out this secondary! Can't afford a loss in Pittsburgh, where GB has not won since 1970.
barutanseijin
October 20, 2025 at 07:57 am
Never mind the stats, this was a good game. Many fans dismissed the Cards, but they were a worthy opponent. (Unlike some of those Bear, Lions and Viking teams of years gone by. ) Brisset played well and it took a great performance from Parsons to win. On to Pittsburgh.
NFLfan
October 20, 2025 at 08:46 am
Barely winning against statistically lower-rung teams are not good wins. Once in awhile this is ok but it is becoming a pattern. There is nothing wrong with objective critique.
SicSemperTyrannis
October 20, 2025 at 02:47 pm
Is constantly playing down to the level of your opponents the same thing as falling into a trap game? Whatever it is, the trend is disturbing.
GregC
October 20, 2025 at 03:19 pm
Considering that the 49ers, Seahawks, and Colts--all good teams this year--were barely able to beat the Cardinals, I don't think the Packers were playing down to anybody.
Coldworld
October 20, 2025 at 03:34 pm
To be realistic, in some of those games the Cardinals were healthier and had a much more credible run game. They started yesterday with their 4th and 5th choice running backs. Their only consistent plus weapon is McBride. Not that we seemed aware of that by how we covered him.
I will let McKinney answer this rather threadbare theme that a win is a win and that’s all that matters, irrespective of how it is achieved:
"It shouldn't even come down to the fourth quarter. I think we have a better team, and I don't think we played really up to our standard as much," said McKinney, via Ryan Wood of the Green Bay Press-Gazette after the game.
"We'll get back to the film room and find ways to be better, but we for damn sure can't do this against good teams, because it's not going to work. I think the guys know that. Yeah, we're happy about the win, but we've got to be a lot better."
Yes, he’s right.
GregC
October 20, 2025 at 04:11 pm
I think pretty much the same players were injured when they played the Colts the week before. I know they've been dealing with injuries at running back for several weeks now.
dobber
October 20, 2025 at 08:50 am
"TE: 1.61 (high)"
Interestingly, this seems to be where Wicks' snaps went when he was in and out of the game. It didn't translate into TE production. It's hard to say whether it helped the run game, either, as I recall a couple of blocking snaps where Musgrave got either dropped on his backside or beat soundly.
"When 4 of your 5 defensive backs and 2 of your 3 linebackers are bad in coverage, that strikes me as a systemic problem rather than a personnel issue."
There was something amiss in general yesterday--almost as if they game planned for a different team. It should've been no surprise to see McBride targeted repeatedly--and was essentially uncovered more than a couple times--but Harrison, a talented but inconsistent WR, was getting way too open over and over. It's almost as if the defense wasn't getting its play calls straight.
Leatherhead
October 20, 2025 at 10:04 am
I'm not sure why Hobbs is playing and Valentine isn't. Valentine has been a defacto starter the last two years, and never looked as bad as Hobbs did yesterday.
T7Steve
October 20, 2025 at 12:38 pm
I'm wondering if Valentine was dinged or being punished for some in-locker-room type thing because after the second or third 3rd down conversion you'd think he'd be in there. He only played a couple ST plays. If he was healthy, you'd think he be in most all if he was on the bench for other than injuries or discipline.
SicSemperTyrannis
October 20, 2025 at 02:52 pm
Valentine played one, count them (1) snap on ST. I agree with your assessment that the only logical explanation for this would be if it were some disciplinary measure. MLF has been known to do some illogical things, like "forgetting" to use a great RB for long stretches of a game; so maybe this was pure oversight on his part? Not exactly confidence inspiring.
T7Steve
October 21, 2025 at 05:47 am
If it was disciplinary, it's a good sign that we know nothing about it in this day and age. They're supposed to, but how often do these things stay in the locker room anymore when it's just one click away?
LeotisHarris
October 20, 2025 at 09:36 pm
"Valentine has been a defacto starter the last two years, and never looked as bad as Hobbs did yesterday."
Carrington eating 20+ yards of Dallas Goedert's stiff arm has entered the chat:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rgDLqO5Vi34