Here's a perhaps stupid theory:

The Packer's have too many great players. That sounds like a good problem to have, right? Maybe, but what it could mean is that they will have a difficult timing affording good to above-average players, and you need a team full of those kinds of guys to win meaningful games. Currently they have:

1. Top 3 (best?) QB
2. Top 3 (best?) WR
3. Top 3 (best?) CB
4. Top 3 (best?) LT
5. Top 5 RB
6. Top 5 S (Amos)
7. Top 5 NT
8. Top 10 (top 5?) Edge

I still worry that paying Aaron Jones big money was a mistake, as it will make it harder to keep Adams and Alexander, both of whom I think are more important. Plus, it makes it that much harder to generally fill out the roster with above average-good players.

It will be very interesting to see what happens in the next 2-3 years with the cap, who they manage to retain and who they have to let walk. Especially with all of the weird stuff they had to do to get under the cap this year.

---

The did pay Jones less then he could have got on the open market. Hopefully other players, like Adams, will also help the team in that way.
It sucks that when you finally get great players that you developed, that you end up having to let them leave because of the cap. That’s why your shot at a super bowl window is so small.
Makes you wonder how New England remained so good for so many years. That’s so rare.

---

Split this into it's own topic because it's good.

Here's a perhaps stupid theory:

The Packer's have too many great players. That sounds like a good problem to have, right? Maybe, but what it could mean is that they will have a difficult timing affording good to above-average players, and you need a team full of those kinds of guys to win meaningful games. Currently they have:

1. Top 3 (best?) QB
2. Top 3 (best?) WR
3. Top 3 (best?) CB
4. Top 3 (best?) LT
5. Top 5 RB
6. Top 5 S (Amos)
7. Top 5 NT
8. Top 10 (top 5?) Edge

I still worry that paying Aaron Jones big money was a mistake, as it will make it harder to keep Adams and Alexander, both of whom I think are more important. Plus, it makes it that much harder to generally fill out the roster with above average-good players.

It will be very interesting to see what happens in the next 2-3 years with the cap, who they manage to retain and who they have to let walk. Especially with all of the weird stuff they had to do to get under the cap this year.

I had a similar exchange on Tweeter about this. I said it was a good problem to have and was told it's not a good problem to have. And the retort was saying the Packers need to do better at drafting because they won't be able to re-sign all their guys. I thought that was funny. If the Packers weren't good at drafting, would they have all these home grown studs to re-sign? 🤷‍♂️

The Aaron Rodgers contract is what really hurts this team. It's not team friendly at all.

---

Yeah....it’s kind of stupid. If they draft lousy players, people complain. If they draft great players, who then want to get paid, those same people complain that they will want too much money to stay here.
If Rodgers was really a team guy, he’d let go of his massive ego a take a pay cut to allow the team to resign other players.
A “pay cut” at his level doesn’t mean he’d be playing for peanuts. He’d still be making multi-millions a year. Not exactly poverty level.
Does he value a shot at a second Super Bowl worth that?
It’s not like he had a short shot at making a ton of money, so he has to grab it all now. He’s made more then enough to last him and his kids (if he ever has any) the rest of his and their lives. So his future is set.
At what point is it enough?

---

I think they're referring to the time Gute had to go out and sign the Smiths, Amos, Billy Turner, plug all those holes.

If we draft a guy, we got him at a discount for 5 years. Problem is, he's in a developmental phase when he's young.

Next year we'll trade Aaron's cap hit away, barring an injury to Love. Not to jinx.

---

Yeah....it’s kind of stupid. If they draft lousy players, people complain. If they draft great players, who then want to get paid, those same people complain that they will want too much money to stay here.
If Rodgers was really a team guy, he’d let go of his massive ego a take a pay cut to allow the team to resign other players.
A “pay cut” at his level doesn’t mean he’d be playing for peanuts. He’d still be making multi-millions a year. Not exactly poverty level.
Does he value a shot at a second Super Bowl worth that?
It’s not like he had a short shot at making a ton of money, so he has to grab it all now. He’s made more then enough to last him and his kids (if he ever has any) the rest of his and their lives. So his future is set.
At what point is it enough?

I'm maintaining what I said before the 2018 contract. I wanted them to offer up a 10 year contract for like $120 guaranteed. This was assuming he had 3-4 good years left and then the contract was spread throughout the other years as the Salary Cap ballooned. I'm not sure if he'd sign that. It's easy for me to sit in my little office saying hell yeah, $120 million guaranteed? Sign me up! I'm not talented like Aaron Rodgers. SURPRISED you all are, I know.

---

. SURPRISED you all are, I know.

What.....Zero is actually........

YODA?!?!?😎😂

---

What.....Zero is actually........

YODA?!?!?😎😂

I have spoken.

---

I think they're referring to the time Gute had to go out and sign the Smiths, Amos, Billy Turner, plug all those holes.

If we draft a guy, we got him at a discount for 5 years. Problem is, he's in a developmental phase when he's young.

Next year we'll trade Aaron's cap hit away, barring an injury to Love. Not to jinx.

We really didn't sign the Smith Bros, Amos, Graham and Turner because we drafted too many good players to resign, we signed them because the 2011-2014 drafts were on average hit and miss and the 2015-2018* drafts were just flat out bad on average. Gutey dipped into FA in order to plug holes and hold the line until guys like Gary, Savage, Dillon, Deguera, Runyan, Newman etc could be developed. A lot of the frothing at the mouth of Guteys draft picks stems from people thinking GB was a few players from contending in 2018 and 2019 when they weren't.

*Clark, Jones and Alexander being big exceptions. Guys like Martinez and Jamaal were nice finds for the round picked but far and few between.

---

I have spoken.

Chile, please.

---

Chile, please.

---

We really didn't sign the Smith Bros, Amos, Graham and Turner because we drafted too many good players to resign, we signed them because the 2011-2014 drafts were on average hit and miss and the 2015-2018* drafts were just flat out bad on average. Gutey dipped into FA in order to plug holes and hold the line until guys like Gary, Savage, Dillon, Deguera, Runyan, Newman etc could be developed. A lot of the frothing at the mouth of Guteys draft picks stems from people thinking GB was a few players from contending in 2018 and 2019 when they weren't.

*Clark, Jones and Alexander being big exceptions. Guys like Martinez and Jamaal were nice finds for the round picked but far and few between.

This is very true. IF they had drafted better, they wouldn't have needed to spend big in free agency.

---

Here's a perhaps stupid theory:

The Packer's have too many great players. That sounds like a good problem to have, right? Maybe, but what it could mean is that they will have a difficult timing affording good to above-average players, and you need a team full of those kinds of guys to win meaningful games.

That theory doesn't work in the modern NFL, as they cut back more and more practice times, teams have gotten away from above-average vet players... and saving that money to pay the true stars.

So the problem you are mentioning, is exactly the Packers strength... of why they're done so well.

But yes, it seems like the Packers have got themselves into a bit of a Cap financial tough spot and they're probably have to reload in the next couple of years, I've been looking at 2023, as when I think Gute was aiming for.

And yeah, Gute might have already be starting the restock. He got a potential future QB, and stocked the OL pretty well.

But he's going to have to let some players leave next year, at least Preston Smith, unless they can agree to a pay cut, which they already did once, so maybe it'll happen again. But there will probably have to be more moves too... like losing Jenkins or Turner. Which is why I think Gute partly was stocking up on OL.

---

That theory doesn't work in the modern NFL, as they cut back more and more practice times, teams have gotten away from above-average vet players... and saving that money to pay the true stars.

So the problem you are mentioning, is exactly the Packers strength... of why they're done so well.

But yes, it seems like the Packers have got themselves into a bit of a Cap financial tough spot and they're probably have to reload in the next couple of years, I've been looking at 2023, as when I think Gute was aiming for.

And yeah, Gute might have already be starting the restock. He got a potential future QB, and stocked the OL pretty well.

But he's going to have to let some players leave next year, at least Preston Smith, unless they can agree to a pay cut, which they already did once, so maybe it'll happen again. But there will probably have to be more moves too... like losing Jenkins or Turner. Which is why I think Gute partly was stocking up on OL.

Yeah I mean the Packers have so many good players, and seemingly at all the key positions, that they should be a good team even if the rest of the guys were scrubs. And for the most part they aren't scrubs, hell I didn't even mention guys like Elgton Jenkins, perhaps one of the best young interior lineman in the NFL.

But yes, the longer term cap consequences is what has me a bit more concerned. Though I generally think it's a good time to "mortgage for the future", with Aaron Rodgers being in the twilight of his career. If it works out, awesome! If it fails, well, they're going to have to rebuild either way, so eating some dead cap money will be the least of their problems.

Your point about reduced training time etc is interesting. I think it's made it harder for teams like the Packers that have relied so much on developing draft picks, to get over the hump. There's probably a decent argument to make that was, if not the main factor, partially why Ted Thompson's drafts fell off towards the end of his tenure.

---

Your point about reduced training time etc is interesting. I think it's made it harder for teams like the Packers that have relied so much on developing draft picks, to get over the hump. There's probably a decent argument to make that was, if not the main factor, partially why Ted Thompson's drafts fell off towards the end of his tenure.

Except that most of the teams actually moved more I'm the direction of draft and development with less training... and more focused on paying the big stars and not paying the vets that are only above average as much, making many of the teams younger, which Ted was ahead of his time on.

Though, Ted did over pay players that were only good too often... people complained Thompson didn't spend money, but he did, it was just on inside guys and not outside guys. Thompson would of been better off letting more of the guys that were only good but not great leave sooner... Hawk, Cobb, etc.

As far as why Thompson drafts dropped off, I think partly due to guys getting injured and part of it was due to Thompson mental health problems. I think it effected him sooner than they realized. And his drafts weren't nearly as good, and then he seemed to start trying some more new school stuff in the Spriggs draft where he got a long more length than his normal drafts. And I'm not sure the new school or mixing of ideas worked well for him.

---

Beast bantered

As far as why Thompson drafts dropped off, I think partly due to guys getting injured and part of it was due to Thompson mental health problems. I think it effected him sooner than they realized. And his drafts weren't nearly as good, and then he seemed to start trying some more new school stuff in the Spriggs draft where he got a long more length than his normal drafts. And I'm not sure the new school or mixing of ideas worked well for him.

I think you are spot on, but if you look at the tape of Spriggs against Bosa OSU, the guy was friggin awesome. Yes, a miss, but I get it.

---

He is really really good. But how much of that is because he is Rodgers security blanket.

If you believe Rodgers is exceptionally good, and I do, a big part of Adams success is that 12 targets him an inordinate percentage of times.

He is worth definitely worth keeping, but only at a reasonable price.

---

Beast bantered I think you are spot on, but if you look at the tape of Spriggs against Bosa OSU, the guy was friggin awesome. Yes, a miss, but I get it.

Oh I agree, he was surprisingly good against Bosa, but as I said before his draft, if he's drafted for just his ceiling highlights, he should be a lock to be drafted in the top 20 overall. But his lack of development, especially considering he was a four year starter (which suggest he should be more developed than average) I wouldn't touch him in the top 40. But I understand taking a chance later on him.

Yes to be clear, I'm just stating that the majority of that draft is very different style (most new style) of drafts than Thompson previous drafts, seemingly looking for length at the edge players and speed WR... and that's not a good nor bad thing, just different style, in they're successful players either style works just fine.

Though I didn't get the Fackrell pick that high, he lacked strength and physical in what he showed in college, though I liked him more than Burks.

---

He is really really good. But how much of that is because he is Rodgers security blanket.

If you believe Rodgers is exceptionally good, and I do, a big part of Adams success is that 12 targets him an inordinate percentage of times.

He is worth definitely worth keeping, but only at a reasonable price.

Yes, having one of the best QBs in the NFL certainly helps, that being said, he doesn't have a lot of competition with teammates for whom Rodgers should look at more, or whom defensive coaches and players need to focus on stopping... and teams still can't.

Adams is one of the best route runners and great with his footwork. Think of all the top tier WRs out there, can you think of any of them that is as slow as Adams? Yes that is a bit of a knock on Adams, but it's also a compliment to his development, he had less elite talent and maximum his footwork more than others to get on a similar level as those other top their guys.

But really stopping the Packers offense is basically trying to stop Jones and Adams or blow up
/dominant the OL. Teams haven't done so well with those the last two years in this system that's gotten the OL and running game on track.

---