Mark Murphy: Packers wanted Khalil Mack, Raiders thought Bears would have...· Page 3

Zero2Cool
Elite Member Topic Starter

5 years ago

Absolutely. My only contention is that GB MIGHT have had a better record than the bares. But it is all conjecture. You know, the stuff that makes up 90% of the internet discussion boards. My original comment was more than likely GB would not be 6 games better but they might have been 3 games better (9-6-1) and da bares 3 games worse (9-7). It wouldn't have all been because of Mack. A healthier Rodgers would have been a factor as well.

Would I have wanted Gute to make the deal Chicago did and give away so much? No. But that is another issue for another thread. And this site does have space for a few more threads.

Originally Posted by: wpr

The Bears jumped 6 games because of offensive scheme and their dominant defense. We gotta keep in mind, they had a stout defense to begin with. Adding Mack was fruit loops and icing on the cake. They also had a healthy set of WR if I remember right.

I wanted Mack because I like elite players. I am okay not having him because I feel we'd be falling short big time.

sschind
Senior Member

5 years ago

#22

I guess I can't really remember a game last season where I thought dang if our defense was just a little better on the pass rush we'd have won. I felt the offense was big issue.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool

Its not that I disagree with this its just that everything is connected. However, the only way to even think about which games he could have tilted in our favor is to play the what if game and for me one of the biggest what ifs with Mack directly involves our offense. What if we had gotten Mack and Rodgers hadn't gotten hurt in the first game. Sure there were more issues with our offense than just Rodgers injury but I have to think a healthy Rodgers would have certainly helped.

That's why anything that regarding what may have happened if we had gotten Mack is pure speculation. There is simply no way to know what may have happened.

sschind
Senior Member

5 years ago

#23

If for no other reason, Aaron wouldn't have faced such a tenacious pass rush in week 1. He wouldn't have been hindered with an injury and would in all probability been more effective all year.

Originally Posted by: wpr

I don't think Mack would have put us over the edge. We couldn't even make the playoffs without him. Now if we got to the 2nd round of the playoffs, I'd be thinking ya on to something.

We were far more than a Mack from being contenders.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool

I don't think he would have put us over either but as WPR said he may have made enough of a difference to win us the division. Of course had that happened would we be looking at McCarthy in training camp rather than MLF. If so many people would consider that a downside of us getting Mack.

KRK
Veteran Member

5 years ago

#24

Sschind queried:

Can we delete posts I know we can edit.

No, we can not. Z2C is a ruthless taskmaster. He not only will not let us delete posts, but after a certain period of time, he won't even let you clean up typos. He is truly a unforgiving tyrant. He owns our asses.

In Luce tua Videmus Lucem KRK

Zero2Cool
Elite Member Topic Starter

5 years ago

#25

Originally Posted by: sschind

Aaron didn't get hurt because of Mack. He got hurt because he's fragile and the Bears front seven is menacing.

wpr
Preferred Member

5 years ago

#26

Should have read everything before I made my last post sorry. Funny to think that maybe the most positive outcome of us getting Mack would have been on our offense and not our defense.

Can we delete posts I know we can edit.

I don't think he would have put us over either but as WPR said he may have made enough of a difference to win us the division. Of course had that happened would we be looking at McCarthy in training camp rather than MLF. If so many people would consider that a downside of us getting Mack.

Originally Posted by: sschind

It's all good. Zero bought enough space to allow many many members to post similar comments. He's a genius.

wpr
Preferred Member

5 years ago

#27

Aaron didn't get hurt because of Mack. He got hurt because he's fragile and the Bears front seven is menacing.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool

Of which Mack was a contributing factor. He elevated an elite defense another 2 notches. The pressure that he and others got to Rodgers. Without Mack the GB OL might have held the pressure at bay. We will never know.

Cheesey
Preferred Member

5 years ago

#28

It's all good. Zero bought enough space to allow many many members to post similar comments. He's a genius.

Originally Posted by: wpr

Kiss ass.

😂 😂 😂

wpr
Preferred Member

5 years ago

#29

Kiss ass.

😂 😂 😂

Originally Posted by: Cheesey

Just stating the facts bro.

buckeyepackfan
Veteran Member

5 years ago

#30

Flip the switch time!

Time for Mark Murphy to go back to being CEO of The Packers and leave the football process to the guys that know what they are doing.

There's no time for woulda, shoulda, coulda

New era, new leaders!

Time to sit back and enjoy the process!

I was addicted to The Hokey Pokey, but I turned myself around!

Important Information:

The PACKERSHOME uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More Details Close

Fan Shout

Zero2Cool (10h) : sounds like Packers don't get good compensation, Jaire staying

dfosterf (14h) : Nobody coming up with a keep, but at x amount

dfosterf (14h) : Trade, cut or keep

dfosterf (15h) : that from Jaire

dfosterf (15h) : My guess is the Packers floated the concept of a reworked contract via his agent and agent got a f'

Zero2Cool (15h) : Yes, and that is why I think Rob worded it how he did. Rather than say "agent"

dfosterf (15h) : Same laws apply. Agent must present such an offer to Jaire. Cannot accept or reject without presenting it

Zero2Cool (15h) : I'm thinking that is why Rob worded it how he did.

dfosterf (15h) : The Packers can certainly still make the offer to the agent

dfosterf (15h) : Laws of agency and definition of fiduciary responsibility

dfosterf (16h) : Jaire is open to a reduced contract without Jaire's permission

dfosterf (16h) : The agent would arguably violate the law if he were to tell the Packers

Zero2Cool (16h) : That someone ... likely the agent.

Zero2Cool (16h) : So, Jaire has not been offered nor rejected a pay reduction, but someone says he'd decline.

Zero2Cool (16h) : Demovksy says t was direct communication with someone familiar with Jaire’s line of thinking at that moment.

Zero2Cool (16h) : Demovsky just replied to me a bit ago. Jaire hasn't said it.

dfosterf (18h) : Of course, that depends on the definition of "we"

dfosterf (18h) : We have been told that they haven't because he wouldn't accept it. I submit we don't know that

dfosterf (18h) : What is the downside in making a calculated reduced offer to Jaire?

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Packers are receiving interest in Jaire Alexander but a trade is not imminent

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Jalen Ramsey wants to be traded. He's never happy is he?

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : two 1sts in 2022 and two 2nd's in 2023 and 2024

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Packers had fortunate last three drafts.

dfosterf (15-Apr) : I may have to move

dfosterf (15-Apr) : My wife just told the ancient Japanese sushi dude not enough rice under his fish

Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : I think a dozen is what I need

dfosterf (14-Apr) : Go fund me for this purpose just might work. A dozen nurses show up at 1265 to provide mental health assistance.

dfosterf (14-Apr) : Maybe send a crew of Angels to the Packers draft room on draft day.

Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : I am the Angel that gets visited.

dfosterf (14-Apr) : Visiting Angels has a pretty good reputation

Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : what

Martha Careful (14-Apr) : WINNING IT, not someone else losing it. The best victory though was re-uniting with his wife

Martha Careful (14-Apr) : The manner in which he won it was just amazing and wonderful. First blowing the lead then getting back, then blowing it. But ultimately

Zero2Cool (12-Apr) : I'm guessing since the thumb was broken, he wasn't feeling it.

dfosterf (10-Apr) : Looking for guidance. Not feeling the thumb.

Mucky Tundra (10-Apr) : If they knew about it or not

Mucky Tundra (10-Apr) : I don't recall that he did which is why I asked.

Zero2Cool (10-Apr) : Guessing they probably knew. Did he have cast or something on?

Mucky Tundra (10-Apr) : Did they know that at the time or was that something the realized afterwards?

Zero2Cool (9-Apr) : Van Ness played most of season with broken thumb

wpr (9-Apr) : yay

Zero2Cool (9-Apr) : Mark Murphy says Steelers likely to protect Packers game. Meaning, no Ireland

Zero2Cool (8-Apr) : Struggling to figure out what text editor options are needed and which are 'nice to have'

Mucky Tundra (8-Apr) : *CHOMP CHOMP CHOMP*

Zero2Cool (2-Apr) : WR who said he'd break Xavier Worthy 40 time...and ran slower than you

Mucky Tundra (2-Apr) : Who?

Zero2Cool (2-Apr) : Texas’ WR Isaiah Bond is scheduled to visit the Bills, Browns, Chiefs, Falcons, Packers and Titans starting next week.

Zero2Cool (2-Apr) : Spotting ball isn't changing, only measuring distance is, Which wasn't the issue.

Zero2Cool (2-Apr) : The spotting of the ball IS the issue. Not the chain gang.

Mucky Tundra (2-Apr) : Will there be a tracker on the ball or something?

Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2024 Packers Schedule

Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM

Eagles

29 - 34

Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM

COLTS

16 - 10

Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM

Titans

30 - 14

Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM

VIKINGS

29 - 31

Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM

Rams

24 - 19

Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM

CARDINALS

34 - 13

Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM

TEXANS

24 - 22

Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM

Jaguars

30 - 27

Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM

LIONS

14 - 24

Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM

Bears

20 - 19

Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM

49ERS

38 - 10

Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM

DOLPHINS

30 - 17

Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM

Lions

31 - 34

Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM

Seahawks

30 - 13

Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM

SAINTS

34 - 0

Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM

Vikings

25 - 27

Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM

BEARS

22 - 24

Sunday, Jan 12 @ 3:30 PM

Eagles

10 - 22