Packers 2020 Offseason Thread - Packers Talking Extension with Aaron Jones
Moderators: paulpressey25, MickeyDavis, humanrefutation
Re: Packers 2020 Offseason Thread - Favre says Packers "burned bridge" with Rodgers
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 16,744
- And1: 8,159
- Joined: Feb 06, 2006
-
Re: Packers 2020 Offseason Thread - Favre says Packers "burned bridge" with Rodgers
I’d be interested to know how one could possibly surmise how many total yards of offense are lost on dropped balls. I’d also be interested if they could tell me how many stalled drives we had due to Aaron not taking an open read and looking for a bigger play.
Do it for Chuck
Re: Packers 2020 Offseason Thread - Favre says Packers "burned bridge" with Rodgers
-
- Analyst
- Posts: 3,516
- And1: 2,303
- Joined: May 27, 2005
-
Re: Packers 2020 Offseason Thread - Favre says Packers "burned bridge" with Rodgers
Receiver and QB play didn't cause us to get stomped (twice) by San Fran.
Our run D was pathetic, and our offensive line got dominated. They killed us in the trenches.
Good thing we fixed that. Oh, wait
Our run D was pathetic, and our offensive line got dominated. They killed us in the trenches.
Good thing we fixed that. Oh, wait

Bucks in 6
Re: Packers 2020 Offseason Thread - Favre says Packers "burned bridge" with Rodgers
-
- Head Coach
- Posts: 7,086
- And1: 2,707
- Joined: Feb 23, 2019
-
Re: Packers 2020 Offseason Thread - Favre says Packers "burned bridge" with Rodgers
jakecronus8 wrote:I’d be interested to know how one could possibly surmise how many total yards of offense are lost on dropped balls. I’d also be interested if they could tell me how many stalled drives we had due to Aaron not taking an open read and looking for a bigger play.
I agree. Everyone i mean every pro football know it all brings up the packer receivers as a problem yet you nailed it its adsolutely not all on the wrs because if our former MVP would hit the hot read open guy instead of throwing a 25 yard pass on 3rd and 4 or tbrowing to a triple teamed adams the drives would continue and our weak ass receiving core wouldnt look so weak.
I know im in the minority on this but i would love rodgers to put up bradys daily stats what i mean is brady will go 35-41 only 281 yards but 3 tds he will dink n dunk all game every game rarely throws long.
Rodgers will go 25-45 275 yards plus.It seems like he just refuses to take what the D gives him and on 3rd n short he just will never try to move the chains with a pass to the 1st down marker instead he throws a low % pass 25 yards down the field which is usually incomplete and as fans we blame the receiverz
Re: Packers 2020 Offseason Thread - Favre says Packers "burned bridge" with Rodgers
-
- Head Coach
- Posts: 7,086
- And1: 2,707
- Joined: Feb 23, 2019
-
Re: Packers 2020 Offseason Thread - Favre says Packers "burned bridge" with Rodgers
Wow larry warford just got cut by the aints 3 time all pro guard to me this could be a guy GB talks to would upgrade that line
Re: Packers 2020 Offseason Thread - Favre says Packers "burned bridge" with Rodgers
-
- Head Coach
- Posts: 6,496
- And1: 2,383
- Joined: Jul 08, 2014
Re: Packers 2020 Offseason Thread - Favre says Packers "burned bridge" with Rodgers
Daver wrote:jakecronus8 wrote:I’d be interested to know how one could possibly surmise how many total yards of offense are lost on dropped balls. I’d also be interested if they could tell me how many stalled drives we had due to Aaron not taking an open read and looking for a bigger play.
I agree. Everyone i mean every pro football know it all brings up the packer receivers as a problem yet you nailed it its adsolutely not all on the wrs because if our former MVP would hit the hot read open guy instead of throwing a 25 yard pass on 3rd and 4 or tbrowing to a triple teamed adams the drives would continue and our weak ass receiving core wouldnt look so weak.
I know im in the minority on this but i would love rodgers to put up bradys daily stats what i mean is brady will go 35-41 only 281 yards but 3 tds he will dink n dunk all game every game rarely throws long.
Rodgers will go 25-45 275 yards plus.It seems like he just refuses to take what the D gives him and on 3rd n short he just will never try to move the chains with a pass to the 1st down marker instead he throws a low % pass 25 yards down the field which is usually incomplete and as fans we blame the receiverz
Rodgers completed a higher %-age than Brady, and didn't have much higher yards per catch, which was middle of the pack.
I wish he'd have more confidence in his receivers and let them go get the ball. He seemed to be developing that with Lazard toward the end of the season.
Re: Packers 2020 Offseason Thread - Favre says Packers "burned bridge" with Rodgers
-
- Head Coach
- Posts: 7,086
- And1: 2,707
- Joined: Feb 23, 2019
-
Re: Packers 2020 Offseason Thread - Favre says Packers "burned bridge" with Rodgers
You just dont see brady in his O scheme constantly go for low % passses on 3rd down n less thsn 5 he will throw a 6 yard pass to keep the chains moving and rodgers in what seems like game after game goes for a very long completion instead of a higger percentage pass to get the O going .
Hard to get rhythm when on damn near what seems like every 3rd down n short he tries a 30 yard pass n then people question why the O struggles to score
Hard to get rhythm when on damn near what seems like every 3rd down n short he tries a 30 yard pass n then people question why the O struggles to score
Re: Packers 2020 Offseason Thread - Favre says Packers "burned bridge" with Rodgers
-
- Bench Warmer
- Posts: 1,323
- And1: 548
- Joined: Apr 26, 2017
Re: Packers 2020 Offseason Thread - Favre says Packers "burned bridge" with Rodgers
Daver wrote:Wow larry warford just got cut by the aints 3 time all pro guard to me this could be a guy GB talks to would upgrade that line
Yes please
Re: Packers 2020 Offseason Thread - Favre says Packers "burned bridge" with Rodgers
- M-C-G
- RealGM
- Posts: 23,525
- And1: 9,849
- Joined: Jan 13, 2013
-
Re: Packers 2020 Offseason Thread - Favre says Packers "burned bridge" with Rodgers
DrWood wrote:
I wish he'd have more confidence in his receivers and let them go get the ball. He seemed to be developing that with Lazard toward the end of the season.
No data on this but I seem to recall Lazard's big plays tended to be on the boundary, where MVS was more running stuff down the middle of the field. It'd be interesting to see if that is a legit causal or not.
Re: Packers 2020 Offseason Thread - Favre says Packers "burned bridge" with Rodgers
- M-C-G
- RealGM
- Posts: 23,525
- And1: 9,849
- Joined: Jan 13, 2013
-
Re: Packers 2020 Offseason Thread - Favre says Packers "burned bridge" with Rodgers
Really like the UDFAs from PVAMU. Jordan Jones the TE has a chance to stick, fantastic feet for a guy 250
Re: Packers 2020 Offseason Thread - Favre says Packers "burned bridge" with Rodgers
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 20,626
- And1: 8,336
- Joined: Jun 29, 2005
-
Re: Packers 2020 Offseason Thread - Favre says Packers "burned bridge" with Rodgers
Warford being cut is just weird.
The Saints used a first round pick to draft an interior lineman, then cut one who was in his prime and actually on a team friendly deal. No way we can afford him. He is going to make more than he was getting in New Orleans, they just did him a favor.
The Saints used a first round pick to draft an interior lineman, then cut one who was in his prime and actually on a team friendly deal. No way we can afford him. He is going to make more than he was getting in New Orleans, they just did him a favor.
Re: Packers 2020 Offseason Thread - Favre says Packers "burned bridge" with Rodgers
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 16,744
- And1: 8,159
- Joined: Feb 06, 2006
-
Re: Packers 2020 Offseason Thread - Favre says Packers "burned bridge" with Rodgers
Man. How much could we save by cutting Taylor? Warford is a beast.
Do it for Chuck
Re: Packers 2020 Offseason Thread - Favre says Packers "burned bridge" with Rodgers
- M-C-G
- RealGM
- Posts: 23,525
- And1: 9,849
- Joined: Jan 13, 2013
-
Re: Packers 2020 Offseason Thread - Favre says Packers "burned bridge" with Rodgers
jakecronus8 wrote:Man. How much could we save by cutting Taylor? Warford is a beast.
Can we ask the obvious question, why was he cut?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Re: Packers 2020 Offseason Thread - Favre says Packers
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 20,626
- And1: 8,336
- Joined: Jun 29, 2005
-
Re: Packers 2020 Offseason Thread - Favre says Packers
M-C-G wrote:jakecronus8 wrote:Man. How much could we save by cutting Taylor? Warford is a beast.
Can we ask the obvious question, why was he cut?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Saints only had 600k in caproom, not even enough to sign their rookies. We would be in a similar boat if we signed Warford though or we would have to backload it and lose most or all of our free agents next year.
Is signing Warford this year worth losing Clark next year? I don't think so.
Re: Packers 2020 Offseason Thread - Favre says Packers
-
- General Manager
- Posts: 7,839
- And1: 1,947
- Joined: Jun 17, 2009
- Location: Out in the Driftless Area
-
Re: Packers 2020 Offseason Thread - Favre says Packers
M-C-G wrote:jakecronus8 wrote:Man. How much could we save by cutting Taylor? Warford is a beast.
Can we ask the obvious question, why was he cut?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Yeah, what don't we know? At least do the due diligence and check the situation out.
*******************************************************
Re: Packers 2020 Offseason Thread - Favre says Packers
-
- General Manager
- Posts: 8,977
- And1: 5,031
- Joined: May 06, 2014
-
Re: Packers 2020 Offseason Thread - Favre says Packers
You stop making senseProfound23 wrote:M-C-G wrote:jakecronus8 wrote:Man. How much could we save by cutting Taylor? Warford is a beast.
Can we ask the obvious question, why was he cut?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Saints only had 600k in caproom, not even enough to sign their rookies. We would be in a similar boat if we signed Warford though or we would have to backload it and lose most or all of our free agents next year.
Is signing Warford this year worth losing Clark next year? I don't think so.
Sent from my SM-G975U using RealGM mobile app
Re: Packers 2020 Offseason Thread - Favre says Packers
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 20,626
- And1: 8,336
- Joined: Jun 29, 2005
-
Re: Packers 2020 Offseason Thread - Favre says Packers
RRyder823 wrote:You stop making senseProfound23 wrote:M-C-G wrote:Can we ask the obvious question, why was he cut?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Saints only had 600k in caproom, not even enough to sign their rookies. We would be in a similar boat if we signed Warford though or we would have to backload it and lose most or all of our free agents next year.
Is signing Warford this year worth losing Clark next year? I don't think so.
Sent from my SM-G975U using RealGM mobile app
Yeah, we are screwed next year covid messes up the cap. With all the free agents coming up next year, I don't think we can't sign anyone.
I am really holding out hope we can retain at least Bakh (hoping last year was just a bad year) or Clark. I already assume King and Jones are gone.
Re: Packers 2020 Offseason Thread - Favre says Packers
-
- Head Coach
- Posts: 7,086
- And1: 2,707
- Joined: Feb 23, 2019
-
Re: Packers 2020 Offseason Thread - Favre says Packers
Profound23 wrote:RRyder823 wrote:You stop making senseProfound23 wrote:
Saints only had 600k in caproom, not even enough to sign their rookies. We would be in a similar boat if we signed Warford though or we would have to backload it and lose most or all of our free agents next year.
Is signing Warford this year worth losing Clark next year? I don't think so.
Sent from my SM-G975U using RealGM mobile app
Yeah, we are screwed next year covid messes up the cap. With all the free agents coming up next year, I don't think we can't sign anyone.
I am really holding out hope we can retain at least Bakh (hoping last year was just a bad year) or Clark. I already assume King and Jones are gone.
King gets hurt wiping his own ass as much as think he can be a top flight corner i think for the amount of money he has in his head that he wants i think the packers let him walk.
As for warford dude would look great at guard in GB as another poster said i hope they at least talk to his agent and do the noble TT thing and that is kick the tires.
Maybe im wrong probably am but if they really wanted to sign him they could make it work.Andrew brandt evrn mentioned that in a article
Re: Packers 2020 Offseason Thread - Favre says Packers "burned bridge" with Rodgers
- M-C-G
- RealGM
- Posts: 23,525
- And1: 9,849
- Joined: Jan 13, 2013
-
Re: Packers 2020 Offseason Thread - Favre says Packers
-
- Starter
- Posts: 2,050
- And1: 526
- Joined: Jan 27, 2018
Re: Packers 2020 Offseason Thread - Favre says Packers
Well, with AROD is there a possibility his contract can be restructured to sign our guys?
Sent from my SM-T510 using RealGM mobile app
Profound23 wrote:RRyder823 wrote:You stop making senseProfound23 wrote:
Saints only had 600k in caproom, not even enough to sign their rookies. We would be in a similar boat if we signed Warford though or we would have to backload it and lose most or all of our free agents next year.
Is signing Warford this year worth losing Clark next year? I don't think so.
Sent from my SM-G975U using RealGM mobile app
Yeah, we are screwed next year covid messes up the cap. With all the free agents coming up next year, I don't think we can't sign anyone.
I am really holding out hope we can retain at least Bakh (hoping last year was just a bad year) or Clark. I already assume King and Jones are gone.
Sent from my SM-T510 using RealGM mobile app
Re: Packers 2020 Offseason Thread - Favre says Packers
-
- General Manager
- Posts: 8,977
- And1: 5,031
- Joined: May 06, 2014
-
Re: Packers 2020 Offseason Thread - Favre says Packers
For one he just restructured not to long agoMAC1987 wrote:Well, with AROD is there a possibility his contract can be restructured to sign our guys?Profound23 wrote:
Yeah, we are screwed next year covid messes up the cap. With all the free agents coming up next year, I don't think we can't sign anyone.
I am really holding out hope we can retain at least Bakh (hoping last year was just a bad year) or Clark. I already assume King and Jones are gone.
Sent from my SM-T510 using RealGM mobile app
Secondly unless its a strait paycut he'd be accepting it would just be extending his guarantees into the final 2 years of his deal. (Something I'm sure the Packers have little interest in doing post Love selection)
And finally Rodgers accepting a paycut would be extremely suprising considering he was pretty vocal about wanting a new deal when he felt underpaid (there's a reason why he got an extension when he had multiple years left) and I'm sure he isn't more open to the idea of a paycut post draft
Sent from my SM-G975U using RealGM mobile app