NFC North / NFL Thread 2017-18

[B. McBannerson]

This isn't a touchdown?  This league is killing itself daily with stupidity on and off the field.


http://www.espn.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/252749/nfl-owes-a-big-explanation-for-austin-sefarian-jenkins-fumble

[tower912]

The Packers would be fools to not sign CK.  The pool of available quality quarterbacks is not deep.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

This isn't a touchdown?  This league is killing itself daily with stupidity on and off the field.


http://www.espn.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/252749/nfl-owes-a-big-explanation-for-austin-sefarian-jenkins-fumble

NFL Rules committee:

[B. McBannerson]

The Packers would be fools to not sign CK.  The pool of available quality quarterbacks is not deep.

Please do, please do, please do so the national nightmare can be over

[TinyTimsLittleBrother]

This isn't a touchdown?  This league is killing itself daily with stupidity on and off the field.


http://www.espn.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/252749/nfl-owes-a-big-explanation-for-austin-sefarian-jenkins-fumble

I've never understood why the defense should get the ball on the 20 on a fumble out of the end zone.  If that fumble occurs on the 1 yard line, the offense would retain it.  The offense is massively penalized for actually advancing the ball further.

Yeah I do understand this was a bad call.

[forgetful]

I've never understood why the defense should get the ball on the 20 on a fumble out of the end zone.  If that fumble occurs on the 1 yard line, the offense would retain it.  The offense is massively penalized for actually advancing the ball further.

Yeah I do understand this was a bad call.

I dislike the rule also, but the runner here clearly fumbled before reaching the goal line. 

Now, I don't think there was clear evidence that he didn't regain control before being out of bounds.  So I think it should have stayed a touchdown, since that was the call on the field, but I wasn't able to see every angle of the play.

[Juan Anderson's Mixtape]

The Packers would be fools to not sign CK.  The pool of available quality quarterbacks is not deep.

That or #RomoComeHome-O

[Jay Bee]

The CONSENSUS is in first place. Skol Vikings!!

[wadesworld]

Please do, please do, please do so the national nightmare can be over

National nightmare?  Lol.  Never change, chicoloop.

[wadesworld]

The CONSENSUS is in first place. Skol Vikings!!

If the Queens sneak into the Playoffs can their kicker make a 27 yard field goal?

[mu03eng]

Packers are damned if you do, damned if they don't. Even if Kaep is average, with the injuries this team isn't. She what you have with Hundley and if it's not good, tank

[Jockey]

http://www.ajc.com/sports/football/green-bay-packers-potential-free-agent-targets-with-aaron-rodgers-out/7hpskEjpdUXr1VVVJcAhWK/

When the 2nd and 3rd best options are Matt McGloin and Matt Barkley, I think you have to at least kick the tires on Kaep.

Any quality backups out there the Pack could put together a trade for? Or do you just roll with Hundley and accept that you are only going to win 2 or 3 games the rest of the season and get a decent draft pick?

I would be shocked if McCarthy didn't stay with Hundley all the way.

There are two possible outcomes.

1. Hundley isn't very good - the result is a top 10 draft pick. A win because this team will never see a pick that high otherwise.

2. Hundley is as good as McCarthy hopes he is. A win becauise the team gets in as a wild card and gets a high draft choice for Hundley.


I know. Bur I'm stuck with this batch of lemons........

[Dish]

I would be shocked if McCarthy didn't stay with Hundley all the way.

There are two possible outcomes.

1. Hundley isn't very good - the result is a top 10 draft pick. A win because this team will never see a pick that high otherwise.

2. Hundley is as good as McCarthy hopes he is. A win becauise the team gets in as a wild card and gets a high draft choice for Hundley.


I know. Bur I'm stuck with this batch of lemons........

Hundley has a year left on his deal, even if he's good, they're not getting a high pick for him.

[Babybluejeans]

Please do, please do, please do so the national nightmare can be over

You should go outside. Take a deep breath.

[Jockey]

You should go outside. Take a deep breath.

Meds. Air won't help.

[GooooMarquette]

I think the Packers should give Kaepernick a serious look...and sign him if McCarthy thinks he would beat out Hundley to start.  Most of the NFL guys who say that his unemployment is justified are basing that on the huge attention he'd get...not a bad thing for a starting QB, but bad for chemistry if he is a backup.  And up until now, it has been pretty clear that he'd be a backup on most teams.

Would he be a backup for GB too?  Hard to say.  I suspect his mobility would help compensate for the weak offensive line, but the key would be less tangible to most of us - mostly McCarthy's gut feeling about how the players would react to having him in GB, how quickly he could learn the offense, etc. 

Bottom line - sign him if you think he would start, pass him by if you think he'd just be a high-profile bench warmer.

Or maybe Favre will pull a Jordan....

[4everwarriors]

Dickerson is right. Without #12, GB is sub 500. However, They will not sign Kneeornick. Won't fly in Green Bay and the whole is greater than the sum of the parts.

[wadesworld]

Rodgers is why the Packers are good. Kaepernick isn't 1/100th the football player Rodgers is. Signing him does nothing for the Packers.

[MerrittsMustache]

Rodgers is why the Packers are good. Kaepernick isn't 1/100th the football player Rodgers is. Signing him does nothing for the Packers.

Pretty much. GB isn't going anywhere without Rodgers.

[mu03eng]

I think the Packers should give Kaepernick a serious look...and sign him if McCarthy thinks he would beat out Hundley to start.  Most of the NFL guys who say that his unemployment is justified are basing that on the huge attention he'd get...not a bad thing for a starting QB, but bad for chemistry if he is a backup.  And up until now, it has been pretty clear that he'd be a backup on most teams.

Would he be a backup for GB too?  Hard to say.  I suspect his mobility would help compensate for the weak offensive line, but the key would be less tangible to most of us - mostly McCarthy's gut feeling about how the players would react to having him in GB, how quickly he could learn the offense, etc. 

Bottom line - sign him if you think he would start, pass him by if you think he'd just be a high-profile bench warmer.

Or maybe Favre will pull a Jordan....

I don't want Kaep anywhere near the Packers, I don't care if he is better than Hundley. With the injuries on this team they are a sub .500 team and Id rather they get a high draft pick then tread water(assuming Rodgers is done). Kaep specifically (note not the players or the protest, Kaep himself) offends me and I don't want him near a team I cheer for. There is zero upside to signing him.

[GooooMarquette]

Pretty much. GB isn't going anywhere without Rodgers.

Maybe, but McCarthy has a better picture of our chances than any of us here.  If he thinks the Packers could sneak into a wild card game with Kaepernick starting, IMHO it would be worth it.  Most thought the Vikings would never make it without Bridgewater and Peterson last season and thought they wasted their money on Bradford, but they squeezed in.

[Dish]

If the Pack can get healthy in the secondary and o-line, I won't count them out, if for no other reason than the NFC is very mediocre. They probably have to find 5 more wins to be in the hunt, and have the Bears and Browns still to come.

[mu03eng]

Maybe, but McCarthy has a better picture of our chances than any of us here.  If he thinks the Packers could sneak into a wild card game with Kaepernick starting, IMHO it would be worth it.  Most thought the Vikings would never make it without Bridgewater and Peterson last season and thought they wasted their money on Bradford, but they squeezed in.

This only makes sense if Rodgers is going to be able to return for the playoffs. Getting a wild card and losing in the first round has zero appeal to me. I'd rather be bad, get high draft picks, get a long term replacement for Rodgers or Saquon Barkley in the first round and build more depth on this team in the 2-5 rounds.

[ChitownSpaceForRent]

There are so many bad teams in the NFL, that even if the Packers attempt to tank, I don;t think they will lose as many games as people expect. At least, not nearly enough losses to get a top 10 draft pick.

Sign Kaep, probably make the playoffs in the NFC, and hope that Rodgers returns.

[tower912]

9-7 could very well win the NFC North.   Could Kaepernick get the Packers to 9-7?    If yes, sign him.    If no, roll with the young guy and tank.