collapse

* Recent Posts

NCSTATE is evil by The Sultan of Semantics
[Today at 08:03:55 AM]


Chicago bars for Fri game by palellama
[Today at 07:36:35 AM]


2024 Transfer Portal by Spotcheck Billy
[Today at 07:22:54 AM]


2024 Coaching Carousel by The Sultan of Semantics
[Today at 07:02:21 AM]


Dallas bars tonite by Marquette Gyros
[Today at 06:59:41 AM]


Are we still recruiting anyone for the 24-25 season. by Jay Bee
[Today at 06:42:08 AM]


2024 NCAA Tournament Thread by Uncle Rico
[Today at 06:32:48 AM]

Please Register - It's FREE!

The absolute only thing required for this FREE registration is a valid e-mail address.  We keep all your information confidential and will NEVER give or sell it to anyone else.
Login to get rid of this box (and ads) , or register NOW!


Author Topic: 2024 Green Bay Packers Thread  (Read 125305 times)

Pakuni

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 9878
Re: 2023-24 Green Bay Packers Thread
« Reply #1475 on: April 26, 2023, 06:33:54 PM »
Ok, bad comp, lol.  There were a lot of concerns about Allen’s completion percentage coming out and Love was really good as a sophomore with a new coach (Gary Andersen) his junior year

To be fair, Allen threw 15 picks in his second season at Wyoming. And accuracy was an issue.

Sir Lawrence

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1719
Re: 2023-24 Green Bay Packers Thread
« Reply #1476 on: April 26, 2023, 10:02:31 PM »
See Rodgers new hair cut?  Cleaning it up for the east coast media or what the hell.
Ludum habemus.

Herman Cain

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 12801
  • 9-9-9
Re: 2023-24 Green Bay Packers Thread
« Reply #1477 on: April 26, 2023, 10:11:32 PM »
What was the rush to move up and select Love? Its not like he's the second coming of Mahomes. I'll be surprised if he's any more than pedestrian and would peddle his ass right now for a pigskin and a kickin' tee, hey?
I agree with this analysis
Winning is overrated. The only time it is really important is in surgery and war.
                       ---Al McGuire

CreightonWarrior

  • Starter
  • ***
  • Posts: 241
Re: 2023-24 Green Bay Packers Thread
« Reply #1478 on: April 27, 2023, 09:58:37 AM »
As it currently stands, AR's cap hit in 2024 will be $107.5mm.

Herman Cain

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 12801
  • 9-9-9
Re: 2023-24 Green Bay Packers Thread
« Reply #1479 on: April 27, 2023, 08:45:46 PM »
Packers needed a Tight End . Can’t go wrong with a good edge rusher . Maybe the second round picks will yield some TE
Winning is overrated. The only time it is really important is in surgery and war.
                       ---Al McGuire

rocket surgeon

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 3660
  • NA of course
Re: 2023-24 Green Bay Packers Thread
« Reply #1480 on: April 28, 2023, 05:20:47 AM »
you ain't wrong here hermie, but they need a quarterback to throw to him first, unless you mean from a blocking standpoint :(

    the packers always seemed to draft somewhat antithetical to what most thought to be CW. 

the packers should blow up their little "ownership committee" and form something that can be held a little bit more accountable.  murphy and gutekunst need to go.  going back to the favre days, we should have won no less than 4 superbowls between the 2 qb's...NO LESS-the town should be running with pitchforks and fire the way they hold this team in importance of their day to day functions
don't...don't don't don't don't

Uncle Rico

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 9633
Re: 2023-24 Green Bay Packers Thread
« Reply #1481 on: April 28, 2023, 07:40:29 AM »
you ain't wrong here hermie, but they need a quarterback to throw to him first, unless you mean from a blocking standpoint :(

    the packers always seemed to draft somewhat antithetical to what most thought to be CW. 

the packers should blow up their little "ownership committee" and form something that can be held a little bit more accountable.  murphy and gutekunst need to go.  going back to the favre days, we should have won no less than 4 superbowls between the 2 qb's...NO LESS-the town should be running with pitchforks and fire the way they hold this team in importance of their day to day functions

Van Ness was connected with the Packers for most of the draft process, so there was nothing unconventional about the pick.  Edge rusher was a spot they needed to add depth to with Gary coming off his injury and possibly leaving after 2023.

The Packers would have won more Super Bowls had the Ol’ Dongslinger didn’t fire inexplicable interceptions all over the field and 12 choke like a dog in the playoffs
“This is bar none atrocious.  Mitchell cannot shoot either.  What a pile of dung”

The Sultan of Semantics

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 11527
  • "Private message me coward" - panda
Re: 2023-24 Green Bay Packers Thread
« Reply #1482 on: April 28, 2023, 07:50:43 AM »
you ain't wrong here hermie, but they need a quarterback to throw to him first, unless you mean from a blocking standpoint :(

    the packers always seemed to draft somewhat antithetical to what most thought to be CW. 

the packers should blow up their little "ownership committee" and form something that can be held a little bit more accountable.  murphy and gutekunst need to go.  going back to the favre days, we should have won no less than 4 superbowls between the 2 qb's...NO LESS-the town should be running with pitchforks and fire the way they hold this team in importance of their day to day functions


What do you mean by "ownership committee?"  Gutekunst has complete control of the draft and Murphy has complete control over the business operation.  They have an executive committee that oversees them from a governance point of view, but there are very clear lines of responsibility.
“True patriotism hates injustice in its own land more than anywhere else.” - Clarence Darrow

rocket surgeon

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 3660
  • NA of course
Re: 2023-24 Green Bay Packers Thread
« Reply #1483 on: April 28, 2023, 07:52:59 AM »
well, here's hoping there are good tight ends and wide receivers available from here on for a couple of rounds unless they have something cooking via trades or free agency
don't...don't don't don't don't

Uncle Rico

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 9633
Re: 2023-24 Green Bay Packers Thread
« Reply #1484 on: April 28, 2023, 07:59:11 AM »
well, here's hoping there are good tight ends and wide receivers available from here on for a couple of rounds unless they have something cooking via trades or free agency

Did you watch the draft?  Did you see how Kincaid fell? 

Do you know who Mayer, Schoonmaker, Musgrave and Washington are?

They should run some veer offense, too
“This is bar none atrocious.  Mitchell cannot shoot either.  What a pile of dung”

rocket surgeon

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 3660
  • NA of course
Re: 2023-24 Green Bay Packers Thread
« Reply #1485 on: April 28, 2023, 08:03:41 AM »

What do you mean by "ownership committee?"  Gutekunst has complete control of the draft and Murphy has complete control over the business operation.  They have an executive committee that oversees them from a governance point of view, but there are very clear lines of responsibility.

  too many chefs in the kitchen.  although it has kinda worked for the past 100 years i guess, but i see stagnation on the horizon.  they have too many people needed to make the "big decisions". 

  this article from nbc sports mike florio back in 2016 couldn't have stated my point any better-

  "Sure, the coach can fire any of his assistants and the G.M. can fire the coach and the CEO can fire the G.M. and the executive committee can fire the CEO and the board of directors can supplant the executive committee, but those powers take a back seat to corporate politics that become much harder to navigate when there isn’t one person who can say without fear of resentment or repercussion or revenge that change is happening. Despite the neat and tidy characterization, the five layers don’t operate as bright lines; if the coach wants to fire one or more members of his staff, he’d better be sure the G.M. is on board with it. If the G.M. wants to fire the coach, he’d better be sure the CEO is on board with it. And if the CEO wants to fire the G.M., he’d better be sure the executive committee is on board with it. And if any members of the executive committee want to fire the CEO, they’d better be sure to get enough members of the board of directors on board with it."
don't...don't don't don't don't

rocket surgeon

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 3660
  • NA of course
Re: 2023-24 Green Bay Packers Thread
« Reply #1486 on: April 28, 2023, 08:12:56 AM »
Did you watch the draft?  Did you see how Kincaid fell? 

Do you know who Mayer, Schoonmaker, Musgrave and Washington are?

They should run some veer offense, too

 no

yes

yes

no

   
don't...don't don't don't don't

The Sultan of Semantics

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 11527
  • "Private message me coward" - panda
Re: 2023-24 Green Bay Packers Thread
« Reply #1487 on: April 28, 2023, 08:17:54 AM »
Well, since the Packers don't have an owner, and are a not-for-profit corporation, they have to have a Board of Directors. But the Board really doesn't actually do much. They vote on a few things that are required by the by-laws, go to a couple of meetings a year when they see some presentations, and travel on the road a couple games a year.

The Executive Committee oversees governance issues and hires and evaluates the President. But Mark Murphy runs the organization. There is no doubt about that. He defers football related decisions to Gutekunst.  This is the same way the Packers have been run since Bob Harlan took over as President and hired Ron Wolf as GM. This isn't like the Bart Starr era when the chair of the board was the de facto President and got overly involved in football operations.

The Executive Committee or Mark Murphy aren't making football personnel decisions. And if Mark Murphy wants to fire Gutey, he can do it tomorrow. Would he have to clear it with the Executive Committee? Sure. But they would certainly let him.  But honestly, Mark Murphy likes him and thinks he is doing a good job.  And the Executive Committee and the Board LOVE Mark Murphy - as they should. The organization is making more money than ever, especially though their non-football related operations. And the performance on the field has been fine.

And none of that has anything to do with who they drafted.  Do you really want an owner micro-managing that process?
« Last Edit: April 28, 2023, 08:24:26 AM by The Sultan of Semantics »
“True patriotism hates injustice in its own land more than anywhere else.” - Clarence Darrow

rocket surgeon

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 3660
  • NA of course
Re: 2023-24 Green Bay Packers Thread
« Reply #1488 on: April 28, 2023, 08:23:04 AM »
Well, since the Packers don't have an owner, and are a not-for-profit corporation, they have to have a Board of Directors. But the Board really doesn't actually do much. They vote on a few things that are required by the by-laws, go to a couple of meetings a year when they see some presentations, and travel on the road a couple games a year.

The Executive Committee oversees governance issues and hires and evaluates the President. But Mark Murphy runs the organization. There is no doubt about that. He defers football related decisions to Gutekunst.  This is the same way the Packers have been run since Bob Harlan took over as President and hired Ron Wolf as GM. This isn't like the Bart Starr era when the chair of the board was the de facto President and got overly involved in football operations.

The Executive Committee or Mark Murphy aren't making football personnel decisions. And if Mark Murphy wants to fire Gutey, he can do it tomorrow. Would he have to clear it with the Executive Committee? Sure. But they would certainly let him.

 murphy is the one who needs to go
don't...don't don't don't don't

The Sultan of Semantics

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 11527
  • "Private message me coward" - panda
Re: 2023-24 Green Bay Packers Thread
« Reply #1489 on: April 28, 2023, 08:25:39 AM »
murphy is the one who needs to go


No idea why you think that. The organization is run extremely well.

And you will get your wish because he turns 70 in 2025, which is the Packers mandatory retirement age.
“True patriotism hates injustice in its own land more than anywhere else.” - Clarence Darrow

Hards Alumni

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 6583
Re: 2023-24 Green Bay Packers Thread
« Reply #1490 on: April 28, 2023, 08:39:22 AM »

No idea why you think that. The organization is run extremely well.

And you will get your wish because he turns 70 in 2025, which is the Packers mandatory retirement age.

They should make that a rule for dentists... or scoopers!

Herman Cain

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 12801
  • 9-9-9
Re: 2023-24 Green Bay Packers Thread
« Reply #1491 on: April 28, 2023, 08:40:21 AM »
murphy is the one who needs to go
I agree with this analysis
Winning is overrated. The only time it is really important is in surgery and war.
                       ---Al McGuire

Uncle Rico

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 9633
Re: 2023-24 Green Bay Packers Thread
« Reply #1492 on: April 28, 2023, 09:05:10 AM »
I agree with this analysis

You don’t like the incredible financial growth and development under Murphy?  Huh
“This is bar none atrocious.  Mitchell cannot shoot either.  What a pile of dung”

jficke13

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1361
Re: 2023-24 Green Bay Packers Thread
« Reply #1493 on: April 28, 2023, 09:43:35 AM »
You don’t like the incredible financial growth and development under Murphy?  Huh

It does kind of beg the question of how one measures success.

For example, many of my friends Bears fans and Packers fans alike have been dragging Rodgers as a failure for only winning one Superbowl, considering him a "failure." On the other hand, I had a lot of fun watching him play while he was in GB, I enjoyed the games more often than I didn't, and while it would have been more fun to win more Superbowls, it's hard for me to consider that a "failure."

In this context, my friends measure of success was "championship" while mine was "enjoyed good football and had a lot of fun as a fan."

To that end, how do we measure success of Murphy/GBPackers Org? Make lots of money? Build fancy redevelopments in Green Bay? Win football games? Win NFC North? Win playoff games? Win Superbowls? I think how you answer that will define where you fall on the Mark Murphy issue.

Uncle Rico

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 9633
Re: 2023-24 Green Bay Packers Thread
« Reply #1494 on: April 28, 2023, 09:54:17 AM »
It does kind of beg the question of how one measures success.

For example, many of my friends Bears fans and Packers fans alike have been dragging Rodgers as a failure for only winning one Superbowl, considering him a "failure." On the other hand, I had a lot of fun watching him play while he was in GB, I enjoyed the games more often than I didn't, and while it would have been more fun to win more Superbowls, it's hard for me to consider that a "failure."

In this context, my friends measure of success was "championship" while mine was "enjoyed good football and had a lot of fun as a fan."

To that end, how do we measure success of Murphy/GBPackers Org? Make lots of money? Build fancy redevelopments in Green Bay? Win football games? Win NFC North? Win playoff games? Win Superbowls? I think how you answer that will define where you fall on the Mark Murphy issue.

I think the criticisms of Murphy and the football operations are fair.  They let the QB dictate far too much the last two years to the long term detriment of the team.  I’d guess some argue Murphy didn’t do enough to acquiesce the QBs roster desires.  There’s an argument for both, which is a symptom of the problems that have plagued them the last few years.

As far as Murphy the businessman, he’s done far more good than bad.  People are still piling into Lambeau all year long and will for a variety of reasons moving forward.

I argue he failed the organization by not letting the front office handle roster and coaching issues by allowing the QB too much power.
“This is bar none atrocious.  Mitchell cannot shoot either.  What a pile of dung”

cheebs09

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 4522
Re: 2023-24 Green Bay Packers Thread
« Reply #1495 on: April 28, 2023, 09:54:34 AM »
It does kind of beg the question of how one measures success.

For example, many of my friends Bears fans and Packers fans alike have been dragging Rodgers as a failure for only winning one Superbowl, considering him a "failure." On the other hand, I had a lot of fun watching him play while he was in GB, I enjoyed the games more often than I didn't, and while it would have been more fun to win more Superbowls, it's hard for me to consider that a "failure."

In this context, my friends measure of success was "championship" while mine was "enjoyed good football and had a lot of fun as a fan."

To that end, how do we measure success of Murphy/GBPackers Org? Make lots of money? Build fancy redevelopments in Green Bay? Win football games? Win NFC North? Win playoff games? Win Superbowls? I think how you answer that will define where you fall on the Mark Murphy issue.

It’s interesting because this is pretty much the Giannis press conference answer that has gone viral about disputing this season was a failure.

The Sultan of Semantics

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 11527
  • "Private message me coward" - panda
Re: 2023-24 Green Bay Packers Thread
« Reply #1496 on: April 28, 2023, 10:19:44 AM »
I think the criticisms of Murphy and the football operations are fair.  They let the QB dictate far too much the last two years to the long term detriment of the team.  I’d guess some argue Murphy didn’t do enough to acquiesce the QBs roster desires.  There’s an argument for both, which is a symptom of the problems that have plagued them the last few years.

As far as Murphy the businessman, he’s done far more good than bad.  People are still piling into Lambeau all year long and will for a variety of reasons moving forward.

I argue he failed the organization by not letting the front office handle roster and coaching issues by allowing the QB too much power.


I think Mark Murphy made two mistakes with regards to the football operation.  First was hanging on to Ted Thompson for too long.  Second was, as you mention, letting the quarterback situation get out of hand.

But it would be hard to argue that the football product hasn't been been successful during his tenure. They won a Super Bowl. Sure they lost four conference championships since then, but getting that far, and winning eight division titles in the process isn't failrue. Is it as good as it could have been? No, but it would be hard to define Murphy's tenure as unsuccessful on the football field.
“True patriotism hates injustice in its own land more than anywhere else.” - Clarence Darrow

Uncle Rico

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 9633
Re: 2023-24 Green Bay Packers Thread
« Reply #1497 on: April 28, 2023, 10:25:07 AM »

I think Mark Murphy made two mistakes with regards to the football operation.  First was hanging on to Ted Thompson for too long.  Second was, as you mention, letting the quarterback situation get out of hand.

But it would be hard to argue that the football product hasn't been been successful during his tenure. They won a Super Bowl. Sure they lost four conference championships since then, but getting that far, and winning eight division titles in the process isn't failrue. Is it as good as it could have been? No, but it would be hard to define Murphy's tenure as unsuccessful on the football field.

All valid points.  The fire Murphy stuff revolves largely from people that don’t like Jordan Love and not going “all-in”

The Thompson criticism isn’t something I thought of.  That’s definitely a strike against him
“This is bar none atrocious.  Mitchell cannot shoot either.  What a pile of dung”

JWags85

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 2980
Re: 2023-24 Green Bay Packers Thread
« Reply #1498 on: April 28, 2023, 11:06:44 AM »
It does kind of beg the question of how one measures success.

For example, many of my friends Bears fans and Packers fans alike have been dragging Rodgers as a failure for only winning one Superbowl, considering him a "failure." On the other hand, I had a lot of fun watching him play while he was in GB, I enjoyed the games more often than I didn't, and while it would have been more fun to win more Superbowls, it's hard for me to consider that a "failure."

In this context, my friends measure of success was "championship" while mine was "enjoyed good football and had a lot of fun as a fan."

To that end, how do we measure success of Murphy/GBPackers Org? Make lots of money? Build fancy redevelopments in Green Bay? Win football games? Win NFC North? Win playoff games? Win Superbowls? I think how you answer that will define where you fall on the Mark Murphy issue.

Has Mark Murphy raised any elite PBP announcer offspring while running the front office in Green Bay?  No, then he's a profound failure, thats the key success KPI for a Packer's president.

rocket surgeon

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 3660
  • NA of course
Re: 2023-24 Green Bay Packers Thread
« Reply #1499 on: April 28, 2023, 05:11:52 PM »
ok, had to get a round of golf in while the weather was decent-

   just because, the stands are full, they've been entertaining, the stadium has been renovated, new player hall of fame, restaurants, improved fan experience, we have been to 3 super bowls over the past 26 years coupled with additional playoff appearances with varying amounts of success or failure... etc etc does not tell near the whole story.  i could go on and on about all the good things the packers have provided, including that they've kept the team in green bay, whatever...

  with the quarterbacks they've had plus an array of other talent, the packer organization failed its fans immensely.  when you have 2 hall of fame quarterbacks for over 20 years, one expects a little bit more and rightly so.  whether it was the gm or the president, i don't care who's fault, but getting the final piece or two or three to get to the super bowl a few more times should have been priority #1.  your average fantasy player probably could have done better

   
don't...don't don't don't don't