Discussion Board
beast
2019-03-18T02:13:13Z
Originally Posted by: KRK 

I noticed none of my questions were answer in opposition to my post. The 'injury game' generally can't be played will in teams without depth in certain areas.

Seriously? Those questions seemed to be there to focused at a larger point and I directly talked about what I thought to be your larger point... instead of playing the game... now you're complaining I didn't play your raindeer games?

And of course the injury game can be played with all teams as their isn't enough talented depth to go around... you're complaining about not having a clear good back-up when some teams don't even have a clear good starter.

Originally Posted by: KRK 

The truth is our depth on the offensive line isn't very good and "running the ball' as the sole answer simply obfuscates the issue. Sorry for beating a 'dead horse', but the carcass is still in the room.


The truth is that's YOUR OPINION... and NOT A FACT! ... as we have already hammered out, the stats go more against your opinion then with it, as the OL was quite effective in giving Rodgers the 4th longest average throwing time, despite teams knowing it was going to pass it, and one of the top 2 average rushing yardage.... but you keep ignoring everything that disagrees with your blind opinion that the OL is main problem while you seem to completely and totally ignore all other factors... unwilling to factor in the other 6 guys on offense.

And no one ever said running the ball as the sole answer... you're using false narratives to push your agenda. But the Packers do have OGs (Taylor, McCray, Patrick, etc) that would be able to hold up better with a higher dose of running play calls so the defenders and play callers don't have their ears pinned back ready to pass rush on every single play (because that's what they do when you call pass plays 70% of the time, which very few short ones).

Originally Posted by: KRK 

I couldn't agree more....and you posted this BEFORE the Packers' free agency signing. Now after other gaping needs were addressed in free-agency, you don't address the O Line in you mock draft, until pick #150 and #185.

That's because you're wrongly assuming those are the same, when those are two completely different things... one is ideally, what would be nice to happen, and the other is how the simulated draft fell...

I'm taking what I see as the best value, almost no matter the position, if I see OL as the best value, I'm taking the OL.... if I don't see the OL as the best value, then I'm not taking the OL.... I'm drafting my thought on their value, not just drafting a position.... I was shocked those FS fell that far... and felt like they were the best value (and an important need as well).


Originally Posted by: KRK 

I am simply stating that in my opinion that posters tend to underrate our need for quality and depth at these vital positions

No, because I could agree with that... what you're doing is blindly blaming the OL and ignoring all fact that don't agree with your predetermined opinion... that the OL is the problem.

You put your players in a better position to success, just as the Patriots, Rams and Bears have done and you get a lot better results.... Mike McCarthy scheme with 70% passing calls and QB/WRs that are CLEARLY on different mental pages and QB that doesn't trust said WRs because of it... and you have put your OL in a HORRIBLE spot... because now defenses can tee off on your OL all game long and create schemes to avoid one of the OTs (usually by fake pass rushing an edge and getting the OGs in one on one match-ups time after time after time, and effectively forcing them to play like OTs (when they're not at that level of pass protection).

Originally Posted by: KRK 

sschind scolded:
Your rationale and perspective are spot on. Perhaps I slightly overstated the case.



Which is what I was saying... 3 of the top 6 is too much! Maybe 3 in an entire draft... MAYBE!
KRK
  • KRK
  • Veteran Member
2019-03-18T11:54:29Z
Beast berated:
Quote:

I'm taking what I see as the best value, almost no matter the position

Perhaps this is the essence of the disagreement....I am not taking the best player available, I am drafting for need subject to value. It seems a meaningless exercise to fill out these draft boards if you are not going to take team need into meaningful consideration.

Furthermore, IMO drafting the best player available is something teams with depth at most positions can do....and we don't have relative depth at almost any position, except corner. Second, to be frank, I think the statement many GMs say after the draft, such as "XXXX was the top rated guy on the board and we really wanted him" is largely BS in most cases.

Additionally, IMO the offensive line needs to be looked at as five positions, not one. I am not terribly interested in Composite Line Rankings. As previously stated, on the O line, you as strong as your weakest link. We have great starters at 2 positions, a pretty good one when healthy at another, and now a free agent plug in at another. I am greatly concerned about depth, and somewhat concerned about LG. Stated differently, if one of our top corners goes down, I think we would be OK, if one of our OL goes down, especially a tackle, we have major problems....and those need to be addressed in the draft.

Also, we are all surmising that our guys are going to work well/better with new blocking schemes. I am not yet convinced. Like most posters, I believe that a greater mix of runs, more creativity in play design, and quicker hitting pass plays will benefit the entire team (including 12.)

Therefore my opinion, for which I have now provided more that adequate rationale, is that posters are not taking OL need into consideration.
beast
2019-03-18T15:20:18Z
Originally Posted by: KRK 

Beast berated: Perhaps this is the essence of the disagreement....I am not taking the best player available, I am drafting for need subject to value. It seems a meaningless exercise to fill out these draft boards if you are not going to take team need into meaningful consideration.


1) If it seems meaningless to you, then stop doing it and stop wasting your time watching others do it... because you're then just being a buzz kill for yourself and others.

2) I believe I clearly took meaningful consideration into my mock and you're still complaining about it, because it doesn't fit your personal want list...

But if we're talking about team needs, the team needs TEs, FS, DL, OL, ILB, back-up CBs for when (not if, but when King and/or Alexander go down with an injury), maybe even two.

3) So OL CLEARLY isn't the only need... yet it's the only one you seem to care about which is a huge difference between actual needs and needs you care about.

Originally Posted by: KRK 

Furthermore, IMO drafting the best player available is something teams with depth at most positions can do....and we don't have relative depth at almost any position, except corner.

I feel like that's backwards... the more holes you got the more you can simply grab the best player available because that's a need position.

Originally Posted by: KRK 

Second, to be frank, I think the statement many GMs say after the draft, such as "XXXX was the top rated guy on the board and we really wanted him" is largely BS in most cases.

Yeah I agree with this, I think post draft is a lot of fluff BS.

Originally Posted by: KRK 

Additionally, IMO the offensive line needs to be looked at as five positions, not one. I am not terribly interested in Composite Line Rankings. As previously stated, on the O line, you as strong as your weakest link.

If you're saying you're only strong as your weakest link then you are looking at then as one... which is exactly what you yourself are saying you shouldn't do.


All teams have problems where if certain guys go down, they're completely screwed, other than maybe the Patriots because their strength is amazing coaching. But some teams have sucky OTs like Spriggs starting because there isn't enough talent to go around. If anything I'd try to sign the veteran OT Donald Penn, who the Raiders just released, and is said to workout at the same place as Rodgers and Baktari (spelling) and I think others (Matthews maybe it was?)... I'm sure he want to start at LT, but maybe get him on a two year deal as backup insurance for Bulaga and try to draft a future guy.



Originally Posted by: KRK 

Therefore my opinion, for which I have now provided more that adequate rationale, is that posters are not taking OL need into consideration.


That's an interesting opinion, and for some I'm sure you are correct.... but some are taking it AND other positions into consideration, which you are not seeming to do, as you solely only focus on one need when there are many.
KRK
  • KRK
  • Veteran Member
2019-03-18T16:27:13Z
Beast opined:
Quote:

If you're saying you're only strong as your weakest link then you are looking at then as one... which is exactly what you yourself are saying you shouldn't do.]

😕 Actually, it makes the point that as a unit, you have to look at each link to determine the units effectiveness...ergo, looking at each individual position is necessary.

Beast continued
Quote:

If it seems meaningless to you, then stop doing it and stop wasting your time watching others do it... because you're then just being a buzz kill for yourself and others.

Good idea. I think I will only view posters who aren't just taking the best player available. I hope we get the very best player on the OL who fills what I perceive to be a need there. If we can get value by trading down and picking up and additional pick, I am all for it.

Beast further stated:
Quote:

I feel like that's backwards... the more holes you got the more you can simply grab the best player available because that's a need position.

That is a very good point. IMO, after free agency, I see more relative weakness on the Oline than others. We still need other things, another RB, a TE, another safety, but on a relative basis, not at badly as an immediate starting caliber O lineman.

To be nice, and not a buzz kill, you seem to have actually thought about whether the player will be a good fit in our (new offensive) systems. To that end, if we take a TE at 12, I hope it is Hockenson who seems by all accounts to me more of an effective blocker at TE than Fant.
Zero2Cool
2019-03-18T16:50:13Z
KRK
  • KRK
  • Veteran Member
2019-03-18T17:52:38Z
Wait, so you draft for need?
Zero2Cool
2019-03-18T18:00:50Z
Originally Posted by: KRK 

Wait, so you draft for need?



I'm not an NFL GM (I'd have a short-ass career if I did), so I don't draft, period.

Drafting for need over best available player is how you set yourself up for failure. Always take the best available player. If you have two players that are rated equal, you then take the one of more need.
KRK
  • KRK
  • Veteran Member
2019-03-18T18:15:01Z
Invariably, one has to use a scale of some sort to compare players of different positions and by the time one fine tunes this scale, anyone can get the results they want regarding BPA.

Overriding all this stuff are immeasurables, heart, brains, guts, and determination.

Drafting is not an easy job.
sschind
2019-03-18T18:27:47Z
Originally Posted by: KRK 

sschind scolded:
Your rationale and perspective are spot on. Perhaps I slightly overstated the case.



Maybe not so much. You did say 3 of the first 6 but you didn't say which three and I said 1 with the first 4 and double dip in the 4th round that is 3 out of the first 6. I just don't want to see 2 first round OL. Not that we can't use them but I think I'd rather have the top pick used on someone else. Obviously that depends on who falls. It wouldn't kill me if we went 2 OL in the first if it were the right guys.

OL is easy to overlook if you have a good one but you need 5 starters and then you need backups. If you you only have 3 good starters that means your backups probably are not really very good and when those injuries hit it can be devastating.

Its also tough to consider drafting for depth when there are other needs as well.
sschind
2019-03-18T18:37:09Z
Originally Posted by: beast 


But getting those two FS that late, which made me fall in love with that draft... of course that's because I think it's unrealistic.



Why is Thompson dropping. A few months ago many considered him the #1 safety in the draft. Did he have a poor showing at the combine?

One thing about your draft is I agree with KRK that you waited too long to address the OL. I understand that when you have guys you like its hard to pass up, and I don't know which OL you may have passed on so that may have something too do with it.
Zero2Cool
2019-03-18T18:42:53Z
Originally Posted by: sschind 

Why is Thompson dropping. A few months ago many considered him the #1 safety in the draft. Did he have a poor showing at the combine?

One thing about your draft is I agree with KRK that you waited too long to address the OL. I understand that when you have guys you like its hard to pass up, and I don't know which OL you may have passed on so that may have something too do with it.



I didn't draft to fill holes this season. I add free agents for this season. I draft the best available players to fill my roster in the future.
KRK
  • KRK
  • Veteran Member
2019-03-18T19:17:10Z
What if the best player available is a tight end?
Zero2Cool
2019-03-18T19:45:58Z
Originally Posted by: KRK 

What if the best player available is a tight end?



Then we have the worst draft class in decades. I have only seen one ranking where a TE broke the top 15 in best players to be drafted.
beast
2019-03-19T04:17:40Z
Originally Posted by: KRK 

😕 Actually, it makes the point that as a unit, you have to look at each link to determine the units effectiveness...ergo, looking at each individual position is necessary.

You just said it again, you are looking at them as a unit, and determining them as a unit, so you are doing the opposite of what you said.


Originally Posted by: KRK 

Good idea. I think I will only view posters who aren't just taking the best player available. I hope we get the very best player on the OL who fills what I perceive to be a need there.

Exactly, all this bullshit isn't about OL at all, it's all about you... you are demanding OL to be drafted high and often [horseow] .... we get it!

How about you opinions on draft and ANY other position?

beast
2019-03-19T04:46:13Z
Originally Posted by: sschind 

Why is Thompson dropping. A few months ago many considered him the #1 safety in the draft. Did he have a poor showing at the combine?

One thing about your draft is I agree with KRK that you waited too long to address the OL. I understand that when you have guys you like its hard to pass up, and I don't know which OL you may have passed on so that may have something too do with it.

It's not that he's dropping per say just different people have different opinions, and grade differently based on those opinion... and you ha e to project a player into certain roles.

As a deep zone FS scheme, Thompson could still potentially be the best Safety in this class.... but this website's three opinion writers didn't like his Discipline, tackling or one on one man coverage skills and they make some fair points... Nick Collins he is not. But it all depends on scheme and roles you are projecting them into.


I can't help that the other teams were over drafting OL, letting other talent to drop...

Just because someone else does something stupid, doesn't mean I'm gonna follow their bad example and over draft just to grab a position...

Maybe if there was actually proof they would pan out but the reality is most picks bust, and 4th round linemen have seemed to pan out about as well as linemen selected above...

Everyone has bitched about Colledge and Bulaga for years, not to mention Sherrod, while Bak, Sitting, Lang and Linsley have been heros...
Rockmolder
2019-03-19T11:04:40Z
Originally Posted by: KRK 

Wait, so you draft for need?



Like you say in a later post, it's a lot more nuanced than just drafting for need and just drafting the best player available.

Positional value is a big decider. How your roster is build. How many players you see as aproxomately equally skilled. It's like Z2C said, if you reach for need, you're going to be at the bottom of the league real fast. Doesn't mean we're drafting seven running backs in one draft because they all fit the BPA at that point.

It's just that there's no way you can say that you're drafting 3 o-linemen beforehand. You don't know who's available. That doesn't mean people around here don't see the need. It's just that there's other needs and players that are likely to line up better at our current draft positions. I won't go any further into that, because both sides have given enough arguments.

Add to that that you're usually drafting for the future. We can draft 6 o-linemen on day one and two, but odds are pretty slim that they're all NFL-caliber players from day one, so you won't be plugging those holes you're seeing instantly.

Odds are pretty big, though, that you're creating big problems at other positions. We have two old tight ends and one that will never become a starter, most likely. We need to infuse some talent and youth in that position. ILB is looking pretty barren. Just shoving those needs aside and drafting for inmediate need makes it nearly certain that you'll have to dip into FA and give up top dollar to sign someone there. Something you'd rather not do.


Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 

Then we have the worst draft class in decades. I have only seen one ranking where a TE broke the top 15 in best players to be drafted.




I agree with all your points, apart from this one. I think you actually might be ahead of the curve. Positional value for tight ends has been, in my opinion, undervalued for years. Just take a look at what difference a guy like Graham, Gronkowski or Gonzalez makes.

That said, there's no one I would pick at 12 this year, but I wouldn't mind picking a TE that high. Guard or ILB, those are positions I generally wouldn't spend a high pick on.
KRK
  • KRK
  • Veteran Member
2019-03-19T12:34:50Z
Beast beckoned:
Quote:

How about you opinions on draft and ANY other position?

OK.

RB - I love the two we have, but we really need a quality guy who can step in. Not necessarily a workhorse, especially not a tailback, but someone, from a college system who has experience in blitz pick-up and can carry the ball effectively and reliably. Jamaal Williams like...in fact a clone would be fine with me.

ILB - Not to beat a dead horse, as this has been discussed in the past but with Ryan departure, and the underwhelming first year performance of Burks we need someone. I hope Morrison was a stop-gap until Burks is ready (which I hope is now) but regardless, we need a guy there, and not just plug-in in a safety all the time.

Rockmolder accurately assessed:
Quote:

Positional value for tight ends has been, in my opinion, undervalued for years. Just take a look at what difference a guy like Graham, Gronkowski or Gonzalez makes.

I would not take one at 12 unless I thought he was an instant Pro-Bowl guy. 30 perhaps. In an ideal world, we could trade down from 12 and pick one up in the second round.

And finally, and for the last time, in regard to the OL chain metaphor I am/had been asserting that IF one is:
Quote:

looking at them as a unit, and determining them as a unit

one needs to look at the weakest link to determine the unit strength, NOT to average each of the the individual components' strength as the cited sources seem to do. We need help in the O line and I would not mind addressing it as the top priority, whether we trade down for multiple picks or that a guy a 12. With Turner in fold, if there is a stud G-C, I would take him.
Zero2Cool
2019-03-19T17:26:13Z
KRK erroneously stated
Quote:

I would not take one at 12 unless I thought he was an instant Pro-Bowl guy.



This is why we can't trust you, lol. Pro Bowl? THE PRO BOWL? No, sir, we care ONLY about All-Pro's!

I'll build my team of All Pro's and we'll baby spank your Pro Bowl roster up and down the boulevard!

KRK
  • KRK
  • Veteran Member
2019-03-19T18:32:21Z
I will consider myself corrected, reprimanded, open to be spanked, provided you are arranging for Jessica Alba to do the spanking.
beast
2019-03-20T04:34:04Z
Originally Posted by: KRK 

RB - I love the two we have, but we really need a quality guy who can step in.

I very much agree, I think the Packers have about all the starting pieces for LaFleur's offensive, except maybe a power RB who might be talented enough to start.

Don't get me wrong, I love Aaron Jones, but looking at the Shanahan, McVay, LaFleur offensive, they pretty much always had starting power RBs with the exception of the very early Redskins years.

Also Jones has had some injury troubles with MM's less running calls, can he handle a higher volume of runs? Though to be fair, Jones has gotten hurt more often while pass blocking than while with the ball. So maybe more runs and routes and less pass blocking might keep him healthier.

Originally Posted by: KRK 

Not necessarily a workhorse, especially not a tailback, but someone, from a college system who has experience in blitz pick-up and can carry the ball effectively and reliably. Jamaal Williams like...in fact a clone would be fine with me.

You'll have to tell me how you define/mean by tailback.... as to me, tailback = RB, though it seems to mean a certain type of RB to you.

I've been wondering how Williams might do in that power RB role. But one thing for sure is LaFleur will get more out of Williams verstility, including having him involved in the passing game where Williams looks like a natural WR with the ball in the air.

Originally Posted by: KRK 

ILB - Not to beat a dead horse, as this has been discussed in the past but with Ryan departure, and the underwhelming first year performance of Burks we need someone. I hope Morrison was a stop-gap until Burks is ready (which I hope is now) but regardless, we need a guy there, and not just plug-in in a safety all the time.

Just my opinion, but Morrison sucked... I much prefer the Safety.

Also they're not just plugging in a Safety, as the entire NFL is moving more towards smaller, faster LBers, which are basically larger Safety and some large college Safeties are becoming full time LBers.

I think they should be strongly considering that with Josh Jones, he's got the power for coverage LB, but struggle in Safety coverage, but at LB, he's over athleticism for the position allows him to make up for mistakes, that he doesn't at Safety. And I believe he did play a lot of LB one year in college.
Zero2Cool
2019-03-20T16:39:00Z
Originally Posted by: Rockmolder 

I agree with all your points, apart from this one. I think you actually might be ahead of the curve. Positional value for tight ends has been, in my opinion, undervalued for years. Just take a look at what difference a guy like Graham, Gronkowski or Gonzalez makes.

That said, there's no one I would pick at 12 this year, but I wouldn't mind picking a TE that high. Guard or ILB, those are positions I generally wouldn't spend a high pick on.



If the ahead of the curve is a compliment, let's be clear, I don't know squat about college players, lol. I'm just basing my opinion off of all the top 25 and top 50 and top 100 lists I've been seeing. It's just analysis by observation more than anything.

If the entire league undervalues TE's, why would you take one sooner? That makes no sense. Drafting is kind of like a chess game, at least I think. I've heard someone on the Patriots say if they knew Tom Brady was going to be as great as he is, they'd have drafted in the first round. I pound the desk saying WHY!?!!? Why use your 1st round pick on someone no one is gonna take until you do at 199th overall? Hell, maybe having all 32 teams pass on him 5 times or so is what DROVE him to be the QB he is now?
Users browsing this topic
Fan Shout
Cheesey (10-Jul) : Really though, I’m not slow, not fast....kinda “half-fassed!”
Cheesey (10-Jul) : I’m so slow, it looks like I’m going the other direction!😁
Zero2Cool (10-Jul) : Happy Birthday, Alan! Your mother did all the work, you're stealing her thunder! :D
Zero2Cool (10-Jul) : I laughed and said to myself "bet he's slow as crap!" haha
Zero2Cool (10-Jul) : My dad and I play Madden. We are several seasons beyond 2019. One of the rookies was Alan Smith.
Cheesey (10-Jul) : Thanks WPR. I’m getting closer to the finish line.....thank God.
wpr (10-Jul) : happy birthday cheesey
Cheesey (10-Jul) : I did....2and a half times!🤪
Zero2Cool (10-Jul) : Enjoy being 25!!
Cheesey (9-Jul) : Well...guess I’ll say it myself....HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO ME!
Mucky Tundra (9-Jul) : What I've always been mystified by is the amount of guests looking at threads from 4-9 years ago
Cheesey (7-Jul) : I don’t get it either, Zero. Maybe they figure they can slip by, as there’s no one there to notice them!😂
Zero2Cool (7-Jul) : How a site with low traffic attracts spammers is beyond me.
Zero2Cool (6-Jul) : One an half. 🤣
Cheesey (5-Jul) : BOTH of them?🤪😂
Zero2Cool (5-Jul) : Bills fans won't even notice a thing!
Cheesey (5-Jul) : I wish they would in force the law. It was like a war zone last night.
Cheesey (5-Jul) : Here’s something I don’t understand. It’s legal to buy fireworks here, but illegal to shoot them off.
Cheesey (5-Jul) : Hey Zero. How will the Buffalo Bills tell the difference from previous years?😂
KRK (4-Jul) : Happy Independence Day!!!
KRK (2-Jul) : Great thought of the day Z2C
Zero2Cool (2-Jul) : yikes -- No fans will be allowed to attend Buffalo Bills games during COVID
Zero2Cool (1-Jul) : from twitter...NFL reportedly to announce elimination of 1st and 4th 2020 preseason games
Cheesey (30-Jun) : I had to look up the story to get the details. The man was truly a hero. Jumped in when he couldn’t swim.
Zero2Cool (29-Jun) : @Chiefs 37 years ago today, Joe Delaney tragically passed away after attempting to save three children.
Zero2Cool (25-Jun) : @ShamsCharania Indiana Pacers guard Malcolm Brogdon tested positive for coronavirus.
Zero2Cool (25-Jun) : draft history updated
Zero2Cool (22-Jun) : Good catch smokey! I thought I did that already. I'll get on it later this week.
Zero2Cool (18-Jun) : 49ers WR Deebo Samuel has a bum wheel.
Zero2Cool (18-Jun) : That's noteworthy because Gordon applied for reinstatement today.
Zero2Cool (18-Jun) : @ProFootballTalk Josh Gordon relapsed after brother's death
Zero2Cool (15-Jun) : Thank you. We had like SIX of them. Why would anyone come here to spam? Not exactly high traffic lol
Cheesey (15-Jun) : Yeah, that’s why I called them to your attention. We don’t need that garbage on this great site!
Zero2Cool (15-Jun) : Dang spammers.
Zero2Cool (10-Jun) : @mattschneidman Packers at Giants in Week 3 of the preseason moved from 7 p.m. CT kickoff to 5 p.m. CT kickoff.
Zero2Cool (9-Jun) : @BillHuberSI Bakhtiari says he’s been training with Matthews at Clay’s house, where he has a gym.
Zero2Cool (5-Jun) : #Packers sign sixth-round G Jon Runyan.
Cheesey (27-May) : The irony is, you don’t get the irony. (Just kidding!)🤪
Nonstopdrivel (27-May) : I must have missed the joke. What is the irony?
Cheesey (25-May) : I think I’ll “irony” my laundry...🤪
Zero2Cool (25-May) : The irony lol....
Nonstopdrivel (23-May) : Agreed. I love doing research. I submitted a paper to a journal a couple of days ago. Fingers crossed that it gets accepted.
Zero2Cool (20-May) : Research projects can be tons of fun!
Nonstopdrivel (20-May) : I don't have any hospital responsibilities, just the endless onboarding process. I'm working on some research projects too.
TheKanataThrilla (18-May) : Is it vacation now NSD or do you still have hospital responsibilities?
Nonstopdrivel (16-May) : I'll be moving to Myrtle Beach in June.
TheKanataThrilla (16-May) : Congrats NSD. When are you moving?
Nonstopdrivel (15-May) : And thank you, everyone. Your kind words are much appreciated. It's been a long, long, long time in coming.
Nonstopdrivel (15-May) : Except that I'll be getting me Lombardi Trophy in the mail in a few weeks (Delayed by the idiotic coronavirus pan(Dem)ic, of course.
Cheesey (15-May) : Congrats NSD! I’m sorry u had to watch from home. Must feel like having a ticket to the super bowl, and watching on TV instead
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2020 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 13 @ 12:00 PM
Vikings
Sunday, Sep 20 @ 12:00 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Sep 27 @ 7:20 PM
Saints
Monday, Oct 5 @ 7:15 PM
FALCONS
Sunday, Oct 18 @ 3:25 PM
Buccaneers
Sunday, Oct 25 @ 12:00 PM
Texans
Sunday, Nov 1 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Thursday, Nov 5 @ 7:20 PM
49ers
Sunday, Nov 15 @ 12:00 PM
JAGUARS
Sunday, Nov 22 @ 12:00 PM
Colts
Sunday, Nov 29 @ 7:20 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Dec 6 @ 3:25 PM
EAGLES
Sunday, Dec 13 @ 12:00 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 20 @ 12:00 PM
PANTHERS
Sunday, Dec 27 @ 7:20 PM
TITANS
Sunday, Jan 3 @ 12:00 PM
Bears
Think About It
Think About It
Recent Topics
6m / Around The NFL / Mucky Tundra

6h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

20h / Green Bay Packers Talk / shield4life

21h / Green Bay Packers Talk / shield4life

9-Jul / Around The NFL / Smokey

7-Jul / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

7-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

6-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

5-Jul / Around The NFL / Cheesey

4-Jul / Random Babble / KRK

3-Jul / Around The NFL / Smokey

3-Jul / Random Babble / wpr

2-Jul / Random Babble / Smokey

2-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Smokey

2-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Smokey

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2020 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.