phaedrus posted:

If they ever go 18, I hope I am disciplined enough to bid farewell.

I hope you are, too! 

On Kizer's playing time, anyone think they are trying to put him in some kind of position to show just enough of something to allow for a trade for something just north of a bucket of spit? 

It's either that or he's just taking up reps to lighten the load on the other QB's. Or the coaching staff is blind to the fairly obvious. 

fightphoe93 posted: 

I could deal with an 18 game season if they SIGNIFICANTLY expand rosters.  I mean like add like 10 guys per team and everyone is active and eligible to play that day.  I agree that only allowing them to play 16 of 18 games seems like it could really cause there to be a lot more meaningless games. 

I don't think the NFL would expand the rosters enough to warrant 18 games, they are too greedy and cheap to share the pie with the players. 

The next 1-2 years will be huge for the league (good or bad), with the upcoming CBA and network contract negotiations. It may take a miracle to get the league, owners, players, and network all on the same page, but money has a way of working these problems out.

I agree that the possibility of roster expansion with an 18 game season will be heavily discussed during this same time frame. Between adding players, tweaking the numbers of players that can dress on game day, or perhaps making QBs exempt from active/inactive lists (as an example), there should be some common ground to find.

If an 18 game season were to happen, I'd like to see a minimum of 2 bye weeks, with all teams being off at the same time. It doesn't seem fair for one team to have their bye at week 4 and another at week 12. I can't imagine it being a problem for the league or players, so it's just a matter of 'selling' it to the networks. If one of the byes came at the end of the regular season, all playoff teams could have a week off....

The league has a near impossible task now of finding 32 starting caliber QBs, so limiting games a player can participate in for an expanded season would put a preseason-esque product on the field. Though I doubt the NFL really cares about that.



I think Kizer is getting the extended look as the #2 because he shows it in practice where the play speed is significantly decreased. In the games last year and this preseason he just doesn't look comfortable with what's happening. Better than Hundley, and a lot like Seneca Wallace.

Boyle still looks raw, but he does not have happy feet and works the progressions. He just has some accuracy issues which could be attributed to rushing the throw when he sees the receiver coming free (inexperience). Hell, Rodgers didn't look all that comfortable is first preseason. (not comparing Boyle to Rodgers). I would go with him as the #2 unless a surprise cut allows for a better option/upgrade.

I’m fairly certain the players get nothing for preseason games.  Why play then? 

I also understand that adding more regular season games would increase the injury risk but just get rid of the practice squad and expand active rosters to 65.  Adjust the trade deadline back and modify PUP rules. 

1 of the 18 games could be overseas. 

I'm not ready to give up on Kizer.  He came out of ND a year too early, played too early for a terrible Browns team.  He comes to GB and now has to learn a new system two years in a row.  If we had drafted him and had no coaching changes I'd be much more likely to say he's no good. 

DocBenni posted:

I'm not ready to give up on Kizer.  He came out of ND a year too early, played too early for a terrible Browns team.  He comes to GB and now has to learn a new system two years in a row.  If we had drafted him and had no coaching changes I'd be much more likely to say he's no good. 

You've got to be kidding me. I played QB in high school and he makes mistakes coaches there usually beat out of you. Staring down the receiver, inconsistent accuracy and footwork. He's horrible.

NEXT!

PackerHawk posted:
phaedrus posted:

If they ever go 18, I hope I am disciplined enough to bid farewell.

I hope you are, too! 

On Kizer's playing time, anyone think they are trying to put him in some kind of position to show just enough of something to allow for a trade for something just north of a bucket of spit? 

It's either that or he's just taking up reps to lighten the load on the other QB's. Or the coaching staff is blind to the fairly obvious. 

I vote for the blindness.

YATittle posted:
Boris posted:

If Doc Benni isn't ready to give up, then I'm not giving up either. 

Not me. I know what I see. Hundley 2.0

He may be Hundley-esque, but definitely not Hundley 2.0.  At least not until he can chew a whole pack of Double Bubble while calling plays.

Packers and Raiders giving the field in Winnipeg a long look. Specifically one of the end zones where the goal post normally stands. Bad patch of uneven turf to fill the spot. Don’t think it’s a repeat of the HOF game in 16. But **** NFL. Get out in front of this or play games in NFL stadiums. Except Soldier Field which looks like a mortar range by late October. 

Grave Digger posted:

This all goes back to him becoming vegan. Who ever heard of a vegan in Wisconsin? Isn't that outlined in the first line of the Wisconsin state constitution? "We the people of Wisconsin, in order to form a more perfect union, do hereby establish this constitution for the state of Wisconsin to denounce veganism, margarine, and ya know establish government stuff too." 

And another vegan QB hurt. Cam Newton, congrats on your decision to eat like a gerbil.

 

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/...-getting-sacked/amp/

 Not jbeing sarcastic, how does a man of Cam Newtons size / muscle mass obtain enough calories, while being so physically active, on a vegan diet?    I can’t wrap my head around that.   Is he just a genetic freak?   

How does he not lose muscle mass?

Goalline posted:
Thunderbird posted:

Maybe he's eating a few impossible whoppers a day?

Nasty shit!

Sounds like you've never tried it.  They're suprisingly good.  There are also some really good veggie burgers out there that taste better.  Different but better.  Trader Joe's Masala Veggie patties are great.  And you feel pretty good afterwords.

Beef?  Huge environmental impact.  I haven't cut it out completely yet but the fricking Amazon rain forest is burning down as I type this, partially because of beef.  People out of touch may think that's funny but when the source of 20% of the planet's oxygen (among other planetary resources) is turning to ash and cinders, it's hard not to reconsider.

DH13 posted:
Goalline posted:
Thunderbird posted:

Maybe he's eating a few impossible whoppers a day?

Nasty shit!

Beef?  Huge environmental impact.  

Well, beef can take something that is basically inedible to humans, grasses that is, and turn it into food that humans can consume and thrive on.   We need to change from a grain based diet for beef and  dairy and return to grasses which conserve soil and have a low carbon footprint.   

Add Reply

Likes (2)
GoallineYATittle
Post
×
×
×
×