Game 1: Packers at Bears - 3:25 - Fox

H2tObes · Post #561 » by **H2tObes** » Mon Sep 11, 2023 4:44 am

Got to watch this game with some Bears fans, they know Love is good and it makes them sick. Amazing.

Matches Malone · Post #562 » by **Matches Malone** » Mon Sep 11, 2023 12:25 pm

Treebeard · Post #563 » by **Treebeard** » Mon Sep 11, 2023 12:44 pm

What grade would you give Savage for yesterday? I saw him make a couple of very good plays, but otherwise I didn't tune in on him much. Ford had a real tough day, from what I saw. Out of place at times and he lost his composure the one time and drew a penalty for it.

Of course, it helped that with the lead, the Dline were just teeing off on hard rushes against Fields. Fields looked discombobulated at times.

MVP2110 · Post #564 » by **MVP2110** » Mon Sep 11, 2023 12:50 pm

Read on Twitter

?t=M5gRhYlwy1yGWjISXHQpDA&s=19

Gotta say, I didn't predict that Dontayvion Wicks would lead the WR in snaps yesterday

GiannisAnte34 · Post #565 » by **GiannisAnte34** » Mon Sep 11, 2023 1:32 pm

Have to wonder how much of this is due to the Bears being terrible and how much of this is a sign of how good the Packers are. I think the game coming up against Atlanta will be a good litmus test.

PintSizedBox10 · Post #566 » by **PintSizedBox10** » Mon Sep 11, 2023 1:48 pm

GiannisAnte34 wrote:Have to wonder how much of this is due to the Bears being terrible and how much of this is a sign of how good the Packers are. I think the game coming up against Atlanta will be a good litmus test.

Little bit of both. The Packers are definitely better than people thought, and the Bears will be in the running for the #1 pick. The off-season hype for Chicago made zero sense.

Ron Swanson · Post #567 » by **Ron Swanson** » Mon Sep 11, 2023 1:55 pm

I'll say it again. The oddsmakers were drunk as **** when it came to this team in all the over/unders and power rankings. These guys don't watch film and apparently they don't even scan the rosters. The coaching AND talent disparity was obvious yesterday.

M-C-G · Post #568 » by **M-C-G** » Mon Sep 11, 2023 2:05 pm

Matches Malone wrote:

Read on Twitter

But we traded up for him and he wasn't even active his rookie year! How could this be?

I've been saying, this dude is going to be good, like many others. And cautionary tale, a desperate team for QB traded up and spent like 3 first rounders on Trey Lance only to ship him off for a mid round pick 2 years later.

It is never a bad idea to invest in a guy that you believe could be your QB of the future.

M-C-G · Post #569 » by **M-C-G** » Mon Sep 11, 2023 2:06 pm

Treebeard wrote:What grade would you give Savage for yesterday? I saw him make a couple of very good plays, but otherwise I didn't tune in on him much. Ford had a real tough day, from what I saw. Out of place at times and he lost his composure the one time and drew a penalty for it.

Of course, it helped that with the lead, the Dline were just teeing off on hard rushes against Fields. Fields looked discombobulated at times.

I was dogging Savage with my buddy watching the game and happy to say he made some plays. Where has this been the last two years, I have no idea but him turning into anything positive would be great. We need him to be something because there isn't much else in that safety room.

jakecronus8 · Post #570 » by **jakecronus8** » Mon Sep 11, 2023 2:30 pm

M-C-G wrote:
Matches Malone wrote:

Read on Twitter

But we traded up for him and he wasn't even active his rookie year! How could this be?

I've been saying, this dude is going to be good, like many others. And cautionary tale, a desperate team for QB traded up and spent like 3 first rounders on Trey Lance only to ship him off for a mid round pick 2 years later.

It is never a bad idea to invest in a guy that you believe could be your QB of the future.

The worst time to draft a quarterback is when you need one. Gutekunst plays 3d chess

M-C-G · Post #571 » by **M-C-G** » Mon Sep 11, 2023 2:42 pm

jakecronus8 wrote:
M-C-G wrote:
Matches Malone wrote:

Read on Twitter

But we traded up for him and he wasn't even active his rookie year! How could this be?

I've been saying, this dude is going to be good, like many others. And cautionary tale, a desperate team for QB traded up and spent like 3 first rounders on Trey Lance only to ship him off for a mid round pick 2 years later.

It is never a bad idea to invest in a guy that you believe could be your QB of the future.

The worst time to draft a quarterback is when you need one. Gutekunst plays 3d chess

I am certain I will see a lot of the detractors come out and admit they might have been mistaken.

RedMosquito76 · Post #572 » by **RedMosquito76** » Mon Sep 11, 2023 2:42 pm

I had high hopes for Love coming into this season - sitting behind a legend for 3 years gives you a lot of opportunity to soak up information. Having him play well in game 1 was pretty satisfying, and there's obviously plenty to improve on.

I remember back in the day where it was just known/accepted that starting a rookie QB was a mistake and would likely hurt their development. If a team is bad enough to take a QB in the top 5-10, they likely have a terrible line and that kid is just going to take a beating.

The best thing Love has going for him right now is that the Pack have a stable, veteran led o-line that is capable of giving him time to go through progressions. His development is likely to accelerate faster than typical first year starters because of it.

MoreTrife · Post #573 » by **MoreTrife** » Mon Sep 11, 2023 3:12 pm

Anders with a right down the middle 52 yarder and 5/5 XP. Nice little confidence boost.

M-C-G · Post #574 » by **M-C-G** » Mon Sep 11, 2023 3:39 pm

RedMosquito76 wrote:I had high hopes for Love coming into this season - sitting behind a legend for 3 years gives you a lot of opportunity to soak up information. Having him play well in game 1 was pretty satisfying, and there's obviously plenty to improve on.

I remember back in the day where it was just known/accepted that starting a rookie QB was a mistake and would likely hurt their development. If a team is bad enough to take a QB in the top 5-10, they likely have a terrible line and that kid is just going to take a beating.

The best thing Love has going for him right now is that the Pack have a stable, veteran led o-line that is capable of giving him time to go through progressions. His development is likely to accelerate faster than typical first year starters because of it.

I feel like it was weird when Dante Culpepper started after one season, like somewhat unprecedented. I think it is great he got the chance to soak it all up and refine his technique and mechanics because if you would have rolled him out year 1, he would be on another roster right now.

M-C-G · Post #575 » by **M-C-G** » Mon Sep 11, 2023 3:41 pm

MoreTrife wrote:Anders with a right down the middle 52 yarder and 5/5 XP. Nice little confidence boost.

And it would have been good from 65+ too. Whelan did a really nice job on one of them when it was a terrible snap as well.

BUT, we are going to have games where timing, mechanics, etc. are off and it could look ugly. But not hard to see the upside and why they brought him in. That leg is LEGit.

crkone · Post #576 » by **crkone** » Mon Sep 11, 2023 3:49 pm

Read on Twitter

King of the no look pass. Only gonna get better.

Post #577 » by **MickeyDavis** » Mon Sep 11, 2023 4:42 pm

Read on Twitter

MVP2110 · Post #578 » by **MVP2110** » Mon Sep 11, 2023 4:43 pm

Read on Twitter

?t=JxV_VKnT-6LBkimDbbZUFg&s=19

I'm normally pretty pro PFF, but this might be the best example I've ever seen to not trust them. And I don't even think Love was great yesterday, but to have him this low is absurd

WeekapaugGroove · Post #579 » by **WeekapaugGroove** » Mon Sep 11, 2023 4:47 pm

MVP2110 wrote:

Read on Twitter
?t=JxV_VKnT-6LBkimDbbZUFg&s=19

I'm normally pretty pro PFF, but this might be the best example I've ever seen to not trust them. And I don't even think Love was great yesterday, but to have him this low is absurd

Lol yeah, if you watched that game yesterday and then your formula said that Love and Fields deserve the same grade then it's time to reevaluate your formula.

Sent from my SM-F731U using RealGM mobile app

Ron Swanson · Post #580 » by **Ron Swanson** » Mon Sep 11, 2023 4:50 pm

PFF does a good job calculating positions like O-lineman, defensive backs, and interior defensive guys. It's borderline useless as a single-game score for QB's though (it almost surely penalized Love for some of those drops and overthrows that were more the receivers' fault).