What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Official Game Thread***LA Rams at Green Bay Packers -7 (45.5)*** (3 Viewers)

And that's...all she wrote. Barring unforeseen stuff, GB wins, game hits the over.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yeah, if only they’d drafted that one impact rookie and then that other impact rookie, they’d be dominating even more than they’re dominating this game. 
In fairness to ilov80s, people were universally stunned by their draft and where they took the QB and RB.

 
In fairness to ilov80s, people were universally stunned by their draft and where they took the QB and RB.
I was roasting them all off season here for the draft and the 1 push back I got over and over was that they weren't really a SB contender and they wouldn't be as good this year. 

Ooh boy. I don't think either NO or TB is really suited to go to Lambeau on January 24th.
Great point

 
“Universally” among message board fantasy hottakes, agreed. The Packers have been drafting for the future for 25 years with great success. The 2019 draft came up big tonight. 
I have liked their drafts a lot and drafting for the future is great, but they have a HOF QB near the end of his prime coming off a 13-3 season. I don't think that is the time to just think about the future. Also, what about their team would have made a WR or OL or DL a poor investment for the future? 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I have liked their drafts a lot and drafting for the future is great, but they have a HOF QB near the end of his prime coming off a 13-3 season. I don't think that is the time to just think about the future. Also, what about their team would have made a WR or OL or DL a poor investment for the future? 
Imagine had the Packers taken this same approach when they drafted Rodgers. You had a HOF QB near the end of his prime, shouldve taken a WR or DL or OL.

You don't win in the NFL without a good QB. I don't know if Love is that guy in the future but the Packers obviously felt that way. A WR or OL or DL wouldn't have been a poor investment. But if you feel your future QB is there you take him. Good QBs only come along so often. Good OL or DL or WR come along a little more often.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Imagine had the Packers taken this same approach when they drafted Rodgers. You had a HOF QB near the end of his prime, shouldve taken a WR or DL or OL.

You don't win in the NFL without a good QB. I don't know if Love is that guy in the future but the Packers obviously felt that way. A WR or OL or DL wouldn't have been a poor investment. But if you feel your future QB is there you take him. Good QBs only come along so often. Good OL or DL or WR come along a little more often.
The Packers were a 10 win team the year they took Rodgers and became a 4 win team the following year.This is not the same comparison. 

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top