David from Madison, WI
I'm bewildered, Vic. I recall in the past a question was asked regarding the Packers running some variation of wildcat, to which you replied that you felt the team wouldn't want to give Rodgers one less opportunity to work his magic. Now, you seem to be in favor of adding the read-option wrinkle with Young (something opponents would likely be forced to spend precious time preparing against). So it's OK now to give Rodgers one less play? Or might doing so now just be an effective preseason bluff so teams are forced to fear the read-option's possibility during the regular season?
"One less" don't sound like words I would use. I'm pretty sure I would've used the words "one fewer." Be that as it may, I think I can ease your bewilderment. I was asked yesterday in "Ask Vic Extra!" if I would support using Vince Young "for maybe a play or two during the season." I said I liked that idea because it would give the opponent something for which it would have to spend preparation time. I would also support using the wildcat for a play or two during the season, for the same reason. Actually, that's an opinion I had expressed in this column at some point in the distant past. I would be opposed to using the wildcat or the read option for any significant number of plays. I don't think anything you do can be viable without making a commitment to it, and I don't think this team should make a commitment to any offensive scheme that takes Aaron Rodgers off the field for a significant period of time. Do you have less bewilderment now? Or should it be fewer bewilderment?
Jorge from Austin, TX
What Dan said actually made a lot of sense. You're not telling lies, you're informing readers on the latest possible Packers developments. On top of the forum, write in big, bold letters, "WHAT COULD HAPPEN." Or something like that.
You want rumors? OK, here's a rumor: The Packers are going to run the wildcat.
Matt from Fayetteville, NC
Vic, how many wide receivers are the Packers going to keep?
Five would seem to be a logical number. I think Jarrett Boykin has locked down No. 4 and the fifth spot is up for grabs tonight between Jeremy Ross, Charles Johnson, Tyrone Walker and Myles White. I think Ross goes into the game with an edge because of his role as a return man.
Eric from Columbus, OH
Mason Crosby has all but won his roster spot, right?
I believe the job is his to keep. He has to hold it; that's the challenge now.
Josh from Denver, CO
Vic, I know you said the two bye weeks season was judged to have been bulky and unfavorable, but couldn't the increasing rash of injuries heading into each season be the tipping point for a re-visit to that format?
I guess it could, but how would an extra bye week help Bryan Bulaga and DuJuan Harris? Aren't those the types of injuries, the season-ending types, we're lamenting. The big problem with having two bye weeks in a season is that it's going to force the season to begin before Labor Day, as it did in 1993, provided you want to retain that bye week between the conference title games and the Super Bowl, or not push the Super Bowl back any farther than it is. The NFL is bitterly opposed to starting its season before Labor Day, which is one of the problems that would accompany an 18-game regular season. In that case, however, it would at least be for the gain of improving the product. An extra bye week doesn't improve the product. It adds a TV weekend, but TV wasn't wild about having two watered-down weekends in 1993.
Tyler from Greenfield, WI
Which is the best team you have covered whose season did not end in a Super Bowl championship?
It would be a tossup between the 1976 Steelers, 1999 Jaguars and 2011 Packers.
Scott from Fitchburg, WI
Do you remember the last time you were not at an NFL stadium for a week during the season?
It was the 2002 season. I missed consecutive games in Dallas and in Houston because I had cancer surgery. I remember having a funny feeling watching the games without having to write about what I was seeing. I especially remember so many of my friends calling me after the game as the bus was en route to the airport and as they sat on the plane while it was being loaded with equipment.
Dabego from Glenview, IL
Vic, I believe this season is huge for Dom Capers. If those read-option offenses continue to light up the defense, Mr. Capers may be looking for work. Am I making this bigger than it really is?
He wouldn't have to look long.
Conor from Bloomington, IN
Vic, I understand you cannot play this game with the fear of possible injury, but with the recent loss of DuJuan Harris, doesn't it seem justifiable to sit Eddie Lacy against Kansas City to ensure we still have half of our 1-2 punch intact for the regular season?
I don't expect Lacy to play much, if at all, tonight.
Nick from Madison, WI
Vic, who are these fools that think Packers.com should be reporting on rumors?
So far, they are Dan from Wichita, KS, and Jorge from Austin, TX.
Larry from San Miguel de Allende, Guanajuato
Vic, can you explain in one or two sentences what the lawsuit against the NFL is about? Are the players saying they didn't know football was a dangerous game? Since the beginning, hasn't there been evidence that playing football has risks? I don't get it.
You didn't help me when I needed you. Now I'm going to make you pay. I think that's the message.
Tom from Belmont, MA
Vic, should I be concerned about our obsession with the 49ers game? I mean, could all that focus on San Francisco distract the players from the all-important job of preparing for Kansas City?
That's pretty funny. Honestly, preparation for the San Francisco game began last winter before the schedule was even announced. That playoff game shaped much of what the Packers did in the offseason.
Trent from Nappanee, IN
What exactly does it mean to be waived injured? Why would a team do that to a player instead of placing him straight on the IR?
It's required when a team wishes to release a player who has an injury. The team is required to warn teams that would be interested in claiming the player that he has an injury. A team claiming a player waived injured must accept liability for the injury. If the player is not claimed, he returns to the team that released him. That team may then do an injury settlement with him and release him, or assign the player to the injured reserve list. Once he is judged to have recovered from his injury, he can be released unconditionally.
Paul from Beaver Dam, WI
Vic, has the game of football ever been not changing? Are we going to see teams keep more and more new-age QBs on their rosters?
In my lifetime, change has been a constant theme of the game, and it usually involves the man to whom the ball is snapped. In the earliest years of my life, that man was the single wing tailback, who was two parts runner and one part passer; the quarterback was a blocker. Then came the drop-back passer, who was all parts passer. College football has always been a leader in the evolution of the game. In the '60s, it gave us the sprint-out quarterback, who angled away from center so the pocket would form behind one of the tackles. That little wrinkle was preceded by the rollout quarterback. At the tail end of the '60s, college football gave us the wishbone or triple-option quarterback. We've seen the freeze-option quarterback, the spread-option quarterback and now the read-option quarterback. Oh, yeah, let's not forget "Slash," and he was an NFL invention. In my opinion, we're going to see even more dramatic changes at the position. I think we're heading back to the days when the man to whom the ball was snapped was two parts runner and one part passer.
Alex from La Crosse, WI
I read your column every day and it usually works out so I can read it while I eat lunch. Thanks for that. Also, thanks for the Fleetwood Mac reference. It gave me a good laugh. No questions here, just emailing to show some support. Keep up the good work.
I didn't even know I did it, but I'm glad you got a good laugh. Stop back for "Ask Vic Extra!" this afternoon.
