Inbox: This was the most likely outcome

Al from Green Bay, WI

Spoff, welcome back from a solid two weeks of nothing but draft prospect analysis! Can you share your epiphany here or do you have to wait until feeding it to Gutey?

Ha. I didn't read a single thing about a draft prospect until I returned to work yesterday. When I disconnect, I truly disconnect.

Aaron from Tucson, AZ

How is prying Brett Favre from Atlanta not automatically assumed to be the best trade in GB history?

Probably because it was Wes's last day writing the column before I returned.

Rob from Wilmington, NC

Regarding the best trades, you have to include trading for Favre. Then the picks we got after trading him away helped land Clay Matthews.

It was only one pick, but yes, it was packaged into the trade up for Matthews.

Nick from Mount Horeb, WI

Did we get any draft choices or compensation for the players we lost during free agency?

The Packers got a seventh-round compensatory pick, so they will have two sevenths in this draft – though neither is their original pick in that round. That was traded to Tennessee for Malik Willis, but they got a seventh from Pittsburgh for Preston Smith plus the compensatory for losing Yosh Nijman.

Bruce from Appleton, WI

What do you think of the Packers moving Elgton Jenkins to center?

It's the move that makes the most sense with the signing of Aaron Banks, who clearly piqued Gutey's interest in free agency. Once the Packers decided to move on from Myers, this was the most likely outcome, and it provides an experienced, savvy and versatile mentor for possibly the next center in the pipeline, Jacob Monk.

Clipton from Pasadena, CA

I'm apparently the last Insider to offer an opinion on the Tush Push so I submit mine for critique: The reasons for banning it seem pretextual. There is no data that it's a safety issue so critics say "it might be in the future so we want to get ahead of it." QB sneaks are legal and there's no evidence that pushing a player makes that play more unsafe. As far as it being a "rugby" play so is running, tackling, and kicking the ball through the uprights. Football comes from rugby.

All true, but I liked best what LaFleur said about it from Florida on Tuesday: "It's not really a football play." That's been my argument against it from the beginning, and it sounds like in tabling the issue until the owners' meeting in May (nicely called by Wes), there will be further discussion about the old, broader rule that banned directly assisting ball carriers. That is absolutely the discussion to be had.

Matt from Allouez, WI

I am going to go out on a limb here and say that if the tush push is banned, the Eagles will still be good at short yardage.

Indeed. That Barkley back ain't too shabby, and a 223-pound QB will be able to sneak the ball on his own just fine, too. Which is why this has never been about the Eagles for me, even though they became best at it. It's about the play, or lack thereof.

Patrick from Hudson, WI

Get rid of the "Tush Push" and bring back the "RB Leap" headfirst over the line and into the end zone, a la Barry Sanders or Emmitt Smith. Now that was exciting!

Nobody did that better than Walter Payton, but talk about asking for a guy to get hurt. Mercy.

Steve from Phoenix, AZ

I think we are still in rule change proposals territory so here goes. I never understood the language that all scoring plays are subject to review. It should be all "potential" scoring plays. If the call is whether the foot in the end zone was in or out, why do we only review it if it's called a touchdown? That makes no sense to me.

I agree the rule seemed to miss (part of) the boat, but replay assist has stepped in during recent years to look at the non-automatic reviews, too.

Jake from Apple Valley, MN

Mike, it looks like the owners have expanded the replay assist to pick up flags on safety calls. Has your face subsided from blue to pink?

Not entirely, though it's coming around. The league is taking a step in the right direction here, but there's a caveat. The current construct of the new rule is only going to encourage officials to throw flags, because that will allow the plays to be reviewed, which then will give precedence to the calls on the field during the review process, an outdated concept that has too much influence. I understand the reluctance to, so to speak, throw flags from the replay booth. I honestly do. But I'd still rather see the safety adjudication of penalties and fines better aligned, so players aren't getting five-figure fines for infractions that weren't called. The new rule partially aligns things, but not adequately.

Luke from Holcombe, WI

With regard to rules changes and fan fatigue: I think the change that really started irking people was the overtime rules. Such a knee-jerk reaction to a playoff game, and all the reasons and justifications conveniently ignore a huge part of the game. Play some defense. The rules were just fine.

I think the league (and fans) got tired of seeing teams win the overtime coin toss, drive just 25-30 yards on the opening possession, and kick a long field goal for the win. The better kickers got, the greater the percentage of overtimes decided by the coin toss. So I understood the desire to adjust. In retrospect, perhaps the simpler fix (that could've avoided where we are now) would've been to require first-possession OT field goals to be 35 yards or shorter, forcing an offense on the opening drive of OT to at least get into the red zone before being able to end the game. But defenses are so tired at that stage there probably still would've been too many games ending with only one team getting the ball.

James from Appleton, WI

It seems like under the new overtime rules the key for the team that wins the toss is to go on an eight-minute TD drive. Maybe it's not likely, but what's 100% is that the new rules will be changed right after that happens.

Let's get wild. If the second possession is guaranteed now, maybe the OT clock should start by counting up until the first possession ends, and then it counts down from there beginning with the second possession. If Team 2 matches Team 1's score in less time, then Team 2 wins. That way Team 1 is incentivized to score quickly. If they go three-and-out, Team 2 better hurry. Either way, the OT is structured to end pronto.

Brad from Oshkosh, WI

The potential change to the playoff seeding makes sense to me. Rewarding division winners with an opening-round home game, then re-seeding in the next round. It is an incentive to keep winning (and less chance for boring Week 17 games) because you may have a better chance to get a home game based off record alone. Thoughts?

I've never been a proponent of diminishing the value of winning a division, because otherwise, for equity purposes, you'd have to re-examine the entire scheduling formula, which has teams in the same division playing 14 of 17 games against the same opponents. That said, the idea of re-seeding after the first round intrigues me. As you suggest, that could in effect prevent wild-card teams from being "locked into" their seeds as the regular season winds down.

George from Edinburg, VA

Of course it makes sense with today's technology, but I think we are going to miss the drama of the chains and the index card.

Not me. The "Hawk-Eye" system will not fix any issues regarding the spot of the ball. It will only expedite the measurement itself. But the game not being put on pause for said measurement is a good thing.

Dawn from De Pere, WI

How many times did the Packers draft 23 and who were the players?

The last time Green Bay selected a player with the No. 23 overall pick, it was Bryan Bulaga in 2010. Before that, you have to go back to 1976 and another offensive tackle, Mark Koncar, when the No. 23 pick was acquired from the Raiders in the Ted Hendricks trade. Before that, Irv Comp in 1943 (third round), who intercepted 10 passes as a rookie, which still stands as the club's single-season record.

Derrick from Dell Rapids, SD

Not really a question but a comment. To follow up on Wes's response to Kevin from Casper, WY on the "IT" factor. At the 2024 Super Bowl in Las Vegas, Jordan Love was on the Dan Patrick Show. And before he came on, the show commented on how much of a presence Love had. When he walked into the stage area, there was such an aura around him that everybody just stopped what they were doing and looked at him. Wes nailed it. People gravitate to people like Love.

When I heard LaFleur mention after the season how he wanted Love to continue growing as a "vocal leader," I couldn't help but wonder if that potential progress was stunted by injuring his knee in Week 1, missing two games, being limited in practice as he worked his way back, then injuring the groin and dealing with those limitations, etc. Health permitting, this could be the year Love really comes into his own, leadership-wise.

Mike from Baraboo, WI

Are you as happy as I am that we don't have to go through the Rodgers drama once again? That being asked, where do you think he will ultimately land, or is retirement a real option?

It seems to be a real option or he would've signed somewhere by now, before so many possibilities dried up. If he wants to play, I think he'll go to Pittsburgh, but that won't increase the odds of the Packers-Steelers game in '25 being played in Ireland, despite Green Bay being awarded the international marketing rights there. It would diminish the odds due to the kickoff time, I believe.

Shawn from Kissimmee, FL

Hope you had a great time off, Mike! I guess you didn't miss out on the Rodgers decision like most probably thought. What is the position on offense and on the defense that the Packers need to improve the most? For offense, I think we already did it by addressing the O-line as long as Jenkins can transition to center and maintain near Pro Bowl level. Defense for me I'd say edge or corner, tough call to me but a healthy Jaire that wants to play for us would make that then be edge rusher in my eyes.

I honestly have very few concerns on offense because I expect the pass-catchers to improve on the drops. Ranking fifth in the league in yards and eighth in points with one of the higher drop rates says a lot about the offense's capabilities. On defense, the depth at corner is a concern but that can be addressed in the draft. As noted all offseason, the pass-rush production has to become more consistent and reliable. This week, Gutey reiterated his improvement from within mantra from the combine, which didn't surprise me, and LaFleur sounds very excited about his new D-line coach. Expectations have been laid out, regardless of any new players brought in.

Matt from Middleton, WI

Torpedo bats, what's next?

Submarine pitchers? Oh wait, those already exist. These bats will be taking over the game. Sooner than later.

Aaron from Denver, CO

No question just a lol. Vic – "If there was a soccer game happening in my backyard I would close the blinds."

Not just any soccer game. He said that about the World Cup.

Scott from Sauk City, WI

Going back to the AI topic from Monday (sorry, been a long week...just read it) – wouldn't using AI be just like reading every bit of clickbait in existence? AI doesn't "know" anything that a human hasn't already opined. (If I understand AI, anyways...which is unlikely.) AI would just pick the players viewed as the best by the information it has been fed. That's what interests/scares me the most about AI. We give it the info it uses to make decisions. Garbage in, garbage out?

So glad I came back.

Shannon from Ovilla, TX

Were mock drafts named that because of mock-ups like before a project, or because "experts" get mocked for being so far off base guessing who teams will draft?

So glad.

Dennis from De Pere, WI

Welcome back, Spofford! We tease you a lot because we've got you on the spot! Hopefully you read yesterday's Inbox. Do you think Darren from Wakefield, MI, is aware that the "moving the goal posts" phrase comes from when the NFL moved the goal posts?

Happy Wednesday.