By Category

Joint Practices to Bring Much-Needed Shakeup to Packers' Training Camp

Earlier this week, the Packers announced they would be hosting joint practices with the Houston Texans, leading up to the teams’ first preseason game of the season at Lambeau Field.

Not once in the Mike McCarthy era did the Packers ever hold joint practices with another team. The last time the Packers held joint practices was in the summer of 2005, when the Buffalo Bills came to town.

It’s an issue that has come up several times in recent offseasons.

In 2017, McCarthy said he and Ted Thompson had “talked about it at length,” and decided they would “never take the team out of Green Bay.” McCarthy also discussed some of the challenges associated with joint practices under the collective bargaining agreement established in 2011, as there are now more limited numbers of practices in training camp. There was also the elevated risk of fighting and injury to consider.

In 2015, then-Packers guard Josh Sitton referred to the concept of joint practices at training camp as “stupid.”

I’m not a big fan of those,” said Sitton. “It’s kind of stupid. It’s just inviting fighting. It happens every single time, it doesn’t matter. I’m not a fan.”

McCarthy stressed that year as well that he would never take the team out of Green Bay, and that the team needed as much time as possible to complete the installation of its offensive and defensive schemes.

So what’s changed now? Well, only everything.

With this summer marking the first training camp in town for new head coach Matt LaFleur, it was a chance to shake things up. Based on quotes from Aaron Rodgers on Tuesday, LaFleur has even been shaking things up on a smaller scale, changing up where players sit during team meetings. Rodgers mentioned he’d been sitting in the same chair for 14 years.

LaFleur has also mentioned he would be unwilling to take the team out of Green Bay, but the team did manage to find a club in the Texans that was willing to travel to them.

It remains to be seen, of course, whether practicing with another team will cause any difficulties with the installation of the new offensive system, but if there were ever a team to try something new, it’s now.

The Texans are an ideal choice to come in for the week of practice. They are a young, exciting team with a lot of superstar potential. The homecoming of JJ Watt (who tweeted his enthusiasm for the joint practices earlier this week) is certain to bring out the fans in droves, but it’s also a good chance for iron to sharpen iron, so to speak.

Already, I’m particularly looking forward to David Bakhtiari and Bryan Bulaga getting to spar with Watt and Jadeveon Clowney, and Jaire Alexander getting to test his mettle against one of the league’s top receivers, Deandre Hopkins.

As for the chance of elevated tension and potential fights in training camp, this may actually be more of a benefit than a drawback for a Packers team that has lacked some bite in recent years. For a team that essentially sleepwalked through the last season and a half, this should be a good help in waking them up.

Already looking forward to August!


Tim Backes is a lifelong Packer fan and a contributor to CheeseheadTV. Follow him on Twitter @timbackes for his Packer takes, random musings and Untappd beer check-ins.

  • Like Like
  • 5 points

Fan friendly comments only: off Comments (90) This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.

Samson's picture

"So what’s changed now? Well, only everything."
In a nutshell, it's a great idea.

GBPDAN1's picture

I think it's a good idea from a get the team ready standpoint. We are starting the season at Chicago. We need to be ready to hit, block and tackle. Putting bubble wrap on these guys doesn't help prepare as we are usually still in preseason mode for the first few games.

Let's hope for minor injuries, however. I wonder if teams look at the history of 2 teams practicing together to collect injury data? I know the Cowgirls and Raiders practice every year in Oxnard Ca. I haven't heard of extra injuries regarding their joint practices.

4thand10's picture

I like the idea of a joint practice. I think having different players to practice against other than seeing the same faces would be a good thing. Regardless of questions of "fighting". Pretty confident that problem could be solved before it starts if you have good coaches.

jannes bjornson's picture

Fighting comes with the territory. Its part of summer camp, from High school to the Pros.

Coldworld's picture

Football is a physical, adrenaline driven game. Some scuffles occur internally. Manage it correctly and the slightly higher risk should not deter teams from the opportunity to practice against a group not steeped in the same system. In our case, I think the team became too inward focused in recent years. This may help somewhat.

As to injuries, these are inevitable in practice sadly. If it is true that more occur in inter-team than intra-squad, perhaps that speaks to greater intensity? I for one never liked the seemingly laid back approach to entering the season under MM and the apparent rust we often saw initially. If there is added intensity, this may also be a positive.

Overall, perhaps small steps in honing the new team identity and attitude. I take this as a positive step among the many needed.

Handsback's picture

I know there are preseason games but joint practices are another opportunity for iron sharpens iron event. On a team level, they (the Packers) get a close up of how tough they are or aren't.

Turophile's picture

It's a part of being SEEN to be different. I doubt that this makes a great deal of difference, either way, but LaFleur has to establish a new mindset, and this is part of the drive to divorce the players mindset from the old regime.

As long as players can see LaFleur doing his thing in his own way, they can be encouraged to buy into a new approach with the team. Things are already a fair way away from the MM/TT years, this just adds an exclamation mark to the changes.

CheesyTex's picture

Well, it's preseason and perhaps just fodder for fans. But maybe it does add another avenue to evaluate players.

It is very early in the season, so IMO it won't do much for the starters but could make a difference in determining who gets a head start toward making the final 54 or practice squad.

Lare's picture

With the defense in its second year, I think the priority now is to the get the offensive players acclimated with the new scheme. The only benefit I can see to joint practices is to let the coaches see how their players perform in a more game-like setting. Just hope no one gets injured in a meaningless game.

Coldworld's picture

People get injured in inter squad scrimmages and these aren’t extra games but practice sessions. The game is the first preseason game and would have occurred regardless of joint practice beforehand.

Ultimately one can only go so far practicing against familiar players. Since it’s not a game, the chance to run plays against unknown adversaries in controlled conditions should be useful to both coaches and players. If it’s managed right, I think the increase to the risk of injury ought to be minimal.

albert999's picture

Bleacher report just reported this
"A source close to one of the team's skill-position starters says Rodgers was the one 'sinking the ship' with zero interest in developing [Marquez] Valdes-Scantling, [Equanimeous] St. Brown or [J'Mon] Moore," Bleacher Report's Ty Dunne reported

PatrickGB's picture

Yah, right..and a source close to AR said it was BS.

J0hn Denver's Gavel's picture

Welcome to the party! You are a week late, but I think there might be some beer left in the half empty keg in the backyard. it's definitely warm and flat, though.

Coldworld's picture

Look, it’s clear not everything was sunshine and roses last year. Ultimately, these are big boys. Up to them all to collectively step up and prove the backbiters wrong. If they don’t work together it will hurt them more than anyone. Time to move on from the past.

4thand1's picture

albert is a viqueen troll trying to stir the pot.

Old School's picture

Well, that joint practice in 2005 really helped, no doubt.

When we start losing guys to injury during these 'joint practices', we'll see a different perspective on it.

dobber's picture

We say the same thing about preseason games...and then practices...and then Family Night. At some point you gotta take off the bubble wrap so you can really figure out what you've got.

Coldworld's picture

Right Dobber. In the old days they went at it twice a day and went hard. I’m still not entirely convinced that the current CBA allows adequate physical preparation for when the gloves come off and if this is so dire a risk, perhaps that supports that notion.

Old School, your logic would take us to non contact walk throughs, solo physical training and classroom filled preseasons. Less injuries, at least before real contact: worse football and probably, based on my experience not science, greater in season attrition.

porupack's picture

OldSchool; in your opinion, why would joint practices cause more injury than normal practice? Is it because normal practices are lax and half hearted, thus less chance for injury? A veteran player learns what to expect from the guy he's lined up against, day in and day out, so he tends to just do the same ole, same ole, thus avoiding injury?
Fans on this site have complained for long time that packers have been weak on basic fundamental techniques, tackling, blocking, etc. So then what would be alternative to joint practice, that would have the same benefit to sinking in the proper technique, but avoid risk? Isn't competition heralded as a very good way to prove you learned, or didn't learn the technique? JJWatt landing an OT on his ass in front of 2 teams seems would make a good teacher and a good lesson.

Spock's picture

porupack, I've said much the same thing in another thread. I believe that if players only practice against the same guys they don't learn to adjust to other players. I love the joint practice idea!

Old School's picture

Thank you for these questions.

1). I never stated that my opinion was that joint practices result in more injuries than "normal" practice. That is not my opinion. My opinion is the first time we lose a guy to a scrimmage like that......kind of like we lost Jordy Nelson for a year in a pre-season game.....we're going to have people making the point that we lost a guy in an unnecessary intersquad scrimmage. And they'll have a point, because it happens. Maybe somebody will do a study on it.

2. The Collective Bargaining Agreement puts a lot of limits on contact during OTAs, minicamps, preseason, and during the season, and they do it for a reason: They know that all this contact wears people down.

You might think that if you did more serious contact work that your tackling would be better, but you're also wearing your team out. It's a trade off.

Personally, I used to be a contact guy, but I learned the hard way. Then I heard about a coach who rarely tackled in practice who'd been hugely successful, and I started viewing things differently.

Dartmouth's HC doesn't tackle in practice. Soon, the rest of the Ivy League is following suit. It's becoming more common every year in high schools across the country. Why? Because of the injuries, of course. The more contact, the more tackling, the more injuries. The math isn't that hard.

Don't take my word for it. Google "no tackling practice" and see for yourself.

3) As far as the Packers being "weak on fundamentals", the simple solution to that is to draft college graduates who have good fundamentals, rather than obsess about 40 times or good 3 cone drill times. There are some good tacklers in this draft, but we rarely talk about that.

So I hope I've answered the people who had questions.

porupack's picture

thx for the response and cheers.

Lare's picture

As always, the adults go elsewhere when the kids show up to play. There’s other Packers fan forums that don’t allow the riffraff in.

Old School's picture

Who let you in? Or are they cool with people talking about other posters instead of football?

albert999's picture

who asked u?

4thand1's picture

take a hike albertroll

albert999's picture

I like how LF is handling things so far from practicing another team to interviews with players and what they are saying about the building, the room meetings and the practices

dobber's picture

I agree: if LaF isn't going to be a commanding presence, he's going to have to find other ways to earn the respect of his players. Treating them like people is a good start.

albert999's picture

Sounds like a lot of good energy and new ideas

Jersey Al's picture

Fellows - Dash and Kirk have been blocked. And I'll be looking out for more. I've really had enough of obnoxious people and commenters that just want to fight with other commenters. No more Mr. nice guy.


dobber's picture

I'm sorry it came to this, but you're my hero, Al.

IceBowl's picture

Jersey AI.

Your decision will make for a much better experience on your site. I have recently joined, and really didn't get why such baseless and antagonistic posters had such a strong voice or added value to Cheeseheads.

It is in my nature not to accept hearsay and baseless opinion, so I posted factual and logical opinion (in my mind) rebuttals. Mine, and many others, efforts were just ignored. And seemingly their "family" would come to their aide in one form or another with more hearsay.

So, in my opinion, you create a better home for us Cheeseheads. More fun, if you will. Thanks.

But it is not over as you will see. There are already posts using the same mantra as skip, dash and kirk. They had used multiple aliases before, IMO, and they/he have reproduced more already. Good Luck, and thanks again.

Doug_In_Sandpoint's picture

“And I’ll be looking out for more.”
Al, you look lovely today. I was just telling Theodore how much better the site will be without scrolling through certain poster’s comments.

porupack's picture

Thank you Al. It was to the point of detracting good debate, and getting too toxic to enjoy reading comments from diversity of opinions. I enjoy good debate. But those two just had a mission to antagonize for their kicks.

Spock's picture

Thank you, thank you, thank you, Al. It was becoming almost impossible to "skip" all the rambling self-aggrandizing b.s. to get to football talk. It had to happen and I'm sure that if Kirk had a chance to say one last thing it would probably be, "I have to Dash". :) I mean when a poster has the ego to say they have "a major announcement" and It's that they are changing their screen name I just LOL. I almost posted on those annoying spam "I'm making x amount of dollars..." that since they were constantly changing their screen names (to bypass your block of them) they should be required to add an addendum saying it was a "Major Announcement". :)

Coldworld's picture

Sad that it was necessary, but it had reached that point. The right move Al.

Guam's picture

Thank you very much Al! We are all entitled to our own opinions, but when commenters attack others and detract from the quality of debate and discussion that is a problem. I appreciate your willingness to maintain a high level of discourse on CHTV. Be well.

Since '61's picture

Jersey Al - thank you for giving us our blog back.

And BTW, you and your team did an excellent job with the 2019 Draft Guide. Both the presentation and the content are very well done.

My respect and appreciation for all of the hard work which was done by all involved to deliver the Draft Guide to us. Stay well. Thanks, Since '61

Jersey Al's picture

I don't like to block people. I resisted doing it at all for several years, but alas, when a certain few take over the comment section with insults and non-stop crap about how they are the only smart ones here, my head wants to explode. It's a constant battle and admittedly, I sometimes tire of the fight. Certainly, while we were doing the draft guide, I had no time to police the comment section and a few took full advantage. It still annoys the hell out of me that I need to police the comment section at all, but I am a realist. As Brett would say, "it is what it is."

packergal's picture

Hello Al,

I agree with Old School.
Free speech is free speech but it's your blog so "dems da rules fer sure"...

However, a few comments for your consideration...

Even as Kirk was desperately trying to convince folks that Packer Management ( specifically Murphy) was the issue and Dash fervently agreed with him, Dash generally exhibited a witty, sarcastic, humorous and at times entertaining writing style.

Dash a/k/a SkipGreenBayLESS agreed with Kirk on most everything and while he did insult people, he generally did that only after they insulted him first (and many did).

If you choose to-- go back and read Dash announcement on the new nom de plume he selected and why he did--and I'm sure you will witness the attacks on Dash --without his initial provocation.

In the interim, onward to the 2019 NFC championship and GO PACK GO!
Thanks for your great blog!

fastmoving's picture

Dont know. most of the time he insults first, but more in generall with his agenda. He tried to put his strange and abolute views on faith and politics in here all the time.
Not much entertaining with that and even less witty. He had a sensless conspiracy theory (always fake news, even hate speech somtimes…..however you want to call it) about everyone and everything.
And he got not one mirror at home, thats for sure.

Montana's picture

Jersey Al,

Thanks for the intervention, as a relative newcomer to CHTV I applaud your stance. There are many thoughtful and knowledgeable fans here whom I enjoy reading and regrettably a few outliers. Hopefully we can return to football...... thanks Al

Montana's picture

Jersey Al,

As a relative newcomer to CHTV I applaud your stance. There are many thoughtful and knowledgeable fans here that contribute and make this site worthwhile......and regrettably a few outliers. Thanks Al.........Go Pack

Old School's picture

I'll probably be next, so I 'll say this before I'm gone.

I hate suppression of ideas. Hate. I don't hate a lot of things, but Freedom of Speech means that people shouldn't be able to silence you just because they don't like what you're saying or the way you're saying it.

It is the MOST objectionable speech which needs protection; speech which is unobjectionable doesn't require any protection.

I do think that posters should try to argue ideas and not just get into personal attacks. I think that the "downvote" feature here encourages negativity. Vote somebody up or just don't vote.

I read a few of Kirk's things and then decided that I wasn't really interested in what he wrote and I skipped over his posts. Not very difficult, really. I like Dash's sense of humor but I don't understand what was going on here at the end.

And there are some other guys who I won't name who I think are kind of dolts, and I just skip them most of the time.

Some guys, and I'm not going to embarrass them by naming them, I always read and think about. But it's a dwindling percentage.

Montana's picture

Old School,

I hope you are wrong about being expelled, as I said I'm relatively new here but in my short stay I've enjoyed your posts.

Freedom of speech is sacred to me as well and it's easy for me to ignore the white noise and move on to other posts. Still in the past week there has been a feeding frenzy on the AR topic and some discussion has been tiresome at best. I simply take these in stride or simply skip over them as you have.

The personal attacks are neither welcome or interesting no matter who they are directed towards. It's one thing to argue points of view on any subject including football and yet another to engage in personal snipes. That sort of communication is tolerable via exemption but extraneous at best.

I neither condone or condemn the condemned and I wish them well. I would not vote against their reinstatement or them re-entering under another alias either because free speech is paramount regardless of whether you agree with the opinion or not.

I have seen these sites blow up in the past and it's always left a lingering film on my tongue. The comeraderie is what is most welcome who arrive at these sites and spirited debate is a good thing. I think all who enter owe a debt of kindness and courtesy towards other's and I don't think that's too much to ask......

IceBowl's picture

Old school,

Geeze, you are comparing suppression of ideas to free speech??? OK, skipping Constitution and law class is no crime, but those two rights are different. Separate.

Free speech is our right and needs protection. However every word/sentence/phrase is not protected. There is logical, and yes genius in our free speech rights. That's why yelling "fire" in a theater is not protected, among others. It is inherently harmful. Has killed.

You write nonsense, ..."but Freedom of Speech means that people shouldn't be able to silence you just because they don't like what you're saying..." And later you say ....."I think that the "downvote" feature here encourages negativity. Vote somebody up or just don't vote."

Hypocrisy, wouldn't you say, Old school?

So skip the dramatics, and the fainted argument. You are able to offer facts, logic and knowledge. Hard to argue, no matter how negative/unpopular. Anything wrong with that Old school?

IceBowl's picture

Old school,

Geeze, you are comparing suppression of ideas to free speech??? OK, skipping Constitution and law class is no crime, but those two rights are different. Separate.

Free speech is our right and needs protection. However every word/sentence/phrase is not protected. There is logical, and yes genius in our free speech rights. That's why yelling "fire" in a theater is not protected, among others. It is inherently harmful. Has killed.

You write nonsense, ..."but Freedom of Speech means that people shouldn't be able to silence you just because they don't like what you're saying..." And later you say ....."I think that the "downvote" feature here encourages negativity. Vote somebody up or just don't vote."

Hypocrisy, wouldn't you say, Old school?

So skip the dramatics, and the fainted argument. You are able to offer facts, logic and knowledge like all of us. Hard to argue, no matter how negative/unpopular. Anything wrong with that Old school?

Old School's picture

I'm sorry you didn't understand. I'm in favor of free exchange of ideas and opposed to the suppression of those ideas. I also think that just because we can do something doesn't mean we have to do it, and that the downvote option promotes negativity which then manifests itself in a myriad of counterproductive actions.

Did that clear that up?

IceBowl's picture

Old School,

I DO understand!! And I posted about it. CLEARLY! I don't get why you would say I don't understand when I posted exactly what I understand about what you posted above. I posted and discussed your post. I spoke specifically to what you said. CLEARLY!

Ignoring my response/discussion and changing the discussion is not an honest response.

I guess, as you say ..."just because we can do something doesn't mean we have to do it,....." defines your position pretty well. Like entering an honest discussion. You said it!!

And you say ..... "and that the downvote option promotes negativity...."
You have been here too long to believe the "down vote" comes anywhere close to creating the negativity of many of the antagonistic posts here. Neither you or I am that naive.

Why not just engage in a honest conversation? Let's go.

stockholder's picture

I hope your not next. If it's not liked, it can be erased. Some posters just want to win. Others stir the pot. People need to keep their sense of humor. We all love the Packers. I hope people can keep that in mind first. Opinions should matter. Not everyone is a suck up.

IceBowl's picture


If my post gets me kicked off, I do not belong here.

I offered you honest discussion to your post, and you want to discuss winning about posts?

Your post was not about humor. You posted some crappy, inconsistent content. And I talked to you about it. But you ignored the content and came up with this.

And I agree "Not everyone is a suck up." Didn't I address your post as an honest "not suck up."

stockholder's picture

Get over it. I don't Lock Horns. Do yourself a favor and stick to the packers. If you can do that, you belong here.

Guam's picture

We've disagreed before Old School and I will disagree with this post too.

You will NOT be banned from this site because you present well reasoned discussion points and just as importantly, do so with civility and humility. Unlike some other posters, you do not attempt to dominate the thread, but rather contribute to it. I always look forward to reading your posts as I usually find them thought provoking and beneficial to the discussion.

I will also disagree with some of your thoughts on freedom of speech. While public freedom of speech is precious and to be well guarded, freedom of speech is not guaranteed everywhere or for everything. CHTV is effectively a private club run by its Board and you must uphold the standards of the club to continue to be a member. Your freedom of speech here is not unfettered. If Dash and Kirk want to express their views on a street corner, they may do so in almost any fashion they choose. However on CHTV they needed to adhere to the standards of behavior as determined and required by the Board. They failed to do so and I will not miss them. Though their comments could be "skipped over" there were some threads that became unreadable while trying to ignore their diatribes. I believe the site will be better without them.

I will now climb off my soapbox and just say I sincerely hope you will continue to be a member of the CHTV site for a long time to come as you are a thoughtful and valued contributor.

Adorabelle's picture

Difference of opinion and disagreements on specific points are fun. But someone who's sole purpose is to start fights is beyond the pale (the expression not the fusion band from Canada). Good call and be on the watch for his next names coming soon.

LarryPennell's picture

It's unfortunate that it has come to this. While I welcome different thoughts and ideas when people start to behave in condescending and egotistical behaviors it becomes tiresome. No more delusions of grandeur. Let us share and debate in a positive manner and hopefully I will no longer have to read how others are smarter and more elite that I.

IceBowl's picture


You a Batman fan. You look like 2 face. Or at least one side. LOL.

LarryPennell's picture

I would like to clear something up, Contrary to someone's strong opinion I'm not Lare nor do I have anything to do with him, no disrespect to Lare.

IceBowl's picture


I have been calling you Lare. I did because that 'j kirk" guy said in a post you 2 were the same person right after that "dash" guy changed his name. (time frame) He also made a comment about putting you to rest later that night. (hence my post on you are supposed to be dead). It seemed the the "group" (multi aliases) of you were in cahoots.

Maybe I should not have trusted that "j kirk" guy (and I didn't) but that was my 1st week here, and, to me, you were part of their clan. So, from what you say, I got duped.

So, my sincere apologies!!!

LarryPennell's picture

It's all good my friend, with all the name switching and finger pointing about aliases I just wanted to clear it up more for Lare's benefit. I really enjoy this site and reading 99% of the opinions here but I soon got fed up with a certain person who I felt was bullying others, whose logic and claims were contradictory and made absolutely no sense. I decided to use the Larry Pennell name to try and stand out to that bully. He immediately accused me of being another Lare account and would never drop it. Since that is all in the past now it's time to look forward and be excited about the upcoming draft and season. By the way I've always enjoyed your posts IceBowl and appreciate how you stood up to those egotistical people as well.

IceBowl's picture


Here is the post I was referring to in case you didn't see it. And I git the author wrong (sort of) , Skip wrote it ......

"Skip greenBayless says:
April 09, 2019 at 08:26 pm
Larry "Lare" Pennell, I am so sorry Dash Riprock passed away this afternoon.


Yes, I agree about the site, wish I had found it long ago. Thanks for the kind words too. Appreciate it.

jannes bjornson's picture

Well, I geuss they can focus on their viqueen and Bear blogs. Thanks Al. No doubt some of their comments were humourous, but they couldn't leave well enough alone.

PatrickGB's picture

Thanks Al. Let them argue with their friends...if they have any left.
Joint practices are a tangible sign that things are different with the team. I also understand that the facilities are decorated differently as well. For good or ill this will be a different team going into a new season.

Bryan Chisholm's picture

I love it.. I think the good that comes from joint practice vastly outweighs the bad. (1) The whole Iron sharpens Iron thing is a huge factor. (2) Basically scouting two teams at once. (3) We don't have to travel. (4) Coaches can bounce ideas off each other, seeing we don't play them this year. (5) We don't have to play our starters as much during the preseason, since they're getting reps against other #1's. (6) More time to see rookies and unproven players in preseason. (7) We get a faster, more accurate look at the quality of our depth. Instead of the same young/bench guys vs the same young/bench guys. Giving Cole Madison a rep or 30 vs Watt and Clowney is a tad better than Fackrell or even the Smiths for that matter. All of this vs the fact that fights are more opportune. I don't know why teams don't this more lol.

BoCallahan's picture

The joint practices are far from game-like. There may not be any tackling. They are highly structured and controlled, fast whistles and multiple rotations to keep tempers from rising. Most of the hitting is in the trenches which is where most of the fights occur. I am sure LaF will keep a handle on it, or at least attempt to. Teams have figured it out and apparently consider it beneficial. On another note...I left BR because of Simm’s rants (& Freeman). I nearly left CHTV because every thread was dominated by 1 person. I tried skipping certain post but found myself having to skip large sections. It was tiring. Jersey Al, it was unfortunate but necessary. Thank you. I must tell you that I really enjoy the comments section here, when it’s logical and related to the topic. I enjoy posters that cause me to look at the situation differently (Old School). I often enjoy the comments more than the article.

Coldworld's picture

Disagreement is good provided it is not personal and relates to the topic not personalities or all about the poster him or herself. I enjoy the banter here and the freedom to be able to say the unpopular when the general flow seems to me misguided. I’m happy to say I have both agreed and disagreed with everyone I recognize here. This move (and I’ve never been sure if they were one individual or two) improves the health of our debate and the site.

Now to get back to healthy debate about football ...

dobber's picture

Hear hear!

Doug_In_Sandpoint's picture

There there.

Since '61's picture

Well said Coldworld! Thanks, Since '61

EddieLeeIvory's picture

I am still fairly new to this site, so I don't even know who Simms or Freeman are.
As a fairly new reader & occasional poster, nobody stands out to me, except the few people I can't even remember their names. Since61 does, NickPerry does. And there are 2 people who are clearly passionate Packer fans but they're constantly negative & one always points to himself like "look at me...".

Let's just talk Packers & football. Opinions vary always. Let's keep it classy.

KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

With you about being fairly new and not knowing those aforementioned posters, etc!

What amazed me was the vast amount of posts one poster (or was it two) would post? Obviously much thought and time would be spent creating those posts. I simply could never comprehend what their motivation was to be such antagonists let alone ability to devout so much time posting. I always found myself pondering what did these individuals do each day besides CHTV?

There is no question he or is it they will be back....

IceBowl's picture


IMHO, they already are, in a slightly more subdued position.

Maybe we will have conversations now????

BoCallahan's picture

Eddie, Simms is the cohost of Bleacher Report. Freeman is a contributing writer on that site. BR is HUGE in the sports reporting industry. I left the site because those 2 individuals so often used the format to promote their own political agendas using belittling, nasty tactics. It drove me away. I wholeheartedly agree with you! Let’s talk football and let’s keep it civilized, sane, yes classy.

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

Dear Eddie Lee,

Please allow me to introduce myself
I am a man of wealth and taste.

Old School's picture

Whooo Hu Woooo

RCPackerFan's picture

The one thing that I'd like to know is if its better for a new HC installing a new offense to go up against another team in training camp. OR if its better for them to go against themselves and have a more controlled environment. Regardless LaFleur thinks this will benefit his team, so I'm all for it!

I think all of these changes will be a nice change.

EddieLeeIvory's picture

I approve of this idea as it might toughen them up & get them more ready for week 1 at Chicago. I want to leave Chicago with a 1-0 record.

Since '61's picture

I think practicing against other teams is a good approach, especially for helping the rookies and other younger players get up to the speed of NFL games.

In addition we're starting with a clean slate with MLF so why not make this change as well.

With a new CBA looming just 2 seasons away the number of pre season games may become an area of contention and we could see the number of preseason games reduced to 3 or even 2 games. If that happens practicing against other teams will probably become a preseason norm. In which case it's good for the Packers to get ahead of it now. Thanks, Since '61

Trapped in MN BUT GB fan's picture

I’m relatively new to this site but really enjoy and like all the opinions that I read. Never liked all the negative and argumentative stuff. But, now they are blocked, what are they going to do with all their extra time in their mothers’ basement?

blacke00's picture

Every so often you need to shake things up a bit.
I think it may be an opportunity to see how players respond to different team in a practice setting, also additional method of assessment.

IceBowl's picture

I was a bit surprised to hear this. With MLF being so young in his coaching career, and of course as a new HC, I thought he have to spend more time getting a "routine" established. Work out the details of what works and what doesn't. I would think the same applies to the rest of the coaches too.

It took M McCarthy a good year and a half to get his routine worked out, and then was still tweaking it through the years. Of course that CBA had something to do with his adjustments.

So maybe MLF has a better handle on this "coaching thing" than I thought. (the administrative part)

DD's picture

Great idea. Creates team chemistry right away. Get Rodgers many reps with receivers. Perhaps the team will get some confidence and swag back by doing this.

Lare's picture

I'm kind of against pre-season games in general. As teams have evolved to no longer take pre-season games seriously with starters sitting out and not showing opponents real plays before the regular season they've become less meaningful.

My vote is to have a longer training camp (joint practices against other teams) and then go into the regular season.

Will be interesting to see how pre-season games are handled in the upcoming CBA.

Mike Wendlandt's picture

I can definitely see your point for the starters to take it easy in the preseason, but I would be against getting rid of it entirely myself. For the bottom of the roster guys, this is their one chance to prove themselves in a full contact setting to keep their careers going. Take a guy like James Crawford. There's no way he would've made the team if he hadn't had a massive impact against Kansas City last year, especially on special teams. For every starter that takes it easy in the preseason, there's five young guys who are doing the opposite trying to live their dream.

IceBowl's picture


How many owners are going to give up a games' revenue? (75,000 paid seats + stadium/parking revenue)

People will always talk (media especially, as there is not much else to talk about during the preseason) about various options of the bland preseason. Maybe, as you say, the CBA.

It still comes down to the $$$.

Adorabelle's picture

The whole preseason will be a new experience for the Packers. Fans have become accustomed to the team not playing much of anyone in the preseason. Maybe times will change and the look and energy will change.

A more intense practice where you have added desire to want to beat the player across from you. Seems like that can only help.

IceBowl's picture


I'm confused. When you say... "Fans have become accustomed to the team not playing much of anyone in the preseason." do you mean the Pack playing their starters in preseason games or other teams?

I agree it will be new under this new regime, But I don't think who plays in the games will be much different. Most of the 32 teams played preseason games with starters on the bench most of the time. I don't like it, but that has been the trend. Yes the 2's, 3's, 4's and rooks need reps, but so do our starters. This year more than ever. (I am already hearing the injury argument rumbling in the background)

Reps help precision and timing. I hear timing will be expected this year.

4thand1's picture

I would like to see them play a half in PS game 3 anyway.

IceBowl's picture


I appreciate what you say, but I would like to see them play more. Until they are game ready. I can't remember the Pack coming into a season really ready in years.

We can't play scared. Have 53 primed and ready to play. All practice players ready to step in, and reserves on call. There will always be injuries.

Get out there and play!!!!!!!!!! Not scared!!!!!!!!!!

buddrow53's picture

I think this year will be more important to play the offense more than most years in preseason.

Don't think I want to see us "rest starters" in preseason with a new offense. Would like to see us come out playing the Bears looking like we know what we are doing.

IceBowl's picture


Don't worry, the Bears have forgotten all about last year, and are just focusing on this new year. RIGHT!!!

The Pack's improbable come back last year embarrassed the Bears. They will do everything they can to reverse the story line.

As you say, the Pack better be ready. Really ready. For war. If they know what they are doing in MLF's new offense, the Bears will have to guess some. Advantage Pack.

If the Pack can't execute, Rodgers gets a broken _____________ (insert your guess). Head?

Log in to comment, upload your game day photos and more!

Not a member yet? Join free.

If you have already commented on Cheesehead TV in the past, we've created an account for you. Just verify your email, set a password and you're golden.

Or log in with Facebook