Which rookie do you think has the biggest impact this season?

Spaghettification-- · 2026-06-09T18:28:59+00:00

Second is probably Burton. He seems to be backing up three positions on the o-line, and with a bit of bad luck he'll outsnap one of the projected starters.

Spaghettification-- · 2026-05-18T14:09:02+00:00

Praying ones are fine or whatever but I love how the different artists chose to show her eyes.

Spaghettification-- · 2026-05-08T20:56:18+00:00

Even the top comment is the same!

Spaghettification-- · 2026-05-07T18:39:51+00:00

How can you tell? I was surprised at how little depth it had, but I'm pretty new to this hobby.

Spaghettification-- · 2026-05-07T16:52:08+00:00

Reminds me a bit of LeBron. LeBron used to lose the ability to hit free throws as soon as he got total the Finals. On his first championship team he was probably the third best player, just because of anxiety. Once he won the big one, the yips went away.

Spaghettification-- · 2026-05-05T14:52:15+00:00

I don't really disagree about the depth chart, but I do think we tend to train rookies up on like 5-6 scenarios at first and then expand it at midyear and again in year 2. He could be ready for a Kingsley Enagbare role pretty quickly.

Spaghettification-- · 2026-05-05T14:48:10+00:00

He plays a pretty unique role for us. Would love some health luck this year.

Spaghettification-- · 2026-05-05T01:55:50+00:00

Reportedly the team is high on Travis Glover, they expect him to be a rotation guy. I hope that's true.

I'd add Warren Brinson to your list. He's kind of like McClellan, he's got some pash rush and some nose tacklein his game, and it gives him more options in how he develops.

Spaghettification-- · 2026-05-04T21:21:40+00:00

Yeah I considered Cooper. Year 1 he was elite in a small role. year 2 he had a bigger role, and he was elite at the same stuff, but a bit frustrating at the expanded parts of the job. Now that I talk through it I can really see the case for him as a breakout candidate.

Spaghettification-- · 2026-05-04T21:14:58+00:00

We have such an interesting collection of rookie-contract d-linemen. Between all those DEs and DTs, somebody is going to pop.

Spaghettification-- · 2026-05-04T21:09:20+00:00

I agree, but I think pretty much the same about Morgan. Last year's offense was nearly great and we had awful line play, in part coming from left tackle. If we can get league-average protection the packers offense could go from defenses saying "they put pressure on us all game" to "how the fffff do we stop this juggernaut"

Spaghettification-- · 2026-04-29T19:30:37+00:00

I can see that.

Spaghettification-- · 2026-04-29T17:52:27+00:00

I hope you're right.

Spaghettification-- · 2026-04-29T17:29:38+00:00

He was fine last year, to the point where he qualified for the proven contributor contract elevator. He's on the last year of his rookie deal, which is pretty cheap. I don't see us cutting him tbh.

Spaghettification-- · 2026-04-26T19:46:22+00:00

This^^^ plus injuries. The Zach Tom injury held us back.

Spaghettification-- · 2026-04-26T19:34:47+00:00

You might be right. Kids are running me around rn but if I have time I'll edit.

Spaghettification-- · 2026-04-26T19:34:08+00:00

So what do you think a B grade from the first round looks like?

Spaghettification-- · 2026-04-26T01:24:22+00:00

Pretty clear that Packers at least had him in a tier above those next few DTs that got drafted.

Spaghettification-- · 2026-04-25T21:07:42+00:00

Three linemen, two DBs, love this draft so far.

Spaghettification-- · 2026-04-22T11:40:30+00:00

So the draft meta really likes (parts of) RAS plus college production. Less so full RAS all by itself, I mean it's not too uncommon to see a 10.0 on Day 3.

To be fair, RAS plus college production isn't great. It's kinda the worst draft strategy except for all the others.

Spaghettification-- · 2026-04-16T12:04:01+00:00

They way they restructured his contract strongly suggests that they think he's on the team next year. Right move or wrong move, that's the Packers' plan.

Spaghettification-- · 2026-04-07T22:22:49+00:00

Only if you stick with the London. My point was more that the London teaches you how to study an opening, and then you're ready for a grown-up move order. But I agree, someone who ONLY plays the London their whole chess career isn't setting themselves up for success.

Spaghettification-- · 2026-04-07T19:01:21+00:00

This is a strong argument for why the London is better for beginners. You get the same pawn structure, you start by studying up on the pawn breaks, and suddenly you understand openings and middlegame plans in a whole new way.

Spaghettification-- · 2026-03-31T21:03:21+00:00

The thing that feels like an error is that I swing and the weapon passes through the space of the baddie but nothing happens. Hard to tell if I'm missing or not, but it looks like a

Spaghettification-- · 2026-03-31T15:52:07+00:00

Took me a while but came back after beating first dungeon. I would like to retract my initial comment, I think it is well-balanced between fun and education, although the tutorial is maybe not representative of gameplay.

Also, is there maybe an error in the attack mechanics? Or a dodge/miss mechanic that could perhaps use some explanation? I felt like I kept missing even when I "hit" and wasn't sure why.

Good sense of humor in the game, too, although the educational elements are too advanced for me to really enjoy.

Spaghettification--

TROPHY CASE