Rich from Bannockburn, IL

I heard an internet pundit say, in defense of Rashan Gary, that playing under Hafley’s 4-3 defense the past two years were not playing to his strengths, and that he played much better under the previous 3-4 defenses. And because of the Gannon hiring and his 3-4 focus, Gary should be retained with a salary restructure and should shine again. So Ms. Vito, does the defense’s case hold water?

I’m as curious as anyone what’s going to happen with Gary. I believe he improved considerably as a run defender under Hafley. What I’ve wondered is whether the discipline required to play the run well took away some of his pass-rush impact. Don’t know that for a fact, just pondering. Do the Packers see what he can do in Gannon’s scheme? Deem him too expensive and move on? Ask him to take a pay cut, which he certainly could refuse and take his chances on the open market? We’ll find out soon enough.

With the success that Malik Willis brought with his mobility, will we see Jordan Love be coached to run if necessary, or is this too risky and he’ll utilize rollouts and other motions to extend plays?

All of the above. Love will continue to pick his spots when to run, but there’s always risk and he has dealt with injuries (knee and groin in ’24, shoulder in ’25). But he’s first and foremost a pocket passer who’s at his best with the offense timed up and in rhythm. The priority is always to get into that mode and build from there.

Are we going to keep Luke Musgrave or go after a tight end in the draft?

Are we all making the wrong comparison when looking at the Willis situation like Darnold in Minnesota? Maybe we should look at Darnold in San Francisco and see what Willis can make of his next opportunity first.

Doug from River Falls, WI

There are two things I would call fallacies in general. The first is playing a (1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th) place schedule. This isn’t 1999 when teams truly played schedules according to how they finished in their divisions. Today, only three games are different for all four teams in a division. The other is 3-4 vs 4-3 defense. Since most defenses only play a true 3-4 or 4-3 about 10% of the snaps, and 4-2-5 on about 80% of the snaps, it doesn’t seem to be enough of a difference. Where am I wrong?

I think those three games in the schedule can make a difference if they fall a certain way, but there are so many variables over the course of a long season I still believe in the adage “it’s not who(m) ya play but when ya play ’em.” Nickel became the “new” base defense at least a dozen years ago.

Just wondering this as I hear chortling out of a certain city in northeastern Illinois. When you assess a team’s success year to year, how much do you look at whether it played a first- or a fourth-place schedule? I think the Commanders are a good example of a team playing well in a softer schedule, but then cratering when all the first-place teams came calling the next year. Is that overblown?

In the case of the Commanders, their starting QB played only seven games.

Hello II, can two shutdown corners and a dominant nose tackle fix this defense?

I don’t think a defense that finished just outside the top 10 in yards and points allowed, and ranked much higher than that before Parsons’ injury, necessarily needs fixing. It needs reinforcements, and those two positions are important to reinforce.

Josh from Playa Majagual, Nicaragua

I just saw a certificate from the first Packers stock sale in ’23 sold for $64K, not a bad $5 investment especially considering no ownership was conveyed with the sale. I know stock ownership is limited to 200K shares to prevent a hostile takeover, but do we know who our majority shareholders are? 539K people own about 5.2M shares so there must be some “big fish.” Does anyone own a share from all six offerings (via inheritance/gift)?

I have no idea on your “big fish” question, but I have wondered whether a family out there has a certificate on the wall from every stock offering. What a conversation starter.

So far, the talk of the town is Green Bay’s first selection will be at cornerback, do you agree? If so, could you provide us with a few players the Packers could pursue?

I don’t know if it’ll be a cornerback, but regardless, this week I’ve begun my Prospect Primer research into Day 2 (Round 2-3) players who could be available to the Packers. I need some time to put it together and the series will launch in April.

Mike from Ellicott City, MD

I fear the NFL has devolved into an untenable situation regarding the salary cap. The formula for playing in the Super Bowl is to have a solid QB, still on their rookie contract, so they still have lots of cap room left to load up on the rest of the players. Once the QB “gets paid” and is re-signed after his rookie contract, the whole economic dynamic changes, and in my opinion not for the better. Have you heard any rumblings from NFL execs or team execs about addressing this situation?

Ha, no. They don’t view it as a “situation” that needs addressing. It’s the reality in a QB-driven league that other challenges arise once you’ve found “the man,” but dealing with those challenges beats crossing your fingers you can find the next one. Darnold, Hurts, Mahomes and Stafford are QBs from the last five Super Bowls who were not on rookie contracts.

Good morning Mike! Apologies for the math but ATMR (WCBR), there have been 18,235 games played in NFL history. Not counting ties, 45% of all NFL games have been one-score games. Turns out it’s pretty hard to win by two scores.