DT Can Become a Strength for the Packers in 2025

With the Packers needing to bolster their front four this offseason, defensive tackle could quickly become a roster strength in 2025.

The 2025 defensive tackle free agency class doesn't bring much meaningful conversation to the table to help the Green Bay Packers improve their front four, but the 2025 draft class is primed to set them up with a difference-maker should Green Bay look that way early.

The Packers' defense was leaps and bounds more effective in their first year under defensive coordinator Jeff Hafley, and they did it all without anyone across their front four playing at an elite level.

Elite play or not, the Packers' defense still ranked in the top ten for both rushing success rate allowed and pass rush win rate from the interior defensive line. But as much as the Packers' defense improved and played well in the scheme across the board, the individual contributions graded out as PFF's ninth-lowest team run defense grade, and Devonte Wyatt leading the interior linemen with five sacks was tied for ninth-lowest to lead a team at DT.

To summarize, the Packers are good along the defensive front but not great. The difference and talent gap is evident when watching teams with true disruptors up the middle.

A big issue for the Packers was their inability to establish a menacing presence up the middle. There was no dominating, keep-a-coach-up-at-night player anchoring the defensive line.

Sure, Wyatt and Karl Brooks both had nice seasons in terms of generating pressure despite splitting snaps with five total interior linemen. And sure, TJ Slaton is a titanic presence in run defense, even though it feels unlikely Green Bay would bring him back next season due to upgrades they can make in the draft. Even Kenny Clark contributed more down the stretch and his ability to work double teams is still highly valuable, as seen by his being the eighth most double-teamed defensive tackle in football last season.

But without a complete player leading the way, the Packers are left with four players who are really only strong in one phase of the game right now. 

Clark has long been that anchor, but entering his age 30 season, and as seen by many top defensive tackles hanging it up in their early 30s, it's more than likely his best days are behind him.

However, there is still a lot to be excited about what the Packers' front four can accomplish in 2025 simply by adding a premier defensive tackle via the draft.

For starters, Clark is not going anywhere before next season unless he ends up being an outlandishly surprising roster cut. It wouldn't make sense for the Packers to move off him until next offseason, and there's next to no chance any team will trade for his contract, age, and production.

Clark's starting again next season is inevitable, with no other player along the defensive line playing well enough yet to demote him.

More encouragingly, from the Packers' week 10 bye and on, Clark flipped a switch in run defense, leading the Packers' front with 13 stops and stringing together seven of his best-graded games of the season. Despite posting one of his worst seasons, he offered plenty of optimism going into 2025 that he can still play the high-quality football he was recently paid to. That all said, the clock is ticking, and the Packers lack a meaningful contingency plan to replace Clark as early as the 2026 season when they can safely get out of his contract.

As for Wyatt, he seemed to have taken a step forward in his pass rush and ability to finish plays to start the 2024 season before a week four injury that sidelined him for three weeks. However, from week 12 and on, he played arguably his best football of the season, albeit not playing anywhere near a starter-level snap count. 

In that seven-game stretch, Wyatt's pass rush and run defense were both the most consistent on a week-to-week basis in his career. He added 20 pressures and a four-week stretch of posting at least a 72.1 PFF defensive grade, including taking it to the Vikings in week 17 with an 88.3 pass-rush grade and 91.8 total defense grade.

Karl Brooks also had a nice season for the Packers despite being third or fourth in the snaps pecking order, depending on the game script. Brooks finished with four sacks but only had three games with a sack. That said, he's remained a reliable tackler and was consistent week-to-week with his pass rush.

All in all, the Packers have three interior defensive linemen who make strong compliments, and part of the problem could just be that they just need to give their best players more snaps.

Realistically, they all improved down the stretch as Hafley's scheme developed and are all entering 2025 with positive momentum. However, each still raises a fair level of concern about whether any can be "the guy" who takes the Packers' front four to the next level, which they need to get to.

While no rookie, no matter where they're drafted, is a sure bet to work out, the Packers in the back half of the first round will be sitting comfortably in a position to land one of the top defensive tackles in a rarely strong top-of-class at the position.

Any of Walter Nolan, Derrick Harmon, or Kenneth Grant are players who can come in with a "complete" skill set to instantly add value to the Packers front.

In an ideal world, the Packers would be able to situationally phase in a rookie throughout the season and set up for him to take over as the starting defensive tackle in 2026. Which, not only are most of the top defensive tackles in football first-round picks, but most also take very similar paths to stardom in their first two seasons.

Worst case, that rookie exhibits a level of play that no one else is providing and starts consuming more snaps en route to quickly being the menacing force Green Bay is missing. Pivoting to building the front around that player for the remainder of the season if it becomes obvious, similar to Edgerrin Cooper, that the rookie needs more snaps. 

Best case, the Packers' current front with Clark, Wyatt, and Brooks continues the positive regular season momentum, and the Packers upgrade Slaton's snaps with a rookie who brings far more upside in all phases.

Either way, the Packers set themselves up next season to be a greater force up the middle simply by adding a premier talent from a stacked DT class. The move also sets them up to be set at the position for the next decade, regardless of who the running mate is.

Again, no one is a sure bet to work out. But the odds are in the Packers' favor this year if they take up an opportunity to capture a top talent who projects to be an immediate starter at a position that no one is dominating for Green Bay.

Snaps might again be spread across four interior defensive linemen, but that strategy was also part of a top-ten Packers' defense last season and a drastically improved run defense despite no stand-out performances up front.

However, settling for modest individual contributions in a strong scheme is how average teams stay average.

Adding a player who projects to quickly be the best of the Packers' defensive tackle group would go a long way toward making a good group a great one.

PLEASE SUBSCRIBE TO OUR CHEESEHEAD NATION WEEKLY NEWSLETTER HERE.

__________________________

Based in Seattle, Austin's roots are in Wisconsin and he bleeds Green & Gold. He also currently writes for Lombardi Ave and has been featured on various Packers podcasts. Follow him on Twitter at @AustinKrueger_.

__________________________

NFL Categories: 
0 points
 

Comments (47)

Fan-Friendly This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.
Leatherhead's picture

March 05, 2025 at 10:41 am

The offense has failed in elimination games 4 straight seasons, but we should spend our first round pick on a DT.

If this is such a deep DT class, aren't there any who might be available around #54?

"""But as much as the Packers' defense improved and played well in the scheme across the board, the individual contributions graded out as PFF's ninth-lowest team run defense grade, and Devonte Wyatt leading the interior linemen with five sacks was tied for ninth-lowest to lead a team at DT."""

Doesn't stuff like this make you question the validity of PFF? Sixth in scoring defense and one of the top rushing defenses in the league grades out 9th lowest? How do you rationalize that? This is like saying the Beatles weren't a good band because none of them graded out very well individually as musicians.

Results matter, IMO. Points matter. The rest of this stuff seems to confuse people about that.

0 points
0
0
TarynsEyes's picture

March 05, 2025 at 11:07 am

I'm not a stat lover or presume to understand the PFF rating system, but the question you're pondering is answerable by what always seems to be ignored by fans, who they played and where they were ranked.

Yes, Wyatt led interior linemen with 5 sacks, but against which Offenses. I don't know, but since the team failed against most better Offenses, it would be safe to assume the overall grade dropped due to it.

I remember when many cheered Nick Perry for his 3 sack game against Wash, but ignored that they had the worst O-Line and QB.

Playing bad against the better certainly erases the over graded marks against the lesser.

This is why I limit my trust in rankings.

0 points
0
0
13TimeChamps's picture

March 05, 2025 at 03:43 pm

"This is why I limit my trust in rankings."

Amen to that! Far too often people see what they want to see in rankings without taking into consideration all of the data involved that produced those rankings.

Case in point: GB went 11-6 last year, which tied for the 6th best record in the NFL if my math is correct. But 4 of those wins were against the worst (AFC West) division in the NFL. But against better teams...Philly, Detroit (twice), Minny (twice), they were 0-5.

Rankings suggest they were one of the best 6 teams in the NFL. Further data suggests otherwise.

0 points
0
0
GregC's picture

March 05, 2025 at 06:14 pm

So an 11-6 team is better if they beat a couple of really good teams but lost to a couple of bad teams? I get what you're saying, it's better in the sense that at least they showed the potential to beat good teams. But I don't think it's that much of a difference. Nor do I think that PFF grades take strength of competition into account. That would be very complicated and would be of dubious value anyway. I don't think a DT is any better if he wins some reps against good offensive linemen but gets stopped stone cold by bad offensive linemen.

Usually this stuff evens out. I think last season was kind of a fluke. Either that or the Packers had matchup problems with the Lions, Vikings, and Eagles.

0 points
0
0
TarynsEyes's picture

March 05, 2025 at 07:57 pm

I believe you answered your own suggestion about strength of competition with your last sentence. Matchup issues is a strength of competition value in the formula. How can it not be? If your top edge can't beat the LT, you move him against the right to get more from your guy and scheme performance. If you're not winning the one on one, your likelihood to lose the game increases. Strength of competition. Every position, every game.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

March 06, 2025 at 07:46 am

"So an 11-6 team is better if they beat a couple of really good teams but lost to a couple of bad teams?.... I don't think it's that much of a difference."

I come back to the fact that he Packers won 11 of their weekly matchups, and they avoided all but one slip-up against a bad team.
They can only play the teams the league puts in front of them and that gets off the bus on a given game day.
We can litigate the quality of the schedule, but it doesn't change the fact that they won 11 games. That doesn't happen by accident.
It's also immaterial to 2025.

0 points
0
0
GregC's picture

March 05, 2025 at 12:11 pm

My thoughts exactly, LH. PFF may need to recalibrate their rating system, or at least admit that it's not very meaningful.

I'm also seeing our defense constantly downgraded on the basis of cumulative individual stats, which ignores the fact that they heavily rotate their DTs and DEs. This article does that when it mentions that the Packers DT with the highest sack total had the 9th fewest sacks of any team leader at that position. Does that really matter?

0 points
0
0
Leatherhead's picture

March 05, 2025 at 12:27 pm

Does it matter? Not as much as points matter.

0 points
0
0
Guam's picture

March 05, 2025 at 12:31 pm

I don't think the argument for a DT has anything to do with the crappy PFF rating system. The issues are (1) the Packers will likely lose Slaton in free agency, (2) Clark had an off year in 2024 and next year will be his tenth in the league and he may be headed for decline and (3) Wooden isn't very good. That leaves the Packers with two good, young DTs (Wyatt and Brooks) and a question mark in Clark.

Why not play into one of the strengths of this draft and insure a solid DL for years to come? I think it largely depends on who is available at #23, but I sure wouldn't pass on a good defensive lineman to reach for a WR. And historically good DTs go early and you can get good WRs in round two. I will not be surprised at all if Gute takes a DT at #23.

PS: Metcalf just demanded a trade from the Seahawks. I wonder if that will bring his price down to a point the Packers might be interested in trading for him. Doubs and a fourth rounder?

0 points
0
0
Leatherhead's picture

March 05, 2025 at 01:52 pm

Yes, let's leave crappy PFF out of this.

I can see a lot of merit in getting a good DT. I've read the arguments. I don't disagree with them. So we're going to improve the offense by taking a guy on Day 2 who will be more impactful than Watson, and replace Myers with.....??? Color me skeptical.

We need to add weaponry, and we need to improve blocking. When is that going to happen?

0 points
0
0
Guam's picture

March 05, 2025 at 02:48 pm

Not all of it can be solved with the draft. Some pieces will have to come in free agency.

As far as the OL is concerned,, I think the Packers have their starting five in Walker, Jenkins, Rhyan, Morgan and Tom (rearrange the IOL any way you want to). They need reserves and I am hoping for a FA swing tackle and fourth round and fifth round picks as depth pieces.

For weapons, the Packers are getting Musgrave and Lloyd back and that should take care of the TE and RB rooms (maybe a late round TE to push Sims). They need a WR. That has to come either as a second round pick or a FA (Metcalf at a responsible price?).

That still leaves CB which I assume will be a free agent (Adebo) and a third round pick to give them five CBs (assuming Alexander is gone and they keep one of Stokes/Ballantine) plus King off the PS.

0 points
0
0
murf7777's picture

March 06, 2025 at 07:00 am

Regarding DK Metcalf I don’t think it would be wise to waste draft picks and make him the highest if not one of the highest paid WR’s. use that salary cap dollars elsewhere and keep those draft picks IMO.

0 points
0
0
Guam's picture

March 06, 2025 at 07:27 am

Metcalf is under contract for next season at $18MM for the acquiring team. He would be a free agent in 2026.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

March 06, 2025 at 07:50 am

The Questions:
Is a 29-year old Metcalf worth the contract it would take to placate him?
Is the cap investment over the term of the contract worth it?
Would you be willing to allow Metcalf to play out his deal--be, potentially, very unhappy--and walk at the smaller cap number?
If you're not committed to paying him, why would you surrender all the draft capital for him?

0 points
0
0
Guam's picture

March 06, 2025 at 09:40 am

Slight adjustment Dobber: DK Metcalf is 27, not 29. You might be thinking of Deebo Samuel who is 29.

Those two years make a big difference to me. Metcalf is in his prime and should be for the next 3-4 years. I have no idea what he wants in his new contract, but if it is not unreasonable for a true #1 WR, you are going to pay him or someone else to be your #1 WR. Since he should be in his prime for the length of his new contract I don't mind paying him.

And I don't propose paying multiple draft choices to get him. A fourth plus Doubs would be all I'm willing to put out there. Deebo Samuel set the market with a fifth rounder for a 29 year old WR with a big contract. I wouldn't pay much more for Metcalf given his big contract. If Seattle wants a #1, skip Metcalf and draft Egbuka.

PS: I did a little research into veteran trades over the past year and, excluding QBs, no acquiring team traded a #1 for a veteran with a big contract and most trades were day three picks for high dollar vets. As examples: Keenan Allen went to the Bears for a fourth round pick, Jerry Jeudy went to Cincinnati for a fifth and sixth round picks, Joe Mixon went to Houston for a seventh round pick and this year the Bears are reportedly acquiring Joe Thuney (all pro guard from KC) for a fourth round pick. Teams are just not willing to part with high draft choices AND absorb a big salary cap hit. Seattle may want a #1 for Metcalf but history says they won't get it. Too much salary cap implication given his contract to also spend much draft capital.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

March 06, 2025 at 12:04 pm

"Slight adjustment Dobber: DK Metcalf is 27, not 29. You might be thinking of Deebo Samuel who is 29."

When I was in college I did a summer program in Ames, IA, and didn't take a TV. I quickly learned that you need a TV in Iowa. Anyway, I talked to my folks and they said go ahead and buy a small TV and we'll pass it on to my brother...so I went to Wal-mart and they had a big stack of boxed TVs labeled, "RCA 13-inch TV (14 inches in Canada)." I kid you not. I still laugh over that one.

So maybe DK Metcalf is older in Canada.

"And I don't propose paying multiple draft choices to get him. A fourth plus Doubs would be all I'm willing to put out there."

I keep hearing these reports of what it will take to pry Metcalf away from the Seahags and it just sounds like FFL trade talk to me: "Yeah, I can deal you X, but you need to give me a playable WR in return." I'm not so sure anyone really knows what it will take, especially given the size of that contract...and this kind of trade raises the top end of your WR room, but hurts the depth (v. dealing for Metcalf and keeping Doubs).

0 points
0
0
Guam's picture

March 06, 2025 at 01:33 pm

I never knew Canada had a shorter inch than we do.........LOL

Ultimately Gute will have to decide what he is wiling to pay for Metcalf. I trust his history to not mortgage the Packer's future.

0 points
0
0
murf7777's picture

March 06, 2025 at 03:25 pm

Guam, he wants Top 3 money for not even Top 10 production. No thank you....NOW, give up some draft capital for Trey Hendrickson, even thou he's 30 who has had 17.5 each of the last two years and doesn't get injured has tread left cuz he didn't even play much his first three years....YES.

0 points
0
0
Guam's picture

March 06, 2025 at 03:42 pm

Gute has supposedly expressed interest both when Metcalf was drafted and again with the trade rumors now. I don't particularly care who is the Packers #1 WR, but they do seem to need someone. We will have to see what Gute does.

0 points
0
0
Leatherhead's picture

March 06, 2025 at 03:57 pm

We do need someone. We can shift things around and throw more to TEs and do this and that, but Watson was on the field 555 times, and although he didn't touch it much, he had about a 20 yard average when he did, along with solid blocking when he didn't. That's a hole that has to be filled just to be as good as last year,which wasn't good enough.

We can put an expensive old vet out there, or we can put a rookie #1.

The Packers have drafted first round receivers three times in the last 50 years: James Lofton in 1978, Sterling Sharpe, in 1988, and Javon Walker in 2004.

It LOOKS, right now, that the Packers might have a shot at a legitimate #1 WR

0 points
0
0
LLCHESTY's picture

March 05, 2025 at 09:01 pm

Backwards thinking. If you want an All Pro DT you draft them in the 1st round or your odds go down astronomically.This years depth gives them an outside shot at grabbing one at 23 that wouldn't be there any other year, especially after years of thin classes. Then there's the fact that Slaton needs to be replaced and this is Clark's last year and the timing couldn't work out better.

0 points
0
0
LambeauPlain's picture

March 06, 2025 at 09:40 am

Agree...DT at 23 for me!

In the first two days draft the BAP at DT, IOL, CB, OT, WR or DE...in that order of priority. Four of the positions reinforce the trenches.

The depth of premier DT prospects should be the first off the Packer's board.

0 points
0
0
Packer_Fan's picture

March 05, 2025 at 11:01 am

I like the headline. "DL can" But will they? That is question they didn't answer last year and it is important this year.

I don't know why thaant question wasn't answered last year. Run defense yes, but not pass rush. Seems Wyatt doesn't play well when he is hurt. And perhaps the change in scheme made an impact.

So what do we do. I say sign a good free agent DE and draft a high IDL in the draft. And don't draft a project. Had enough of them. ie: Gary and Van Ness.

0 points
0
0
LLCHESTY's picture

March 05, 2025 at 09:03 pm

Would you play well with a high ankle sprain? Those take an off-season to recover from. Dumb statement.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

March 06, 2025 at 12:13 pm

I couldn't play well without a high ankle sprain.

0 points
0
0
T7Steve's picture

March 06, 2025 at 12:59 pm

Comment of the day, as far as I'm concerned.

You might be able to play well with my ankles. They've never been used except to drive to church on Sundays.

0 points
0
0
LLCHESTY's picture

March 07, 2025 at 08:15 am

I wish someone would have told me the dumb shit you do as a kid will come back to haunt you. Probably wouldn't have helped but even if it would have kept me from doing the top 5% of the dumbest. 🤷

0 points
0
0
T7Steve's picture

March 05, 2025 at 11:02 am

If they can find a dominating type of D-line/edge or O-line, they have to take him. There are allot of other positions they need that could fall to them too. It would be nice if they don't have to reach for a change and get a project with "high ceiling".

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

March 06, 2025 at 08:06 am

Right now, the Packers need to take notice of the fact that the only team to finish behind them in the division has already added two IOL to their front 5 who represent an improvement over what they had--you know, their most glaring weakness on offense.

How do the Packers get better to compete?

0 points
0
0
T7Steve's picture

March 06, 2025 at 08:31 am

Draft well and add a FA or two to the O and D lines? Might want to get lucky with a CB and WR or two.

Hopefully the Bears will screw it up as usual. That doesn't mean they'll be a cakewalk anymore. With their bad team they managed to compete to almost two wins over an 11-win Packers team last season.

0 points
0
0
LLCHESTY's picture

March 07, 2025 at 08:27 am

I'm not sure Jonah Jackson is an upgrade over Tevin Jenkins, the Rams gave up on him one year after giving him a 3 year/$51M deal. But Thuney is definitely an upgrade even though he's aging. Just don't ask him to play LT.

0 points
0
0
stockholder's picture

March 05, 2025 at 04:24 pm

The talent gap isn't the problem on the DL.
Devaluing the DL so we can draft replacements is.
Your point will only lead, " To where the costs are too much."
The difference isn't disruption, up the middle.
The difference is; Gute drafted guys with "limited tools."
And I don't see any DT, that would project quickly to "starter"
The True disrupters; were the Smiths and Gary.
And that is the first thing that Gute must improve.
Whether it be Garret or some other well known.

0 points
0
0
LLCHESTY's picture

March 07, 2025 at 08:30 am

It's fun when you throw your comments in a metaphorical Cuisinart before posting them!🙄

0 points
0
0
brenner's picture

March 05, 2025 at 07:00 pm

To fix the D Line:
1. Move Clark back to nose and let Wyatt take over the 3tech.
2. Get Kenneth grant in the draft and roll out the 5-2 monster on obvious run situations.
3. STOP rotating in guys unnecessarily and let the starters have the majority of snaps.

0 points
0
0
BuckyBadger's picture

March 06, 2025 at 09:17 am

I doubt Grant is there and there is no such thing as obvious run downs in the NFL anymore. They pass all the time and if you have 5 big men on the field they will spread you out and pick your secondary apart, they also need CBs that can cover with that alignment.

If you have the talent and endurance to run the same 4 guys all game go for it, most will find they have nothing left in the 4th.

0 points
0
0
BuckyBadger's picture

March 06, 2025 at 09:14 am

The DL should have been a strength for a couple of years but it never happens. They don't get pressure and you can still run on them. As the article points out we did see some improvements and I think another year under the current defense will see keep the improvements coming. They will need a replacement for Clark who will leave a huge talent gap.

0 points
0
0
Oxymoron 3339's picture

March 06, 2025 at 09:27 am

We need impact players. We have not had a lot of success drafting and developing true stars. Coop might turn out to be one. I want us to draft the best player within a position of need - DL,Edge,OL,WR,CB etc…
If there is a DL at 23 that we think has a chance to be All Pro in a couple years then go get him.

0 points
0
0
LambeauPlain's picture

March 06, 2025 at 09:49 am

I have read both Wyatt and Clark played with nagging injuries...Wyatt's the most serious with his leg injury. Clark mostly soldiered through his reported turf toe.

Both can have big rebound years under the greatly improved Hafley Defense and his coaches. Adding another top DT in round one for the D coaches to coach up makes sense to me.

0 points
0
0
T7Steve's picture

March 06, 2025 at 01:08 pm

Do you notice that no one seems to mention those injuries and how they played through them. They always bring it up with Love. Be nice to have a rotation that would allow them to recuperate for a while. Too bad only the Eagles had that much depth on their D-line.

0 points
0
0
Lphill's picture

March 06, 2025 at 03:53 pm

Clark is a durable player but never was on the same level as Myles Garrett , JJ Watt or Max Crosby . Also when he played nose he just wasn’t heavy enough .

0 points
0
0
LLCHESTY's picture

March 07, 2025 at 08:32 am

You're comparing a NT to Garrett, Watt and Crosby?🤣

0 points
0
0
nagawicka's picture

March 06, 2025 at 08:16 pm

Gute will draft 2 if not 3 DTs, one 1st tier guy out of Harmon, Grant, Nolen, Tyliek, Walker.
Like to work some movin around magic to scoop up Fannin @30 or so
How good are Omarr, Jemarree and Phillips in the mid-rounds? Ample pickings for th discerning Pack fan here
Warren Brinson very late. The RAS on some of these DTs is off the charts well, really high on the charts.
At least two of not three OL, same deal. Gute intends to be aggressvie so I say Membou. Why? You saw what happened end-of-season. NFL wins are built on mass & power in the trenches, you can't win by being just really good. Lotsa high RAS proven OL in the late- & l ater rounds as well.

0 points
0
0
LLCHESTY's picture

March 07, 2025 at 08:33 am

Membou is most likely a top 10 pick now.

0 points
0
0
nagawicka's picture

March 08, 2025 at 10:08 am

True, and if Gute's being truthful when he says he'll be aggressive, it'll be fun to watch him go after the guys he wants.

On the one hand, I don't really care if it's Membou. OTOH, you HAVE TO go get the massive/athletic unbelievably dominant OL and DL to win it all in the NFL. There's no other path to the Super Bowl. In a draft deeeep in NFL-worthy DTs, you've gotta go get the best of the best. IF YOU DON'T, other teams will roster up with the Erik Williamses and Reggie Whites. At a certain point, you can't get around your almost-300lb-er getting gassed in the 4th quarter b/c the three DTs across from us are all 320-340 and far more athletic. It being football and all, the most physically violent tend to prevail and that means not handing truly great players over to rivals for no particular reason.

Gute will take at least 2 OL, one mid-rounder and one late-rounder -- Jalen Travis anyone? -- because those guys are out there. You take the Membous when you can.

0 points
0
0
TKWorldWide's picture

March 06, 2025 at 10:05 pm

Strengths are great. Big fan of strengths here. Because, you know, they’re like better than weaknesses. I’d love to see strengths all up and down the lineup when it comes to the Packers, particularly.

0 points
0
0
LLCHESTY's picture

March 07, 2025 at 08:34 am

"I love winning, you know what I'm saying? It's like better than losing."

Nuke

0 points
0
0
TKWorldWide's picture

March 09, 2025 at 08:18 pm

Yup, I kinda plagiarized that one!

0 points
0
0