From Lambeau to Lombardi, Holmgren, McCarthy and LaFleur and from Starr to Favre, Rodgers and now Jordan Love we’re talking Super Bowl Champion Green Bay Packers football. This Packers Forum is the place to talk NFL football and everything Packers. So, pull up a keyboard, make yourself at home and let’s talk some Packers football.
Actually you are making it up. The reason being is because it is impossible to prove or disprove without being part of the organization.
Let's ask a simple question, why would MVS still be playing as much as he does if he is running the routes incorrectly, 50% of the time?
he wouldn't be if we had another 4.2 speedster, your problem 23 is that it's been so long since you saw more then one great Packer receiver per season you've lost sight of what a good receiver group looks like.
I think he understands it isn't a drop rate, but I think he is simply looking at the difference in catch rate between MVS and Cobb being so different that some of the issues must be pinned on MVS because a sub 50% catch rate is really bad.
But honestly, this is a unique situation where I wouldn't put the poor catch rate on the WR. Like at all. I think this is purely on 12.
Yesterday again was a prime example. Easy TD. MVS did everythign he was supposed to do and Rodgers just overshot him.
Add the fact that MVS is literally EVERY throw away ball when Rodgers is in trouble. I bet you 10 targets to MVS are simply "throw aways" this season.
if ya average MVS out per season he catches less the 50% of balls thrown his way, as I said MVS does not run the routes at the same speed, that is the biggest reason for the catch to throw discrepancy, I'am not just making this &%$@ up, ask any person that you respect more then me and they will tell you the same thing, either he doesn't get a clean release, or he fails to run the route on schedule.
anyone thats ever played QB will tell you when a receiver lacks consistency running the route the QB will never know where to throw the ball, COMMON FREAKING SENSE WILL TELL YOU THAT, and still you argue.
I will agree about the inconsistency in 2018 and 2019.
But starting in 2020 and especially into 2021 here, I just don't buy it. The person I respect the most on this matter is the person who is actually throwing him the ball. Rodgers made no qualms of throwing MVS under the bus in 2018 and 2019. But starting in 2020 the language started to turn around and in 2021 Rodgers has done nothing but apologize to MVS because he knows he is flat out missing MVS.
It is strange that he is missing MVS so much. You would honsestly think higher speed would give better "run under the ball performance" but the chemistry of Rodgers to MVS is just bad.
And it's too bad because this duo could be such a weapon.
Rodgers was throwing all of the Stooges under the bus back then, but he's accepted the fact that these are the guys he has to play with.
why is it everyone else is catch rate is in the high 60's or 70's and MVS remains at or near 43 %, it's not throwing the ball away or lobbing it in MVS direction each and every time, it's what I said, Rodgers problems building route chemistry with MVS is the same for any receiver with low catch/throws %'s inconsistent route running, you ask any QB about this stuff and they will ehco my thoughts, when a QB is basically on with all the other receivers that should all the proof you need.
as I said, yes we can blame Rodgers some here to, but most of the issue is with MVS.
The idea that MVS has a drop problem is obsolete. He has improved his concentration big time. As for running poor routes, unless we have coach's film and spend huge amounts of time at it, we are just guessing whether he ran the route well or not. The only thing we can do is to compare him to his competition, Lazard and ESB. From targets, it appears that MVS is improving faster than either Lazard of ESB. That and that Kumerow is still on the Bills 53 so even the guy who did not make the cut was good enough to find a home on a different team.
What stands out to me is the number of uncatchable balls in which MVS is targeted. Some because Rodgers missed - a deep ball has a higher degree of difficulty and neither MVS nor Rodgers can always be blamed for that. Sometimes because the defensive player guessed right and MVS was not open - that happens too. When MVS is covered, it is Rodgers' job to throw it to someone else and too often he has not done that. Which isn't all on Rodgers either, his logical 2nd read is Tonyan and Tonyan is on IR or before then trying to chip a pass rusher. In most cases pass blocking has been OK, but you can't expect an Oline on its 3rd LT and 2nd Center and a rookie at RG and a 2nd year man at LG to be perfect and give Rodgers all day like last year.
I think Pkfn is pretty close. This is certainly a top 10 group of receivers and probably in the middle of that range. MVS and Lazard and ESB and Cobb and Taylor are not a bunch of scags.
We do not have a top 10 receiver group, not even close, and if ya add in TE where probably late teens
all grade services differ a bit, but here we are at 19, and don't forget our guys have a HOF QB throwing them the ball
15. Green Bay Packers
The receiving corps generated mixed reviews on ballots (ranks between 11 and 21), likely because it’s difficult to account for both the elite number-one weapon (Davante Adams) and the poor depth. On targets 10+ yards downfield, non-Adams receivers had a pathetic 48.5% catch rate and 16.1% drop rate.
Yeah MVS's hands have been more than fine thus far. If he starts dropping balls after I hit submit on this post, that won't change the fact that he has been pretty solid at catching it up to this point. We have seen our other great receivers go through this same thing; James Jones, Jordy Nelson, shoot even Adams himself all were guys who had a case of the dropsies for a while before becoming sure-handed.
There was that one long ball that mayyyyybe he could have caught last night that he didn't. It would have been an incredibly difficult catch to make, even by NFL receiver standards (the elites make that catch, but none of us is arguing MVS is elite, still a quality #2 receiver though).
Lazard OTOH has been pretty poor over the last couple games.
“Most other nations don't allow a terrorist to be their leader.”
“... Yet so many allow their leaders to be terrorists.”—Magneto
2016 was only 5 years ago, so that is silly to say anyone forgot what a good WR Corp looks like. That 2016 group was better than what we have now, but that was one of the best in the league.
image.png (71.99 KiB) Viewed 509 times
Here are the top 20 players in yards/reception with their catch percentage. No one is above 70%. These are deep target players and that means that catch percentages are going to be lower. Contrast that to reception leaders and only 1 players in the top 20 is below 60% and 7 are above 70%. MVS is at 18.3, but doesn't qualify for the list.
WR Corp does not include the TEs or RBs. Bringing those in the mix, is not talking about Wide Receivers any longer.
NFL Spin Zone is not a "grade service." It's a blogging site. Both links are before the season, not applicable to what has happened this season.
We are talking right now, 12 weeks into the season. The Packers WIDE RECEIVERS are top 10 in the league. Not some "scag" group. Please name the 10 that are definitely better.
I will start:
Arizona Cardinals (Maybe)
Buffalo Bills
Cincinnati Bengals (Maybe)
Dallas Cowboys
Las Angeles Rams
Minnesota Vikings
Pittsburgh Steelers (Maybe)
Seattle Seahawks
Tampa Bay Buccaneers
Tennessee Titans
Washington Football team (Maybe)
Who are you adding?
Last edited by Pckfn23 on 29 Nov 2021 15:12, edited 3 times in total.
Palmy - "Very few have the ability to truly excel regardless of system. For many the system is the difference between being just a guy or an NFL starter. Fact is, everyone is talented at this level."
I am not saying that Rodgers is not a good QB. He is very good. But he is not even the best QB of his generation, Brady is. Nor is he the best Packers QB, Starr was. Can you imagine Bart taking so much cap room that the Packers would have to let good teammates walk? I cannot. Starr always put the team ahead of himself. Brady has almost always come up big when it matters most, so did Peyton.
As far as football players in general, I can easily think of many that were better than Rodgers, even if Rodgers wins his 2nd SB this year. Because of the position he plays, he is the current MVP of the Packers but he is not even the best football player on the team right now. Rodgers isn't even in the same league as Woodson or for that matter Hornung.
Permanently retiring his number is absurd. Why not retire Bakh's number. Why not Jaire and Z and Clark and Adams and maybe Jenkins too?
Uh. What. This is ridiculous. So ridiculous that I suspect ulterior motivations for the dislike.
Woodson goes on the ring easily. As does Rodgers. Rodgers almost certainly gets his number retired. He is the best QB of all time. He is far from the best leader or teammate, but in terms of QB skill, he is the best. He also has 3 MVPs and may very well win another one this year.
On another note, yes we will eventually have to find a solution to the problem of limited space for our honored greats, but the solution isn't to start denying NFL legends the reward of having their name up there because they happened to play for a 100-year old franchise. Woodson is an NFL legend. So is Reggie White. Ted Thompson is iffy in terms of being an NFL legend, but his 5 years or so after taking over were some of the best talent acquisition years ever, so he should probably go up there. We could easily just move the years section to be in line with the name, and then we'd have double the spots available.
First of all, having your name on the ring and having your number retired are 2 different things. You could easily put 50 names on the ring but you can't retire 50 numbers unless you go to a 3 digit uniform number.
Yes, I am aware and was aware when I wrote that. Not sure if you thought I was unaware or just stating this for some other reason.
Secondly anyone who believes Rodgers is the best QB of all time is out of reality. Brady is clearly better. Starr was better - Rodgers would not last 2 weeks with the lack of protection against roughing the passer that Starr had to endure, nor would he be able to play the way he does if he had to deal with actually getting hit. Johnny Unitas was better. Peyton Manning was better - he was so dominant that he changed the way plays are called and how defenses are called. Montana, Graham, Staubach, Tarkington and Young and Marino were better. The second tier includes Rodgers but it also includes Brees and Favre and Wilson and Warner, all of whom may/are/were better. In an objective all time ranking that takes into account the rules changes on roughing the passer and sliding down without getting speared and championships, Rodgers would be hard pressed to make it into the top 20. He is the beneficiary of the pansy rules for QB's and receivers and he could not be effective without them.
But even if you measure only QB's now playing, he is not the best current QB. Based solely on stats, he is #10 this year: https://www.nfl.com/news/nfl-qb-index-w ... n-rankings. If you take into account the strength of the team around him, he still is probably abut #20.
I get it, being a homer is not a bad thing. But be a homer for the real stars of this team. Adams and Jones and Dillon and Clark and Gary and Alexander and Campbell. And soon, I hope Bakh and Myers and Z.
The era comparison point is a valid point. But your estimation of Rodgers' hypothetical rank in a world where we can compare the QBs of different eras is pure speculation. You can almost certainly make a case for your argument, backed up by good reasons, but we can never know for sure. What we can know is that Rodgers has the best stats ever. That doesn't objectively make him "the GOAT" (also because that title is based on a subjective definition). But it does mean that he is the GOAT at least according to objective statistics. Also on the (subjective) eye test, he is better than Brady. Sorry we had to be in the NFC all these years and have Dom Capers running our defense instead of Belichick.
And yeah we have a really good team now with many stars and blue chip players. I hope we win it all this year.
WR Corp does not include the TEs or RBs. Bringing those in the mix, is not talking about Wide Receivers any longer.
n ot bringing in RB's really makes our receiver group look worse, and every report I read has our receiver group (including TE's and RB's ) has us ranked mid to late teens, and if we stick to just WR late teens is our best ranking, we simply suck big time after ya get passed Randal and Devonte, why you and others defend guys like Lazard, Brown, MVS, etc is anyones guess, I expect it's partially do to the fact that I wont.
you just admited that 5 or 6 years ago we had one of the best groups, and in the next breath you basically said this group is not far behind, I don't know why you'd say such a thing, there is a night and day difference between one of the best, compared to even 10th best, which this group is not, I couldn't find any grading service to claim that, and now I'am tired of looking, so provide some proof of that ranking.
hey I was pulling for MVS just like everyone of you, but what we saw last year is who he has been this year.
I hate it so much that we didn't resign Chuck to be safety. We gave up on that project too early.
Woodson should be known as a Packer. But instead he will be known as a Raider because the Packers dumped him too soon.
I doubt that, he became DPOY as a Packer, and has no accolades that I know of as a Raider.
we didn't want to pay Woody and didn't want to insult him with a low offer, but ya, I wish we'd have kept him on some how anyway, one of Teds top UFA moves was bringing Woody to town, one of his worst ( we think) is letting him go.
adding his name to the facade is the just thing to do, he earned his way to that honor.
The idea that MVS has a drop problem is obsolete. He has improved his concentration big time. As for running poor routes, unless we have coach's film and spend huge amounts of time at it, we are just guessing whether he ran the route well or not. The only thing we can do is to compare him to his competition, Lazard and ESB. From targets, it appears that MVS is improving faster than either Lazard of ESB. That and that Kumerow is still on the Bills 53 so even the guy who did not make the cut was good enough to find a home on a different team.
What stands out to me is the number of uncatchable balls in which MVS is targeted. Some because Rodgers missed - a deep ball has a higher degree of difficulty and neither MVS nor Rodgers can always be blamed for that. Sometimes because the defensive player guessed right and MVS was not open - that happens too. When MVS is covered, it is Rodgers' job to throw it to someone else and too often he has not done that. Which isn't all on Rodgers either, his logical 2nd read is Tonyan and Tonyan is on IR or before then trying to chip a pass rusher. In most cases pass blocking has been OK, but you can't expect an Oline on its 3rd LT and 2nd Center and a rookie at RG and a 2nd year man at LG to be perfect and give Rodgers all day like last year.
I think Pkfn is pretty close. This is certainly a top 10 group of receivers and probably in the middle of that range. MVS and Lazard and ESB and Cobb and Taylor are not a bunch of scags.
My perception of the Rodgers-MVS connection is that AR treats him like a deep threat that has no chance of winning a contested ball.
He'll throw up these deep balls to MVS when there is a 1-on-1, but he'll almost always overthrow it and not give MVS a chance to win a contested "jump ball." He doesn't mind throwing to him, but he doesn't fully trust him. Should he have more trust in him? I don't know.
I hate it so much that we didn't resign Chuck to be safety. We gave up on that project too early.
Woodson should be known as a Packer. But instead he will be known as a Raider because the Packers dumped him too soon.
I doubt that, he became DPOY as a Packer, and has no accolades that I know of as a Raider.
we didn't want to pay Woody and didn't want to insult him with a low offer, but ya, I wish we'd have kept him on some how anyway, one of Teds top UFA moves was bringing Woody to town, one of his worst ( we think) is letting him go.
adding his name to the facade is the just thing to do, he earned his way to that honor.
What do you doubt? What are you disagreeing with me about?
I hate it so much that we didn't resign Chuck to be safety. We gave up on that project too early.
Woodson should be known as a Packer. But instead he will be known as a Raider because the Packers dumped him too soon.
I doubt that, he became DPOY as a Packer, and has no accolades that I know of as a Raider.
we didn't want to pay Woody and didn't want to insult him with a low offer, but ya, I wish we'd have kept him on some how anyway, one of Teds top UFA moves was bringing Woody to town, one of his worst ( we think) is letting him go.
adding his name to the facade is the just thing to do, he earned his way to that honor.
What do you doubt? What are you disagreeing with me about?
But instead he will be known as a Raider because the Packers dumped him too soon.
maybe doubt is the wrong word, I strongly disagree with you, is that better?
It might not be that bad an idea to talk more about Woodson's speech and induction.
Thank you Skeptic. Like Charles said, "Go Packers".
Totally agree.
Staying with the Charles Woodson theme, after the game I was bringing a fan (an older gentleman -- even older than me, which is really old) in a wheelchair down the ADA/VIP elevator at section 131. Elevator was going up instead of down but at that point if there's room on an elevator you grab it when you can and ride it out. So the elevator stops at level 4 and in walks Charles Woodson. This fan and his son were at Lambeau for the first time ever and were already pumped by the experience but this left them in awe. Charles talked with them, shook hands with them and thanked them for being there. After we got off the elevator I walked the father and son out. The father was wide-eyed and speechless, the son couldn't stop gushing about it, teared up and said "This day is way better than I ever dreamed it would be."
Charles Woodson, class act.
The Packers lunatic fringe is more visible because of sheer numbers. The Packers have one of the largest fan bases in all of sports. If the fringe percentage is the same as with other teams, then we end up with larger volumes of nut jobs. - JustJeff
