Page 6 of 9
Re: Legal Tampering Period and Early FA Discussion
Posted: 16 Mar 2023 10:55
by Yoop
Pckfn23 wrote: ↑16 Mar 2023 10:41
Yoop wrote: ↑16 Mar 2023 10:18
Pckfn23 wrote: ↑16 Mar 2023 09:59
$11 million per is ranked tied for 28th. So, no, that is not what #3 receivers get these days and the NFL has not proven that.
How good is anyone making them out to be?
just what till the end of this FA period and see how it plays out, any GM that would pay 11 mil. thinking either of these two players is a number 2 receiver is delusional
you and others have been defending the receivers Rodgers has had for ever
So you are saying that 32 receivers in this free agent period are going to make more than $11 million per? I think that would be the delusional part.
Again you continue to say that we have been defending the receiver situation. This is a lie. We have pointed out the poor management especially as it led to the 2022 situation. Please bring proof next time if you insist on continuing with this line of misinformation.
every time I brought it up, a gazzilion times according to fly guy APB, YOU and others defended Gute and the group of receivers we had, and hear you are again denying it, and NO I wont go looking for &%$@ you said in the past to prove this, I will not stoop to your tit for tat games, you have no honor with me, you accuse me of just what your doing now.
Re: Legal Tampering Period and Early FA Discussion
Posted: 16 Mar 2023 11:05
by Pckfn23
Yoop wrote: ↑16 Mar 2023 10:55
Pckfn23 wrote: ↑16 Mar 2023 10:41
Yoop wrote: ↑16 Mar 2023 10:18
just what till the end of this FA period and see how it plays out, any GM that would pay 11 mil. thinking either of these two players is a number 2 receiver is delusional
you and others have been defending the receivers Rodgers has had for ever
So you are saying that 32 receivers in this free agent period are going to make more than $11 million per? I think that would be the delusional part.
Again you continue to say that we have been defending the receiver situation. This is a lie. We have pointed out the poor management especially as it led to the 2022 situation. Please bring proof next time if you insist on continuing with this line of misinformation.
every time I brought it up, a gazzilion times according to fly guy APB, YOU and others defended Gute and the group of receivers we had, and hear you are again denying it, and NO I wont go looking for &%$@ you said in the past to prove this, I will not stoop to your tit for tat games, you have no honor with me, you accuse me of just what your doing now.
Then if you are not going to bring proof, I expect this to not be brought up again. It serves no purpose to begin with.
Re: Legal Tampering Period and Early FA Discussion
Posted: 16 Mar 2023 11:13
by Labrev
Not sure about APB or Pckfn, but I definitely defended MVS and Lazard as guys who are good receiving options behind a true elite #1 WR, which was what they were with Adams. Both played a different but important role to our WR corps: vertical threat and big-bodied possession receiver target respectively...
... and I WAS RIGHT!!! Mahomes won a title with MVS as a receiver who played a key role and stepped up with some big games on the road to victory, plus he got paid like a WR2. Lazard just got paid like a WR2, which is repeatedly what I said he was. yoop himself hilariously also uses the MVS signing for his own stance from time to time.
And my stance this past year was not that Lazard would be good enough at WR1 to keep the O production we had the year before. My stance was our passing game was definitely going to take a big step back without Adams, but that we needed to respond by pivoting to the run and using the RBs and TEs more in the passing game to offset the loss of WR production (and I was banking on our Defense being way more dominant than it ended up being).
yoop will say I am changing my words now, but I didn't, and I also remember his criticism of it("noooo we can't run the ball more noooo that's not good football") so we can skip over the part where he says I am signing a different tune now and go back to the original argument.
Re: Legal Tampering Period and Early FA Discussion
Posted: 16 Mar 2023 11:19
by Pckfn23
Labrev wrote: ↑16 Mar 2023 11:13
Not sure about APB or Pckfn, but I definitely defended MVS and Lazard as guys who are good receiving options behind a true elite #1 WR, which was what they were with Adams. Both played a different but important role to our WR corps: vertical threat and big-bodied possession receiver target respectively...
... and I WAS RIGHT!!! Mahomes won a title with MVS as a receiver who played a key role and stepped up with some big games on the road to victory, plus he got paid like a WR2. Lazard just got paid like a WR2, which is repeatedly what I said he was. yoop himself hilariously also uses the MVS signing for his own stance from time to time.
And my stance this past year was not that Lazard would be good enough at WR1 to keep the O production we had the year before. My stance was our passing game was definitely going to take a big step back without Adams, but that we needed to respond by pivoting to the run and using the RBs and TEs more in the passing game to offset the loss of WR production (and I was banking on our Defense being way more dominant than it ended up being).
yoop will say I am changing my words now, but I didn't, and I also remember his criticism of it("noooo we can't run the ball more noooo that's not good football") so we can skip over the part where he says I am signing a different tune now and go back to the original argument.
Exactly! I would add that I saw it as adequate with Lazard and MVS behind Adams, but saw that With Adams gone it was going to be razor thin. We found out with injuries and Watkins sucking that we ended up on the wrong side of that one. It was risky and didn't work out. A failure. 2018 was another failure with the WR group.
Re: Legal Tampering Period and Early FA Discussion
Posted: 16 Mar 2023 11:19
by Drj820
Lazard was paid like someone who would influence rodgers to come to New York
Re: Legal Tampering Period and Early FA Discussion
Posted: 16 Mar 2023 11:22
by Labrev
So yeah, I am proud to have defended those two from your slander. I have been vindicated by recent events and you have been repudiated by them.
I will give you this though, yoop: MVS and Lazard are *not* good receivers for what you want to do, which is to replicate the 2011 model.
But I maintain that trying to replicate 2011 is an insane delusion.
You keep saying look at KC. Okay, let's look at KC. KC signed several WRs that are not star players to make up for the loss of Tyreek Hill, which was a direct consequence of giving Mahomes an Elite QB contract (these consequences you do not want to accept as true), with Kelce absorbing the hit. Yes, that was very sensible, no argument there.
But they did NOT try to keep Hill and Kelce, and then also draft a WR high in draft year after year as you and brd frx irrationally want us to do lol.
Re: Legal Tampering Period and Early FA Discussion
Posted: 16 Mar 2023 11:26
by Yoop
Pckfn23 wrote: ↑16 Mar 2023 11:05
Yoop wrote: ↑16 Mar 2023 10:55
Pckfn23 wrote: ↑16 Mar 2023 10:41
So you are saying that 32 receivers in this free agent period are going to make more than $11 million per? I think that would be the delusional part.
Again you continue to say that we have been defending the receiver situation. This is a lie. We have pointed out the poor management especially as it led to the 2022 situation. Please bring proof next time if you insist on continuing with this line of misinformation.
every time I brought it up, a gazzilion times according to fly guy APB, YOU and others defended Gute and the group of receivers we had, and hear you are again denying it, and NO I wont go looking for &%$@ you said in the past to prove this, I will not stoop to your tit for tat games, you have no honor with me, you accuse me of just what your doing now.
Then if you are not going to bring proof, I expect this to not be brought up again. It serves no purpose to begin with.
I will bring it up any time I feel like it, you bitched about Rodgers just about every time we lost and defended the players he had to work with, just own it if you want me to stop, till you do STFU
Re: Legal Tampering Period and Early FA Discussion
Posted: 16 Mar 2023 11:28
by Drj820
Lazard was paid to be WR3 at best in NY. Some teams just want at least 3 adequate players at WR. Unlike the Packers who want one at best.
Re: Legal Tampering Period and Early FA Discussion
Posted: 16 Mar 2023 11:38
by Pckfn23
Yoop wrote: ↑16 Mar 2023 11:26
Pckfn23 wrote: ↑16 Mar 2023 11:05
Yoop wrote: ↑16 Mar 2023 10:55
every time I brought it up, a gazzilion times according to fly guy APB, YOU and others defended Gute and the group of receivers we had, and hear you are again denying it, and NO I wont go looking for &%$@ you said in the past to prove this, I will not stoop to your tit for tat games, you have no honor with me, you accuse me of just what your doing now.
Then if you are not going to bring proof, I expect this to not be brought up again. It serves no purpose to begin with.
I will bring it up any time I feel like it, you bitched about Rodgers just about every time we lost and defended the players he had to work with, just own it if you want me to stop, till you do STFU
I criticized any player or coach that deserved criticism when we lost. To say that I criticized Rodgers and defended all other players is just another blatant lie.
Re: Legal Tampering Period and Early FA Discussion
Posted: 16 Mar 2023 11:40
by Pckfn23
Drj820 wrote: ↑16 Mar 2023 11:28
Lazard was paid to be WR3 at best in NY. Some teams just want at least 3 adequate players at WR. Unlike the Packers who want one at best.
If Lazard is going to be an adequate player for the Jets and MVS was an adequate player for the Chiefs then Adams, Lazard, and MVS were adequate players for the 2021 Packers.
Re: Legal Tampering Period and Early FA Discussion
Posted: 16 Mar 2023 11:40
by Yoop
Labrev wrote: ↑16 Mar 2023 11:13
oop will say I am changing my words now, but I didn't, and I also remember his criticism of it("noooo we can't run the ball more noooo that's not good football") so we can skip over the part where he says I am signing a different tune now and go back to the original argument.
I defended a coach who called pass plays when the run didn't give good results, I complained when the run was working and we stopped running your just trying to pigeon hole my comments.
MVS and Lazard are fine #3 or 4 receivers, thats it, and thats all MVS was for KC last year, you focus on a game here or there when Scantling is matched up against a DB that can't deal with his speed or a defense that is out maned by KC's receiver group and go gaga over MVS who only catches 50% of targets, players do improve, that shouldn't over shadow that they weren't as good prior, we all saw how inept MVS had been, same with Lazard, falling over his own feet on a crossing route, both of these guys where low floor and have already reached there ceiling, thats the biggest reason I expect for us not resigning them.
when you and others defend these caliber of receivers it says a ton about your football IQ, please stop embarrassing yourselves it's not a good look for our forum
Re: Legal Tampering Period and Early FA Discussion
Posted: 16 Mar 2023 11:43
by Yoop
Pckfn23 wrote: ↑16 Mar 2023 11:40
Drj820 wrote: ↑16 Mar 2023 11:28
Lazard was paid to be WR3 at best in NY. Some teams just want at least 3 adequate players at WR. Unlike the Packers who want one at best.
If Lazard is going to be an adequate player for the Jets and MVS was an adequate player for the Chiefs then Adams, Lazard, and MVS were adequate players for the 2021 Packers.
whats sad is that you can't recognize, or wont recognize, that even low floor players improve, instead you blame the QB because it took so long for that to happen, last season was the best for both of these players
Re: Legal Tampering Period and Early FA Discussion
Posted: 16 Mar 2023 11:46
by Pckfn23
wrote:
you focus on a game here or there when Scantling is matched up against a DB that can't deal with his speed or a defense that is out maned by KC's receiver group
same with Lazard, falling over his own feet on a crossing route,
This is funny claiming labrev only focuses on a game here or there and then in the next paragraph only focusing on 1 play. Obviously this will fly right over his head and it will be met with some excuse that has nothing to do with his own contradiction.
Re: Legal Tampering Period and Early FA Discussion
Posted: 16 Mar 2023 11:48
by Yoop
Drj820 wrote: ↑16 Mar 2023 11:28
Lazard was paid to be WR3 at best in NY. Some teams just want at least 3 adequate players at WR. Unlike the Packers who want one at best.
no kidding, the peanut gallery here didn't see the difference between Watson and Lazard last season, and will keep acting like the QB should have made Lazard into Watson the last 3 years, or MVS or Allison. the list is endless of number 3 and 4 receivers that have paddled there way across the tundra of Lambeau field the last decade and in order to defend the incompetents of our GM's blame Rodgers, what a joke.
Re: Legal Tampering Period and Early FA Discussion
Posted: 16 Mar 2023 11:49
by Pckfn23
Yoop wrote: ↑16 Mar 2023 11:43
Pckfn23 wrote: ↑16 Mar 2023 11:40
Drj820 wrote: ↑16 Mar 2023 11:28
Lazard was paid to be WR3 at best in NY. Some teams just want at least 3 adequate players at WR. Unlike the Packers who want one at best.
If Lazard is going to be an adequate player for the Jets and MVS was an adequate player for the Chiefs then Adams, Lazard, and MVS were adequate players for the 2021 Packers.
whats sad is that you can't recognize, or wont recognize, that even low floor players improve, instead you blame the QB because it took so long for that to happen, last season was the best for both of these players
I didn't mention the QB there, let alone blame the QB for anything.
You can't help but lie to backup your opinions. 2020 was MVSs best season.
Per usual though you miss the contradiction. If MVS is and Lizard will be adequate for their new respective teams, they were for the Packers.
Re: Legal Tampering Period and Early FA Discussion
Posted: 16 Mar 2023 11:50
by Pckfn23
Yoop wrote: ↑16 Mar 2023 11:48
Drj820 wrote: ↑16 Mar 2023 11:28
Lazard was paid to be WR3 at best in NY. Some teams just want at least 3 adequate players at WR. Unlike the Packers who want one at best.
no kidding, the peanut gallery here didn't see the difference between Watson and Lazard last season, and will keep acting like the QB should have made Lazard into Watson the last 3 years, or MVS or Allison. the list is endless of number 3 and 4 receivers that have paddled there way across the tundra of Lambeau field the last decade and in order to defend the incompetents of our GM's blame Rodgers, what a joke.
Nope, none of what you attribute to the "peanut gallery" is true. More of your lying.
Re: Legal Tampering Period and Early FA Discussion
Posted: 16 Mar 2023 11:52
by Yoop
Pckfn23 wrote: ↑16 Mar 2023 11:46
wrote:
you focus on a game here or there when Scantling is matched up against a DB that can't deal with his speed or a defense that is out maned by KC's receiver group
same with Lazard, falling over his own feet on a crossing route,
This is funny claiming labrev only focuses on a game here or there and then in the next paragraph only focusing on 1 play. Obviously this will fly right over his head and it will be met with some excuse that has nothing to do with his own contradiction.
course you'd take me out of context, it's all you have to stand on.
for a decade all I've heard from you is defense of whatever this front office has done, blame for the QB with every loss, defense of a OL that couldn't protect or run block, and complaints of Capers when Ted missed on just about every pick he made on defense, so spare me your condescending bloviated crappola.
Re: Legal Tampering Period and Early FA Discussion
Posted: 16 Mar 2023 11:54
by Yoop
Pckfn23 wrote: ↑16 Mar 2023 11:50
Yoop wrote: ↑16 Mar 2023 11:48
Drj820 wrote: ↑16 Mar 2023 11:28
Lazard was paid to be WR3 at best in NY. Some teams just want at least 3 adequate players at WR. Unlike the Packers who want one at best.
no kidding, the peanut gallery here didn't see the difference between Watson and Lazard last season, and will keep acting like the QB should have made Lazard into Watson the last 3 years, or MVS or Allison. the list is endless of number 3 and 4 receivers that have paddled there way across the tundra of Lambeau field the last decade and in order to defend the incompetents of our GM's blame Rodgers, what a joke.
Nope, none of what you attribute to the "peanut gallery" is true. More of your lying.
here we go with the lying crap again, look in the mirror peanut
Re: Legal Tampering Period and Early FA Discussion
Posted: 16 Mar 2023 11:55
by Pckfn23
Yoop wrote: ↑16 Mar 2023 11:52
Pckfn23 wrote: ↑16 Mar 2023 11:46
wrote:
you focus on a game here or there when Scantling is matched up against a DB that can't deal with his speed or a defense that is out maned by KC's receiver group
same with Lazard, falling over his own feet on a crossing route,
This is funny claiming labrev only focuses on a game here or there and then in the next paragraph only focusing on 1 play. Obviously this will fly right over his head and it will be met with some excuse that has nothing to do with his own contradiction.
course you'd take me out of context, it's all you have to stand on.
for a decade all I've heard from you is defense of whatever this front office has done, blame for the QB with every loss, defense of a OL that couldn't protect or run block, and complaints of Capers when Ted missed on just about every pick he made on defense, so spare me your condescending bloviated crappola.
Not out of context at all. It is what you said.
Yet more lies from you and now you are so flustered in your dishonesty you go back to Thompson and Capers.
I won't spare you anything until you stop lying.
Re: Legal Tampering Period and Early FA Discussion
Posted: 16 Mar 2023 11:56
by Pckfn23
Yoop wrote: ↑16 Mar 2023 11:54
Pckfn23 wrote: ↑16 Mar 2023 11:50
Yoop wrote: ↑16 Mar 2023 11:48
no kidding, the peanut gallery here didn't see the difference between Watson and Lazard last season, and will keep acting like the QB should have made Lazard into Watson the last 3 years, or MVS or Allison. the list is endless of number 3 and 4 receivers that have paddled there way across the tundra of Lambeau field the last decade and in order to defend the incompetents of our GM's blame Rodgers, what a joke.
Nope, none of what you attribute to the "peanut gallery" is true. More of your lying.
here we go with the lying crap again, look in the mirror peanut
Yes, I also wish your lying about others' positions in almost all threads would stop.