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.
There is a lot of revisionist history when it comes to our WR room. I don't know of a single poster here that wasn't optimistic about our receiver room going into the season. It didn't work out. We now need to find answers.
optimism is the result of prior success, it falters when players regress, and regression can be outside of the players control, defenses watch film, they study tendencies, how do I stop this or that receiver, it starts at the los, all a defender has to do to limit a receiver is ruin route timing, will this group of 3rd year WR get better, that's as much in doubt as you saying most UFA or trades don't work out.
how many years do you want to wait for talent to develop? it is one of the reasons we are going on 15 years minus another SB, most seasons we are almost good enough, wanna play horse shoes
You failed to read my last sentence.
Also, I didn't say most UFA or trades don't work out.
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."
There is a lot of revisionist history when it comes to our WR room. I don't know of a single poster here that wasn't optimistic about our receiver room going into the season. It didn't work out. We now need to find answers.
optimism is the result of prior success, it falters when players regress, and regression can be outside of the players control, defenses watch film, they study tendencies, how do I stop this or that receiver, it starts at the los, all a defender has to do to limit a receiver is ruin route timing, will this group of 3rd year WR get better, that's as much in doubt as you saying most UFA or trades don't work out.
how many years do you want to wait for talent to develop? it is one of the reasons we are going on 15 years minus another SB, most seasons we are almost good enough, wanna play horse shoes
You love the word, "regression", don't you? I don't even think it was regression. In 2023 and even Week 1 2024, the WR's looked great. They are made for LaFleur's heavy PA scheme and thrived in running a ton of it in 2023. So what changed in 2024? Love's injuries. The Packers played A LOT more spread and drop back then they did in 2023 and then you saw the WR's struggle to win at the LOS, run proper route depths, and when some confidence issues entered the mix, you saw them struggle to catch the ball. I don't think these guys regressed as much as they were exposed as to what kind of scheme they can succeed in. I think if we get back to more under center and more PA in 2025, the WR's will magically look better, again, but I also think it's clear you need that #1 guy to succeed in any style. There is a time and place for dropback and spread and the Packers were very inefficient using it last year. A true #1 guy helps fix that big time.
We have to stop this talk about Watson being some great player when he’s on the field. He is not a difference maker. He’s just fast. He impacts the offense the same way MVS did when he was here. That doesn’t make him a good player. The guy played in 15 games this year and still came away with just 29 catches. He’s proven he can run fast and that’s about it. He’s doesnt score TDs, he doesn’t move the chains, he’s just a big decoy which is great and all but at some point you need to come away with more than what we have gotten out of him.
Even if Watson was healthy going into this season I don’t think it would change a thing about how we need to massively upgrade our WRs.
exactly, Watson is another case of Guty valuing razz scores over the on-field ability, WAtson came from a situation that great speed was enough, he showed limited route, ball tracking, or hands to be taken were we took him, it was the same with LVN, or Gary, Guty nailed Alexander, after that the picks are about ceiling, potential, the goal, coach them into super stars, when Mike Smith said Gary WILL be great once coached up, it blew me away, ya don't spend slot 11 on players that don't stud out till the end of there rookie contract, as good as Guty is with some picks, his first rounder leave a lot to be desired
Watson was playing really well before a bad luck, non-contact injury. He isn't an "impact player" on the level of an AJ Brown but neither was he just a glorified MVS. Enough with the hate.
“Most other nations don't allow a terrorist to be their leader.”
“... Yet so many allow their leaders to be terrorists.”—Magneto
There is a lot of revisionist history when it comes to our WR room. I don't know of a single poster here that wasn't optimistic about our receiver room going into the season. It didn't work out. We now need to find answers.
optimism is the result of prior success, it falters when players regress, and regression can be outside of the players control, defenses watch film, they study tendencies, how do I stop this or that receiver, it starts at the los, all a defender has to do to limit a receiver is ruin route timing, will this group of 3rd year WR get better, that's as much in doubt as you saying most UFA or trades don't work out.
how many years do you want to wait for talent to develop? it is one of the reasons we are going on 15 years minus another SB, most seasons we are almost good enough, wanna play horse shoes
You love the word, "regression", don't you? I don't even think it was regression. In 2023 and even Week 1 2024, the WR's looked great. They are made for LaFleur's heavy PA scheme and thrived in running a ton of it in 2023. So what changed in 2024? Love's injuries. The Packers played A LOT more spread and drop back then they did in 2023 and then you saw the WR's struggle to win at the LOS, run proper route depths, and when some confidence issues entered the mix, you saw them struggle to catch the ball. I don't think these guys regressed as much as they were exposed as to what kind of scheme they can succeed in. I think if we get back to more under center and more PA in 2025, the WR's will magically look better, again, but I also think it's clear you need that #1 guy to succeed in any style. There is a time and place for dropback and spread and the Packers were very inefficient using it last year. A true #1 guy helps fix that big time.
why would routes change when ya do PA under center, to the shot gun? sure there are wrinkles, but IMHO the routes don't change, what changed is what I said, defenders learn what it takes to disrupt the routes, often this year we saw Love going right to left trying to find open receivers, often as all 22 showed, everyone was covered, and the route depth is a learned thing, receivers are told where the break points are dependent on pre snap and post snap of defender, this isn't rocket science, and this post is the only one I used the word regression, I'am not a regressive person, shame on you for slandering me so mercilessly
Watson was playing really well before a bad luck, non-contact injury. He isn't an "impact player" on the level of an AJ Brown but neither was he just a glorified MVS. Enough with the hate.
what????? run fast, get open, catch a ball in traffic, that's about it, if MVS had Watson hands he would be about the same player, the key point is catching the ball in traffic, which translates to his lack of route running skills causes the catching in traffic, and this isn't hate, this is about the truth, Jacobs spoke truth
There is a lot of revisionist history when it comes to our WR room. I don't know of a single poster here that wasn't optimistic about our receiver room going into the season. It didn't work out. We now need to find answers.
There was optimism because of potential and the expectation that as a group they would continue to improve. They all got worse, some significantly so. I think the lack of a veteran really hurt the group, there was no one to help them overcome challenges when defenses adapted, and help them progress their game in terms of technique and the finer points.
Now Watson is hurt and Doubs may never play again. But they regressed prior to their injuries. Reed seems like the only one of the group that has much of a future.
That's probably right, the rumors start, are spread, and ya lose the surprise factor, but who cares, surely not this fan, Garrett would be a hard pass for me, but I think it'll take 2 first and a LVN as that SI article I read said, and it would be worth it according to them, we pick late first, so our 2 first have less value than other teams in the mix, so a higher value player in return is also in play, a lot to give up, but our first haven't been that great anyway
I get nervous when talking 2 1st rounders plus because that is just so many eggs in one basket.
Myles goes down with a torn achilles and you suddenly throw 3 years of potential franchise shots away. I would love, love, love to get Garret. But there are also other ways to improve our team. We have plenty of options.
We have a ton of cash and 8 draft picks. We have 46 legit players on the roster already. Sign the kicker and it's 47. I think we can sign two key free agents and then you really just need 2 good players in the draft. Everything else is just fighting for a roster spot.
I think this draft could be a potential of trading up to get a real player if one of the higher end guys falls. I'm keeping my eye on Mykel Williams as an example. Dude is an absolute freak monster.
That scenario can happen regardless. We found a HOF-caliber LT in Bakhtiari, gave him the bag just as we were gearing up to make a SB push.... then he goes down with an unusually bad ACL tear (normally can come back after about year, but this one basically ends his career). We weren't wrong in our decision, it was just terrible luck.
Yeah not the same thing at all. The whole premise is everything has a cost.
Signing a big contract to Bakh and then not getting anything for it is far less compensation compared to 2 1st rounders plus something else plus a big contract extension.
When you trade away player and draft capital and cap you really don't have an out. Even with Bakh we had an out. Yes we had to eat the cap hit but we still had capital to get someone else and frankly recovered as a team fairly well on that deal. 3 playoff appearances in 4 years built on some really good Drafts.
My larger point is everything has a cost. Obviously there is always a line no matter what. Is that line 2 1st rounders? 3 1st rounders? I don't know what the Packers line is but I start getting skittish at 2 1st rounders plus a player plus a contract extension because there are other ways to build a team. You could sign Adams, Haason Reddick/Josh Sweat/etc. or go after CBs AND have draft capital to add to the team to get a lottery pick like Mykel Williams for the same price as Garrett.
I absolutely believe in star power. But everything has a price and there are multiple ways to build a team. If the cost is a 1st rounder, 2nd rounder and player (like Enegbare or even LVN...) I am saying yes to that. But that's my personal line.
There is a lot of revisionist history when it comes to our WR room. I don't know of a single poster here that wasn't optimistic about our receiver room going into the season. It didn't work out. We now need to find answers.
optimism is the result of prior success, it falters when players regress, and regression can be outside of the players control, defenses watch film, they study tendencies, how do I stop this or that receiver, it starts at the los, all a defender has to do to limit a receiver is ruin route timing, will this group of 3rd year WR get better, that's as much in doubt as you saying most UFA or trades don't work out.
how many years do you want to wait for talent to develop? it is one of the reasons we are going on 15 years minus another SB, most seasons we are almost good enough, wanna play horse shoes
You failed to read my last sentence.
Also, I didn't say most UFA or trades don't work out.
what was this, a hint? you obviously brought this up to say something
Steelers traded for Preston Smith and Mike Williams - Didn't make the Super Bowl
Commanders traded for Marshon Lattimore - Didn't make the Super Bowl
Ravens traded for Tre'Davious White and Diontae Johnson - Didn't make the Super Bowl
Lions traded for Za'Darius Smith - Didn't make the Super Bowl
obviously not all trades will result in a SB win, but if ya don't try when it's obvious position improvement is needed or that a generational talent is available and you don't go after it, then are you really doing your job, I don't think so.
Wolf gambled on Favre, also Reggie White, and added key talent to get us a SB, and we've seen that plenty with other teams.
this also isn't actually a knock on Guty, as it is to keep doing what he did last year, and also a couple names that could elevate this team, like Garrett or Adams.
I get nervous when talking 2 1st rounders plus because that is just so many eggs in one basket.
Myles goes down with a torn achilles and you suddenly throw 3 years of potential franchise shots away. I would love, love, love to get Garret. But there are also other ways to improve our team. We have plenty of options.
We have a ton of cash and 8 draft picks. We have 46 legit players on the roster already. Sign the kicker and it's 47. I think we can sign two key free agents and then you really just need 2 good players in the draft. Everything else is just fighting for a roster spot.
I think this draft could be a potential of trading up to get a real player if one of the higher end guys falls. I'm keeping my eye on Mykel Williams as an example. Dude is an absolute freak monster.
That scenario can happen regardless. We found a HOF-caliber LT in Bakhtiari, gave him the bag just as we were gearing up to make a SB push.... then he goes down with an unusually bad ACL tear (normally can come back after about year, but this one basically ends his career). We weren't wrong in our decision, it was just terrible luck.
Yeah not the same thing at all. The whole premise is everything has a cost.
Signing a big contract to Bakh and then not getting anything for it is far less compensation compared to 2 1st rounders plus something else plus a big contract extension.
When you trade away player and draft capital and cap you really don't have an out. Even with Bakh we had an out. Yes we had to eat the cap hit but we still had capital to get someone else and frankly recovered as a team fairly well on that deal. 3 playoff appearances in 4 years built on some really good Drafts.
My larger point is everything has a cost. Obviously there is always a line no matter what. Is that line 2 1st rounders? 3 1st rounders? I don't know what the Packers line is but I start getting skittish at 2 1st rounders plus a player plus a contract extension because there are other ways to build a team. You could sign Adams, Haason Reddick/Josh Sweat/etc. or go after CBs AND have draft capital to add to the team to get a lottery pick like Mykel Williams for the same price as Garrett.
I absolutely believe in star power. But everything has a price and there are multiple ways to build a team. If the cost is a 1st rounder, 2nd rounder and player (like Enegbare or even LVN...) I am saying yes to that. But that's my personal line.
I think this understates how dominant Garrett is. I saw some insane metrics on his pass rush impact earlier in the year, for a bad team with no offense. He's in a league of his own, and will produce even against good OL. Those other guys are simply not in the conversation with him.
“Most other nations don't allow a terrorist to be their leader.”
“... Yet so many allow their leaders to be terrorists.”—Magneto
I get nervous when talking 2 1st rounders plus because that is just so many eggs in one basket.
Myles goes down with a torn achilles and you suddenly throw 3 years of potential franchise shots away. I would love, love, love to get Garret. But there are also other ways to improve our team. We have plenty of options.
We have a ton of cash and 8 draft picks. We have 46 legit players on the roster already. Sign the kicker and it's 47. I think we can sign two key free agents and then you really just need 2 good players in the draft. Everything else is just fighting for a roster spot.
I think this draft could be a potential of trading up to get a real player if one of the higher end guys falls. I'm keeping my eye on Mykel Williams as an example. Dude is an absolute freak monster.
That scenario can happen regardless. We found a HOF-caliber LT in Bakhtiari, gave him the bag just as we were gearing up to make a SB push.... then he goes down with an unusually bad ACL tear (normally can come back after about year, but this one basically ends his career). We weren't wrong in our decision, it was just terrible luck.
Yeah not the same thing at all. The whole premise is everything has a cost.
Signing a big contract to Bakh and then not getting anything for it is far less compensation compared to 2 1st rounders plus something else plus a big contract extension.
When you trade away player and draft capital and cap you really don't have an out. Even with Bakh we had an out. Yes we had to eat the cap hit but we still had capital to get someone else and frankly recovered as a team fairly well on that deal. 3 playoff appearances in 4 years built on some really good Drafts.
My larger point is everything has a cost. Obviously there is always a line no matter what. Is that line 2 1st rounders? 3 1st rounders? I don't know what the Packers line is but I start getting skittish at 2 1st rounders plus a player plus a contract extension because there are other ways to build a team. You could sign Adams, Haason Reddick/Josh Sweat/etc. or go after CBs AND have draft capital to add to the team to get a lottery pick like Mykel Williams for the same price as Garrett.
I absolutely believe in star power. But everything has a price and there are multiple ways to build a team. If the cost is a 1st rounder, 2nd rounder and player (like Enegbare or even LVN...) I am saying yes to that. But that's my personal line.
trades big and small all come with consequences, when trading picks it's not the round, it's where within that round that pick is, so the trade value chart is used, we would have to give more because our draft picks are late in each round, you and other cap guru's know all this stuff more than me, so a team offering two low first rounders will have a huge advantage over us, and why we would have to offer a player like LVN to even hope to compete for a player like Garrett.
also minus injury, which is impossible to predict, some players stand out from others as just more reliably sound, Like McKinney or even Jacobs, or a Adams and Garrett, some players are gifted with the ability to avoid injury, it's the way they play the game, it's why coaches are leary and barely use a rookie at some positions if they lack those skills, such as line play.
we've all seen poor trade results, a keen GM makes wise choices, other make trades for Joe Johnsons and John Hadles
the 2002 MIke Sherman deals are a great case to not spend on on aging vets, only fair to point out both sides to this argument.
why would routes change when ya do PA under center, to the shot gun? sure there are wrinkles, but IMHO the routes don't change
It's night and day different. It is a ton more crossers and running "sloppy" routes into voids in the defense. There is room for error. The spread offense is far more precise and the route combinations require depths and timing to be more precise. It's not 100% the case on every play, but just speaking in general. The PA game was allowing for more free releases and running routes based on the vision and feel of the WR. Spread requires more running the route as it is drawn on paper.
Also yes I agree, there is more than one path to the goal (Lombardis). I am not in a "Garrett or bust" mindset by any means and will not be demoralized or overreact if we miss out, as many no doubt will
But I think that getting him makes achieving the goal MUCH easier, than any of the alternative routes that I can see. Unless the trade compensation required is truly ridiculous, sure, but I kind of feel like almost anything you throw at him will be worth it. Almost.
“Most other nations don't allow a terrorist to be their leader.”
“... Yet so many allow their leaders to be terrorists.”—Magneto
Also yes I agree, there is more than one path to the goal (Lombardis). I am not in a "Garrett or bust" mindset by any means and will not be demoralized or overreact if we miss out, as many no doubt will
But I think that getting him makes achieving the goal MUCH easier, than any of the alternative routes that I can see. Unless the trade compensation required is truly ridiculous, sure, but I kind of feel like almost anything you throw at him will be worth it. Almost.
Oh absolutely. I am very, very interested to see what kind of haul the Browns will actually get. Because literally every team will want him.
The Oakland Mack trade was 2 1st rounders for Mack a 2nd and a 5th.
My line of a 1st, 2nd and a player is actually more compensation than the Mack trade.
why would routes change when ya do PA under center, to the shot gun? sure there are wrinkles, but IMHO the routes don't change
It's night and day different. It is a ton more crossers and running "sloppy" routes into voids in the defense. There is room for error. The spread offense is far more precise and the route combinations require depths and timing to be more precise. It's not 100% the case on every play, but just speaking in general. The PA game was allowing for more free releases and running routes based on the vision and feel of the WR. Spread requires more running the route as it is drawn on paper.
not to argue, and I get the lack of crossing routes with spread verticals, but again, the DB's don't know play action is coming just because the QB is in the gun, they won't change coverage schemes based on what they don't know, so our receivers don't get a free release on either pass scheme.
why is it so hard for you to accept that opposing defenses learn LOS tendencies of our receivers and that, being a main reason our receivers are not at designated pitch points during Loves progression reads, and that being the main reason for our receiver regression, heck I'am convinced of it, and I fought that opinion for most of last season, blaming Love, blaming Lafleur, nope, they simply failed to get off the los, and that threw off the timing of there routes.
optimism is the result of prior success, it falters when players regress, and regression can be outside of the players control, defenses watch film, they study tendencies, how do I stop this or that receiver, it starts at the los, all a defender has to do to limit a receiver is ruin route timing, will this group of 3rd year WR get better, that's as much in doubt as you saying most UFA or trades don't work out.
how many years do you want to wait for talent to develop? it is one of the reasons we are going on 15 years minus another SB, most seasons we are almost good enough, wanna play horse shoes
You failed to read my last sentence.
Also, I didn't say most UFA or trades don't work out.
what was this, a hint? you obviously brought this up to say something
Steelers traded for Preston Smith and Mike Williams - Didn't make the Super Bowl
Commanders traded for Marshon Lattimore - Didn't make the Super Bowl
Ravens traded for Tre'Davious White and Diontae Johnson - Didn't make the Super Bowl
Lions traded for Za'Darius Smith - Didn't make the Super Bowl
First, the comment about our receivers is completely separate to the comment you highlighted above. Second, no hint, very literal, "Trades aren't the end all be all to getting to the Super Bowl." Read entire posts.
obviously not all trades will result in a SB win, but if ya don't try when it's obvious position improvement is needed or that a generational talent is available and you don't go after it, then are you really doing your job, I don't think so.
Wolf gambled on Favre, also Reggie White, and added key talent to get us a SB, and we've seen that plenty with other teams.
this also isn't actually a knock on Guty, as it is to keep doing what he did last year, and also a couple names that could elevate this team, like Garrett or Adams.
There really isn't such a thing as a generational, can't miss player in the NFL being available. It really just does not happen. Lots of examples of big free agent signings working out and lots that don't. Lots of examples of high profile trades that work out and lots that don't. Lots of examples of high draft picks that work out and lots that don't.
We can all point to trades that worked, but there are about the same number that don't. The Bears still suck, evidenced by them giving up the 32nd pick in the 2023 draft to the Steelers for Chase Claypool. Claypool played 10 games for the Bears before he was dealt to Miami for peanuts. Just 1 example.
The Eagles were the example here and they haven't made a trade for a player in quite some time. We traded for Malik Willis just this year. Corey Bojorquez in 2021. So trading for pieces or not does not guarantee success... or not. Free agents... we sign them too as evidenced by our best players on offense and defense this year. What's the biggest difference between us and the Eagles right now? They hit on their firsts and we have been below average.
Moral of the story... acquire the right players regardless of how.
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."
No way the league allows the Packers to not be involved on day 1. We would need to acquire another Round 1 selection or Garrett himself would need to walk out to announce a draft day trade!
actually, I think the league likes blockbuster trades on draft night, affords lots of conversation, and a trade still amounts to being involved, I still have doubts about Guty doing a trade like that though
Prime time sells! Even so, trades can be announced anytime and have effect for the league. This is more of a year-round sport nowadays. Social media and such.
Come on down and try some of our delicious green chili! Best in the world!
I keep seeing LVN packaged in a player/picks deal for Garrett. If there's gonna be a player included, my money says it'd be Gary.
Sure, it'd be painful...for the Packers. Not so much for the Browns. For them, it's a bargain. And Gary provides actual value in compensation rather than what many Packer fans seem to believe with LVN.
why would routes change when ya do PA under center, to the shot gun? sure there are wrinkles, but IMHO the routes don't change
It's night and day different. It is a ton more crossers and running "sloppy" routes into voids in the defense. There is room for error. The spread offense is far more precise and the route combinations require depths and timing to be more precise. It's not 100% the case on every play, but just speaking in general. The PA game was allowing for more free releases and running routes based on the vision and feel of the WR. Spread requires more running the route as it is drawn on paper.
your right, the run look forces DB's to play off, which allows a free release, once we quit using PA that changed
