Packers Huddle

cmon guys, i promise you the rest of the league thinks the Packer receivers suck, and they have for a LONG time, outside of Adams

Drj820 wrote: ↑

17 Oct 2023 12:09

cmon guys, i promise you the rest of the league thinks the Packer receivers suck, and they have for a LONG time, outside of Adams

The rest of the league literally just gave out $74 million dollars to our WR's, outside of Davante. Something isn't true just because you want it to be.

With Davante, and MVS, and Lazard, our O was awesome. We were statistically maybe the best offense in the league over that 3 year stretch and probably the best on paper. Our QB won 2 MVP's.

Not just all coincidences.

BF004 wrote: ↑

17 Oct 2023 12:16

Drj820 wrote: ↑

17 Oct 2023 12:09

cmon guys, i promise you the rest of the league thinks the Packer receivers suck, and they have for a LONG time, outside of Adams

The rest of the league literally just gave out $74 million dollars to our WR's, outside of Davante. Something isn't true just because you want it to be.

With Davante, and MVS, and Lazard, our O was awesome. We were statistically maybe the best offense in the league over that 3 year stretch and probably the best on paper. Our QB won 2 MVP's.

Not just all coincidences.

Key phrase "with Davante"

BF004 wrote: ↑

17 Oct 2023 10:50

Drj820 wrote: ↑

17 Oct 2023 08:29

Yoop wrote: ↑

17 Oct 2023 06:19

everyone knows this, but most here wont admit it, seems people here think all ya need is average players to win it all, course most of the trash receivers that have cycled through here weren't even average, minus Rodgers the last decade and we'd be called the Green Bay Lions

i think most here understand you need good players to win a title. Many just vastly overrate any player in the Green and Gold jersey. For instance, we were told Tonyan was good and he cant even get on the field in awful chicago, we were told MVS was a WR2, the list goes on and on of bonafide scrubs that were just not good enough.

See I just don't get these arguments. I feel like you both just see what you want to see.

Labrev, Skeptic and German_Panzer do not constitute 'most here'.

Again, who was raving up Tonyan? (Maybe skeptic again, lol). I think many argued he got snubbed from the Pro-Bowl, rightfully so, in '20.

And yeah, MVS is a #2 WR, he is paid like one, his impact on the game is evident, his EPA/play while on and off the field is always significant, $30 million dollars don't lie. I think others live in a fantasy land where WR1 gets 1400 yards and WR2 gets 900 yards, but that isn't reality across the league.

These are your top WR2's in the league last year, inclusive of TE's for Kelce. Although MVS is technically WR3, behind Schuster, he is still statistically the 18th best 2nd+ option in the league. I really don't even get the argument against it anymore. I think it just makes people feel better to say it. But that is what a #2 WR in this league does and he is paid accordingly and he is justifying his pay. That is what $10M gets you today on the open market.
'

image.png

Just because I was curious and don't much feel like working.

WR's on 2nd contracts from the above list (AAV = average annual value)

musclestang wrote: ↑

17 Oct 2023 11:58

He threw to Dobbs a lot in Watson wasn’t available for half a year and so far this year. It’s been more the same from him. The problem wasn’t Rodgers.

I will note (again) that the position of us so-called "Rodgers haters" has always and forever been that he was "part of the problem" not THEE PROBLEM.

Drj820 wrote: ↑

17 Oct 2023 12:29

BF004 wrote: ↑

17 Oct 2023 12:16

Drj820 wrote: ↑

17 Oct 2023 12:09

cmon guys, i promise you the rest of the league thinks the Packer receivers suck, and they have for a LONG time, outside of Adams

The rest of the league literally just gave out $74 million dollars to our WR's, outside of Davante. Something isn't true just because you want it to be.

With Davante, and MVS, and Lazard, our O was awesome. We were statistically maybe the best offense in the league over that 3 year stretch and probably the best on paper. Our QB won 2 MVP's.

Not just all coincidences.

Key phrase "with Davante"

Well yeah, MVS and Lazard probably could have been passable adding guys like Doubs and Watson, but that is still less than ideal.

Just Lazard, well duh, we have a pretty shoddy looking group.

BF004 wrote: ↑

17 Oct 2023 12:31

Drj820 wrote: ↑

17 Oct 2023 12:29

BF004 wrote: ↑

17 Oct 2023 12:16

The rest of the league literally just gave out $74 million dollars to our WR's, outside of Davante. Something isn't true just because you want it to be.

With Davante, and MVS, and Lazard, our O was awesome. We were statistically maybe the best offense in the league over that 3 year stretch and probably the best on paper. Our QB won 2 MVP's.

Not just all coincidences.

Key phrase "with Davante"

Well yeah, MVS and Lazard probably could have been passable adding guys like Doubs and Watson, but that is still less than ideal.

Just Lazard, well duh, we have a pretty shoddy looking group.

In my original post, I said "outside of Adams". Gotta remember, Chiefs traded for Kadarius Toney because MVS wasnt what they were hoping he would be.

BF004 wrote: ↑

17 Oct 2023 12:16

Drj820 wrote: ↑

17 Oct 2023 12:09

cmon guys, i promise you the rest of the league thinks the Packer receivers suck, and they have for a LONG time, outside of Adams

The rest of the league literally just gave out $74 million dollars to our WR's, outside of Davante. Something isn't true just because you want it to be.

With Davante, and MVS, and Lazard, our O was awesome. We were statistically maybe the best offense in the league over that 3 year stretch and probably the best on paper. Our QB won 2 MVP's.

Not just all coincidences.

ya know whats sad BF, I think you might believe this , teams didn't even double MVS till his 3rd season, and how many times do you need to see Lazard trip over his own two feet for you to realize, the Jets brought him in because of chemistry with Rodgers and MVS still barely catches 50% of targeted throws and he's only been thrown to about a Doz times this season, KC bought his speed, there is not much more to MVS then just that.

put Watson, or Reed, or Doubs with Adams and Rodgers, then OK, now you have the potential for a t5op 10 receiver group.

come on man, I know your a better judge of prime beef then that

Drj820 wrote: ↑

17 Oct 2023 12:36

BF004 wrote: ↑

17 Oct 2023 12:31

Drj820 wrote: ↑

17 Oct 2023 12:29

Key phrase "with Davante"

Well yeah, MVS and Lazard probably could have been passable adding guys like Doubs and Watson, but that is still less than ideal.

Just Lazard, well duh, we have a pretty shoddy looking group.

In my original post, I said "outside of Adams". Gotta remember, Chiefs traded for Kadarius Toney because MVS wasnt what they were hoping he would be.

Drj820 wrote: ↑

17 Oct 2023 12:09

cmon guys, i promise you the rest of the league thinks the Packer receivers suck, and they have for a LONG time, outside of Adams

My response:

BF004 wrote: ↑

17 Oct 2023 12:16

The rest of the league literally just gave out $74 million dollars to our WR's, outside of Davante.

Seems like we were on the same page.


And I think MVS was pretty much exactly what they thought he was going to be. Outside high end deep play threat who can occupy safeties. That's what they paid him for, thats what he is/was doing. They never paid him to be a 100 catch 1400 yard guy, those guys go for 20+. Toney was an additional slot/gadget weapon. If anything, I think because Skyy Moore isn't who they hoped he could be. He was a good add and played a rather large roll in them winning the Super Bowl.

It is important to have a lot of deep weapons. Also why I think even with Adams, MVS, and Lazard, there was always hope we could add another playmaker. I sure always wanted one. Maybe even someone exactly like Toney, who could have just added something so different over a guy like Cobb.

Yoop wrote: ↑

17 Oct 2023 12:46

BF004 wrote: ↑

17 Oct 2023 12:16

Drj820 wrote: ↑

17 Oct 2023 12:09

cmon guys, i promise you the rest of the league thinks the Packer receivers suck, and they have for a LONG time, outside of Adams

The rest of the league literally just gave out $74 million dollars to our WR's, outside of Davante. Something isn't true just because you want it to be.

With Davante, and MVS, and Lazard, our O was awesome. We were statistically maybe the best offense in the league over that 3 year stretch and probably the best on paper. Our QB won 2 MVP's.

Not just all coincidences.

ya know whats sad BF, I think you might believe this , teams didn't even double MVS till his 3rd season, and how many times do you need to see Lazard trip over his own two feet for you to realize, the Jets brought him in because of chemistry with Rodgers and MVS still barely catches 50% of targeted throws and he's only been thrown to about a Doz times this season, KC bought his speed, there is not much more to MVS then just that.

put Watson, or Reed, or Doubs with Adams and Rodgers, then OK, now you have the potential for a t5op 10 receiver group.

come on man, I know your a better judge of prime beef then that

So Rodgers was only bad because we had poor talent around him. So when he wins 2 MVP's, wouldn't that mean .......


But hey, you guys go on thinking cause they weren't and never will be 100/1200 yard receivers, that others are living in a fantasy world for thinking they are average level NFL starters. I literally just provided several facts and statistics backing up my point. Your whole rebuttal is, 'But I really really think this and want it to be true'.

BF004 wrote: ↑

17 Oct 2023 12:51

Yoop wrote: ↑

17 Oct 2023 12:46

BF004 wrote: ↑

17 Oct 2023 12:16

The rest of the league literally just gave out $74 million dollars to our WR's, outside of Davante. Something isn't true just because you want it to be.

With Davante, and MVS, and Lazard, our O was awesome. We were statistically maybe the best offense in the league over that 3 year stretch and probably the best on paper. Our QB won 2 MVP's.

Not just all coincidences.

ya know whats sad BF, I think you might believe this , teams didn't even double MVS till his 3rd season, and how many times do you need to see Lazard trip over his own two feet for you to realize, the Jets brought him in because of chemistry with Rodgers and MVS still barely catches 50% of targeted throws and he's only been thrown to about a Doz times this season, KC bought his speed, there is not much more to MVS then just that.

put Watson, or Reed, or Doubs with Adams and Rodgers, then OK, now you have the potential for a t5op 10 receiver group.

come on man, I know your a better judge of prime beef then that

So Rodgers was only bad because we had poor talent around him. So when he wins 2 MVP's, wouldn't that mean .......


But hey, you guys go on thinking cause they weren't and never will be 100/1200 yard receivers, that others are living in a fantasy world for thinking they are average level NFL starters. I literally just provided several facts and statistics backing up my point. Your whole rebuttal is, 'But I really really think this and want it to be true'.

in 2023:
Malik Taylor is out of the league
Lazard is averaging 35 yards a game
ESB has played in 2 games this year, averaging 10 yards a game
MVS has 116 total yards, averaging 16 yards a game
Juwann Winfree has 0 catches
Amari Rodgers has 0 yards and 0 catches
Cobb has 20 total yards
Darrius Shepherd is out of the league

Im sorry, but the second these guys arent thrown perfect balls by Aaron Rodgers, they are instantly some of the leagues worst receivers. They all suck. Production numbers dont lie.

BF004 wrote: ↑

17 Oct 2023 12:51

Yoop wrote: ↑

17 Oct 2023 12:46

BF004 wrote: ↑

17 Oct 2023 12:16

The rest of the league literally just gave out $74 million dollars to our WR's, outside of Davante. Something isn't true just because you want it to be.

With Davante, and MVS, and Lazard, our O was awesome. We were statistically maybe the best offense in the league over that 3 year stretch and probably the best on paper. Our QB won 2 MVP's.

Not just all coincidences.

ya know whats sad BF, I think you might believe this , teams didn't even double MVS till his 3rd season, and how many times do you need to see Lazard trip over his own two feet for you to realize, the Jets brought him in because of chemistry with Rodgers and MVS still barely catches 50% of targeted throws and he's only been thrown to about a Doz times this season, KC bought his speed, there is not much more to MVS then just that.

put Watson, or Reed, or Doubs with Adams and Rodgers, then OK, now you have the potential for a t5op 10 receiver group.

come on man, I know your a better judge of prime beef then that

So Rodgers was only bad because we had poor talent around him. So when he wins 2 MVP's, wouldn't that mean .......


But hey, you guys go on thinking cause they weren't and never will be 100/1200 yard receivers, that others are living in a fantasy world for thinking they are average level NFL starters. I literally just provided several facts and statistics backing up my point. Your whole rebuttal is, 'But I really really think this and want it to be true'.

well MVP's are a personal award, so ya could say Rodgers did very well in spite of supporting cast when winning those.

your right, those are my opinions, and those stats back it up, if all you want from your #2 is 680 yrd and play mostly a decoy roll, then fine, but don't expect me to support that, I been spoiled by better then that, and so have you.

Drj820 wrote: ↑

17 Oct 2023 13:06

BF004 wrote: ↑

17 Oct 2023 12:51

Yoop wrote: ↑

17 Oct 2023 12:46

ya know whats sad BF, I think you might believe this , teams didn't even double MVS till his 3rd season, and how many times do you need to see Lazard trip over his own two feet for you to realize, the Jets brought him in because of chemistry with Rodgers and MVS still barely catches 50% of targeted throws and he's only been thrown to about a Doz times this season, KC bought his speed, there is not much more to MVS then just that.

put Watson, or Reed, or Doubs with Adams and Rodgers, then OK, now you have the potential for a t5op 10 receiver group.

come on man, I know your a better judge of prime beef then that

So Rodgers was only bad because we had poor talent around him. So when he wins 2 MVP's, wouldn't that mean .......


But hey, you guys go on thinking cause they weren't and never will be 100/1200 yard receivers, that others are living in a fantasy world for thinking they are average level NFL starters. I literally just provided several facts and statistics backing up my point. Your whole rebuttal is, 'But I really really think this and want it to be true'.

in 2023:
Malik Taylor is out of the league
Lazard is averaging 35 yards a game
ESB has played in 2 games this year, averaging 10 yards a game
MVS has 116 total yards, averaging 16 yards a game
Juwann Winfree has 0 catches
Amari Rodgers has 0 yards and 0 catches
Cobb has 20 total yards
Darrius Shepherd is out of the league

Im sorry, but the second these guys arent thrown perfect balls by Aaron Rodgers, they are instantly some of the leagues worst receivers. They all suck. Production numbers dont lie.

most defenses are using some sort of prevent, so we are seeing a decline with receiver numbers, still you nailed it, take Rodgers out of the equation and these so called average receivers become pond scum, only the guys like Adams put up great numbers no matter who the QB is.

Drj820 wrote: ↑

17 Oct 2023 13:06

BF004 wrote: ↑

17 Oct 2023 12:51

Yoop wrote: ↑

17 Oct 2023 12:46

ya know whats sad BF, I think you might believe this , teams didn't even double MVS till his 3rd season, and how many times do you need to see Lazard trip over his own two feet for you to realize, the Jets brought him in because of chemistry with Rodgers and MVS still barely catches 50% of targeted throws and he's only been thrown to about a Doz times this season, KC bought his speed, there is not much more to MVS then just that.

put Watson, or Reed, or Doubs with Adams and Rodgers, then OK, now you have the potential for a t5op 10 receiver group.

come on man, I know your a better judge of prime beef then that

So Rodgers was only bad because we had poor talent around him. So when he wins 2 MVP's, wouldn't that mean .......


But hey, you guys go on thinking cause they weren't and never will be 100/1200 yard receivers, that others are living in a fantasy world for thinking they are average level NFL starters. I literally just provided several facts and statistics backing up my point. Your whole rebuttal is, 'But I really really think this and want it to be true'.

in 2023:
Malik Taylor is out of the league
Lazard is averaging 35 yards a game
ESB has played in 2 games this year, averaging 10 yards a game
MVS has 116 total yards, averaging 16 yards a game
Juwann Winfree has 0 catches
Amari Rodgers has 0 yards and 0 catches
Cobb has 20 total yards
Darrius Shepherd is out of the league

Im sorry, but the second these guys arent thrown perfect balls by Aaron Rodgers, they are instantly some of the leagues worst receivers. They all suck. Production numbers dont lie.

Won't fight you on any of the other guys, that's for sure. I was always 100% for adding more WR's via draft and trade pretty much every single year since like 2016.

Lazard and MVS are both off to slow starts, should probably never use such a small sample size to draw such heavy conclusions. Both are niche receivers who by pretty much all metrics (short of looking at a 5 game sample size) are very average NFL starters. Certainly aren't pond scum as yoop just said. That is just narrative needing to be true. But they are what they are, they make your team better when used appropriately and aren't expected to be the guy. That is still very valuable. As evidenced by the $74 million dollars they got. But they are not #1 WR's and no one will ever think that. But you don't have the best offense in the NFL and 2 MVPs if you are playing garbage there. We have seen Rodgers with very poor and very good weapons. He wins MVP's when he has them.

Yoop wrote: ↑

17 Oct 2023 13:11

your right, those are my opinions, and those stats back it up, if all you want from your #2 is 680 yrd and play mostly a decoy roll, then fine, but don't expect me to support that, I been spoiled by better then that, and so have you.

What possible stats are backing up your opinion?


And yes, you are absolutely right to want more than 680 yards from your #2 WR. We'd all like more, we should all hope we can get more. But using these said stats we were just talking about, he was the 18th most productive 2nd+ weapon last year in the league. That is neither a plus nor a negative, that is right smack dab in the middle average level 2nd WR option.

And yes, we have been very spoiled, to they point where we think $74 million worth of receivers are pond scum. It is really really really hard to find good WRs. Bares would pay $20 million+ a year if they could get a WR who can regularly get 680 yards.

But alright, good day to you all. Had a nice easy light day and decided to partake in some forumry.

Nice chat, but floors all yours yoop and Dr. Welcome to get in your last words (incorrect as they may be) on the topic.

musclestang wrote: ↑

17 Oct 2023 11:58

He threw to Dobbs a lot

And publicly called to "cut reps" from him (did not specifically name him, but it was obvious in-context that he was referring to Doubs).

That was one of the stupidest things I have ever heard him say. And then throw to who, Aaron? Sammy Watkins?? Jeff Cotton???

BF004 wrote: ↑

17 Oct 2023 13:42

But alright, good day to you all. Had a nice easy light day and decided to partake in some forumry.

Nice chat, but floors all yours yoop and Dr. Welcome to get in your last words (incorrect as they may be) on the topic.

Sorry we dont think Malik Taylor, Juwann Winfrey, or ESB are good football players. Or Alan Lazard for that matter. Have a nice day.

BF004 wrote: ↑

17 Oct 2023 13:37

And yes, we have been very spoiled

No kidding
The MM Packers were loaded at WR and they won their match-ups by being better than the opponents' CBs 1-5.
Our # 3 / 4 WR was better than their # 3 /4 CB for example

The MLF Packers win more with scheme, play design and play action so they don't necessarily NEED to be better 1-5.
(It surely helps !) But this offense/scheme isn't as match-up dependent as the loaded WR rooms of the past. I'd also note that many teams will use their # 2 CB + Safety help when doubling Watson or other # 1 WRs; so Doubs and Reed might have to beat the #1 CB and that's a stiff test for a young WR. Accruing 680 yds vs # 1 CBs is nothing to sneeze at.

BF004 wrote: ↑

17 Oct 2023 13:37

Yoop wrote: ↑

17 Oct 2023 13:11

your right, those are my opinions, and those stats back it up, if all you want from your #2 is 680 yrd and play mostly a decoy roll, then fine, but don't expect me to support that, I been spoiled by better then that, and so have you.

What possible stats are backing up your opinion?


And yes, you are absolutely right to want more than 680 yards from your #2 WR. We'd all like more, we should all hope we can get more. But using these said stats we were just talking about, he was the 18th most productive 2nd+ weapon last year in the league. That is neither a plus nor a negative, that is right smack dab in the middle average level 2nd WR option.

And yes, we have been very spoiled, to they point where we think $74 million worth of receivers are pond scum. It is really really really hard to find good WRs. Bares would pay $20 million+ a year if they could get a WR who can regularly get 680 yards.

sorry, I don't understand for anyone to accept that because of those stats we should accept that as the bench mark for a #2, I know I don't, I want a offense with 2 receivers that go over a 1000 yrds, in fact I expect that every season, that use to be normal.

you watched the decline of the position to the point of that being a impossibility, and now it seem you don't expect it, or it's normal if it never happens again, that to me is the same as accepting mediocrity.

not sure what your so upset about, your trying to convince us that we had better receivers then me and others felt we did have, and after I've complained about it since 2016 why would you think my opinion has changed?

pond scum was a over board remark to show I strongly disagreed, again you act as though if a player like MVS or Lazard make 10 mil. it means there better then what???? a strong #3 receiver.

why can't you just accept them for what they are? Lazard is a throw blanket for Rodgers and MVS is a field stretcher for Mahomes, and neither will ever be better then they are today.

again, not trying to insult, but stats don't define anything, stats are just a reference, KC i8s short on receiver talent, what your seeing from KC is a depleted receiver core, Reid even said as much, and still MVS has what 7 receptions????, Lazard a couple?