Packers Huddle

Acrobat wrote: ↑

17 Jul 2023 16:24

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑

17 Jul 2023 16:03

Acrobat wrote: ↑

17 Jul 2023 13:24

I think what happened was that Gutey saw quite a few holes when he started his tenure, and felt so good about the later round WR's he drafted that he decided to give them time to develop. In hindsight, Ted should have probably pulled the trigger in 2016 on at least a 2nd round WR and then Gutey probably again in 2019 since it looked like MVS was the only one from that group that was going to produce.

So many moving parts though. Lazard obviously became a key player in 2019 as well as MVS. So sometimes you have to play to your surroundings too as in 2022, Lazard and MVS along with Tonyan at TE looked like awesome role players along side one of the best WR's in the game, so it was easier to focus on other positions of need in Free Agency and the draft.

This is exactly what happened. He took 3 WRs in the mid to late rounds. I don’t take problem with this. The team was in desperate need of an influx of youth at the position. It was clear Moore sucked from day one. Both MVS and ESB showed promise wary but by the end of year 2 they were also apparent they were one and done contract guys.

The 2019 draft came and went without any WRs drafted to develop. The 2020 draft came and went and no WRs were drafted. In 2021 the teams waits to take Amari Rodgers and I’m sorry but if you haven’t done dick all at the WR position in 3 drafts you better damn well hit here and they didn’t. Then the team front office has the confused pikachu face meme the following year when the passing game goes to &%$@ after trading Adams and having rookies and trash on the field running routes.

We just didn't hit on the draft picks unfortunately, other than MVS. I know we didn't resign him, but he was still a good contributor. Again, we were all happy with our WR core in 2020 and 2021 when Rodgers was winning MVP's. 2022 was the only season where our WR group was lacking due to the age of the group and obviously we lost Adams, one of the best WR's in the game.

Were we happy with the receivers. Because every mock you saw from posters or pros you had receivers in one of the top 2 rounds.

I was never much for one in the first unless they were worth moving up for or fell but I believed strongly they needed to be targeting the position in the 2nd round to develop the next man up. Sure enough we ended up with what happens when you manage a roster like a moron.

So what moronic things did the Eagles do?

We already know their coach is a cry baby like Matt Lafluer so he will never be a winner. But the front office also can't be off the hook. Yes they hired a cry baby but they also built a roster so stupidly it too lost a SB by a play. And don't even get me started on those loser Bengals.

morons.

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑

17 Jul 2023 20:08

Acrobat wrote: ↑

17 Jul 2023 16:24

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑

17 Jul 2023 16:03

This is exactly what happened. He took 3 WRs in the mid to late rounds. I don’t take problem with this. The team was in desperate need of an influx of youth at the position. It was clear Moore sucked from day one. Both MVS and ESB showed promise wary but by the end of year 2 they were also apparent they were one and done contract guys.

The 2019 draft came and went without any WRs drafted to develop. The 2020 draft came and went and no WRs were drafted. In 2021 the teams waits to take Amari Rodgers and I’m sorry but if you haven’t done dick all at the WR position in 3 drafts you better damn well hit here and they didn’t. Then the team front office has the confused pikachu face meme the following year when the passing game goes to &%$@ after trading Adams and having rookies and trash on the field running routes.

We just didn't hit on the draft picks unfortunately, other than MVS. I know we didn't resign him, but he was still a good contributor. Again, we were all happy with our WR core in 2020 and 2021 when Rodgers was winning MVP's. 2022 was the only season where our WR group was lacking due to the age of the group and obviously we lost Adams, one of the best WR's in the game.

Were we happy with the receivers. Because every mock you saw from posters or pros you had receivers in one of the top 2 rounds.

I was never much for one in the first unless they were worth moving up for or fell but I believed strongly they needed to be targeting the position in the 2nd round to develop the next man up. Sure enough we ended up with what happens when you manage a roster like a moron.

This ill agree with. Reminds of what we did with safeties in like 2010-2013. Just kept doing nothing, then you ended up with MD Jennings eventually starting.

Was a joke we never addressed WR from ~2019-2022, other than a bust slot WR Rodgers.

BF004 wrote: ↑

18 Jul 2023 06:52

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑

17 Jul 2023 20:08

Acrobat wrote: ↑

17 Jul 2023 16:24

We just didn't hit on the draft picks unfortunately, other than MVS. I know we didn't resign him, but he was still a good contributor. Again, we were all happy with our WR core in 2020 and 2021 when Rodgers was winning MVP's. 2022 was the only season where our WR group was lacking due to the age of the group and obviously we lost Adams, one of the best WR's in the game.

Were we happy with the receivers. Because every mock you saw from posters or pros you had receivers in one of the top 2 rounds.

I was never much for one in the first unless they were worth moving up for or fell but I believed strongly they needed to be targeting the position in the 2nd round to develop the next man up. Sure enough we ended up with what happens when you manage a roster like a moron.

This ill agree with. Reminds of what we did with safeties in like 2010-2013. Just kept doing nothing, then you ended up with MD Jennings eventually starting.

Was a joke we never addressed WR from ~2019-2022, other than a bust slot WR Rodgers.

Makes you wonder if the front office and coaches overrated our WR in their self scouting a bit. And I do wonder if they were truly shocked that Adams left. Even last year's WR core looks significantly better when you add a top 3 WR to it. Imagine a Christian Watson/Davante Adams combo towards the end of last season!

BF004 wrote: ↑

18 Jul 2023 06:52

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑

17 Jul 2023 20:08

Acrobat wrote: ↑

17 Jul 2023 16:24

We just didn't hit on the draft picks unfortunately, other than MVS. I know we didn't resign him, but he was still a good contributor. Again, we were all happy with our WR core in 2020 and 2021 when Rodgers was winning MVP's. 2022 was the only season where our WR group was lacking due to the age of the group and obviously we lost Adams, one of the best WR's in the game.

Were we happy with the receivers. Because every mock you saw from posters or pros you had receivers in one of the top 2 rounds.

I was never much for one in the first unless they were worth moving up for or fell but I believed strongly they needed to be targeting the position in the 2nd round to develop the next man up. Sure enough we ended up with what happens when you manage a roster like a moron.

This ill agree with. Reminds of what we did with safeties in like 2010-2013. Just kept doing nothing, then you ended up with MD Jennings eventually starting.

Was a joke we never addressed WR from ~2019-2022, other than a bust slot WR Rodgers.

when it comes to the 2018 draft, the movie Charlie Wilsons War comes to mind with Tom Hanks telling the prime minister of Afganistan that he doubled the money to support there fight against the Russians, and was asked by the defense minister if that was some sort of joke, I think the reason I called Brown, MVS, ???? that other one, the 3 stooges relates a lot to that movie, as was doubling that budget, those 3 would not help the team in 2018 beat anyone.

we talk here all the time about a drafted player needing a year, some maybe even 3 years of coaching up, after what we saw in 2017 and 18 to me we should have started replacing Cobb and Nelson in 2016.

Yoop wrote: ↑

18 Jul 2023 08:26

BF004 wrote: ↑

18 Jul 2023 06:52

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑

17 Jul 2023 20:08

Were we happy with the receivers. Because every mock you saw from posters or pros you had receivers in one of the top 2 rounds.

I was never much for one in the first unless they were worth moving up for or fell but I believed strongly they needed to be targeting the position in the 2nd round to develop the next man up. Sure enough we ended up with what happens when you manage a roster like a moron.

This ill agree with. Reminds of what we did with safeties in like 2010-2013. Just kept doing nothing, then you ended up with MD Jennings eventually starting.

Was a joke we never addressed WR from ~2019-2022, other than a bust slot WR Rodgers.

when it comes to the 2018 draft, the movie Charlie Wilsons War comes to mind with Tom Hanks telling the prime minister of Afganistan that he doubled the money to support there fight against the Russians, and was asked by the defense minister if that was some sort of joke, I think the reason I called Brown, MVS, ???? that other one, the 3 stooges relates a lot to that movie, as was doubling that budget, those 3 would not help the team in 2018 beat anyone.

we talk here all the time about a drafted player needing a year, some maybe even 3 years of coaching up, after what we saw in 2017 and 18 to me we should have started replacing Cobb and Nelson in 2016.

I do wonder if Ted really thought he could hit the jackpot in the later rounds. Maybe outsmarted himself a bit. Because he took Yancey, Dupree, and Trevor Davis in 2016/2017 drafts. Obviously, none of them worked out. And then Gutey's 2018 only produced one quality player out of the 3. So basically went 1 for 6 on WR's in those drafts.

everyone hear knows damn well that our FO neglected the WR position till the 2022 draft

No. We didn't neglect the position. We addressed it, on many occasions in the past six years, and a lot more than KC.

We simply didn't address it the way that TT did in his early years, and did not have the same success. 'Not to say it didn't *have* success, because it did, just not success to the tune of the amazing groups of WRs as we have had in some years.

Yet the WRs were good enough for our QB to put up MVP-caliber production. Twice. So how bad was it, really?

Report: Rodgers's hand signals are too difficult for the Jets WR coach to pick up, such that said coach has given up trying to figure it out and has told his WRs that they are on their own with figuring them out.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nfl/je ... 0298&ei=14

just saw this from twit concerning RB's not being extended from Andrew Brandt

In every other position in football -- let alone in all sports and business -- past productivity is an indicator of future value.
With running backs, that is not the case.
Past productivity, especially with high usage, detracts from future projected value.
A true anomaly.

it wouldn't allow me to bring a link.

I for one am sure glad we resigned Jones, I'am sold now on platooning even the very best RB's in hopes of maximizing there longevity, we have and will continue to pay receivers more simply because of big play ability, however when ya look at yards accrued after the season, Jones is right up there with receivers like Adams, and uses 5 times as much clock doing it, a great RB can keep a opposing offense on the sidelines, to me that is worth more then 10 mil a season.

This WR conversation just kills me.

The WR room was completely serviceable, if not above average, up until 2022. Adams leaving obviously set the room back and, yes, the lack of depth beyond Adams was exposed. But for Pete's sake, with Adams this offense, and WR position in particular, were plenty talented enough to compete for a championship.

This idea that some posters keep pushing, that you need multiple top players at the WR position to compete, is hogwash. You need exactly the type of roster (I'll concede 2022 roster) that was fielded - a great QB, a skilled and versatile RB, and no. 1 WR with other serviceable WR/TE/RB options to keep the offense moving - BUT you also need those elite players to perform at money time. Ours didn't, and they were summarily bounced from play.

Yes, you don't win championships with the likes of MVS, EQSB, and Whitewater Jesus leading the way. That wasn't happening, tho, over multiple years as some of you seem to be arguing. You need superstars, yes, and you need those superstars to play like superstars when it counts. They didn't. The no. 3 WR had absolutely nothing to do with those failures.

Labrev wrote: ↑

18 Jul 2023 08:59

everyone hear knows damn well that our FO neglected the WR position till the 2022 draft

No. We didn't neglect the position. We addressed it, on many occasions in the past six years, and a lot more than KC.

We simply didn't address it the way that TT did in his early years, and did not have the same success. 'Not to say it didn't *have* success, because it did, just not success to the tune of the amazing groups of WRs as we have had in some years.

Yet the WRs were good enough for our QB to put up MVP-caliber production. Twice. So how bad was it, really?

against the more vanilla defenses in the regular season, but in the PO's no more vanilla, instead it's exotic tootie fruity/with sprinkles.

getting over the top required more then one successful (and I call MVS successful with reservations) hit in 6 try's from players that need years of coaching up, that is failure with a capitol F.

after what we saw in 2017 we needed improvement in 2018 at the position, and what did we get? the 3 stooges, I call them that because they where not the answer I expected, and shouldn't have been yours either

APB wrote: ↑

18 Jul 2023 09:21

This WR conversation just kills me.

The WR room was completely serviceable, if not above average, up until 2022. Adams leaving obviously set the room back and, yes, the lack of depth beyond Adams was exposed. But for Pete's sake, with Adams this offense, and WR position in particular, were plenty talented enough to compete for a championship.

This idea that some posters keep pushing, that you need multiple top players at the WR position to compete, is hogwash. You need exactly the type of roster (I'll concede 2022 roster) that was fielded - a great QB, a skilled and versatile RB, and no. 1 WR with other serviceable WR/TE/RB options to keep the offense moving - BUT you also need those elite players to perform at money time. Ours didn't, and they were summarily bounced from play.

Yes, you don't win championships with the likes of MVS, EQSB, and Whitewater Jesus leading the way. That wasn't happening, tho, over multiple years as some of you seem to be arguing. You need superstars, yes, and you need those superstars to play like superstars when it counts. They didn't. The no. 3 WR had absolutely nothing to do with those failures.

I see what you're saying but the only WR on that 2022 roster that I could in good faith describe as serviceable, other than Adams, was Lazard. And I mean that more as a #3 or #4. It's a stretch to say that he was a serviceable #2 IMO. Regarding star power on a roster, I think fans and even front offices too often are distracted by it. I always look back at those Patriots Super Bowl teams and how they seemed to ironically lack superstar players relative to other Super Bowl winning rosters. It's like they understood that rosters don't need to be flooded with superstars, but they do need to not be incompetent anywhere. That 2022 Packers roster, unfortunately, suffered from incompetence at WR IMO and it was exposed by a good defense in the playoffs.

APB wrote: ↑

18 Jul 2023 09:21

This WR conversation just kills me.

The WR room was completely serviceable, if not above average, up until 2022. Adams leaving obviously set the room back and, yes, the lack of depth beyond Adams was exposed. But for Pete's sake, with Adams this offense, and WR position in particular, were plenty talented enough to compete for a championship.

This idea that some posters keep pushing, that you need multiple top players at the WR position to compete, is hogwash. You need exactly the type of roster (I'll concede 2022 roster) that was fielded - a great QB, a skilled and versatile RB, and no. 1 WR with other serviceable WR/TE/RB options to keep the offense moving - BUT you also need those elite players to perform at money time. Ours didn't, and they were summarily bounced from play.

Yes, you don't win championships with the likes of MVS, EQSB, and Whitewater Jesus leading the way. That wasn't happening, tho, over multiple years as some of you seem to be arguing. You need superstars, yes, and you need those superstars to play like superstars when it counts. They didn't. The no. 3 WR had absolutely nothing to do with those failures.

Yep. I think we all concede the 2022 roster, and I know I said this earlier, but I really think the Packers thought Adams was staying. Also, there was some bad luck in there too. We had a lot of draft picks that simply didn't pan out. In the past, some of those 4th, 5th, 6th round picks would turn into something good, and for the most part, they just didn't during that span.

APB wrote: ↑

18 Jul 2023 09:21

This WR conversation just kills me.

The WR room was completely serviceable, if not above average, up until 2022. Adams leaving obviously set the room back and, yes, the lack of depth beyond Adams was exposed. But for Pete's sake, with Adams this offense, and WR position in particular, were plenty talented enough to compete for a championship.

This idea that some posters keep pushing, that you need multiple top players at the WR position to compete, is hogwash. You need exactly the type of roster (I'll concede 2022 roster) that was fielded - a great QB, a skilled and versatile RB, and no. 1 WR with other serviceable WR/TE/RB options to keep the offense moving - BUT you also need those elite players to perform at money time. Ours didn't, and they were summarily bounced from play.

Yes, you don't win championships with the likes of MVS, EQSB, and Whitewater Jesus leading the way. That wasn't happening, tho, over multiple years as some of you seem to be arguing. You need superstars, yes, and you need those superstars to play like superstars when it counts. They didn't. The no. 3 WR had absolutely nothing to do with those failures.

I disagree for the reason I just mentioned, anyone that thinks you can win PO games as you did during the regular season is not accepting or admitting that defenses tend to dial up play and abilities in play off games.

It's a big reason why teams try and add skill position talent in the run up to the play offs, it's all about doing stuff defenses have trouble preparing for or have no film on, and this happens with play off bound teams every season, no one would spend usually a lot of money doing so if it didn't give them a perceived advantage.

ONE great receiver isn't enough, and Jones may have had 130 yrds in the 2020 PO game, while Adams had about 80 yrd, but Jones got over half those yrds on one play, and we couldn't even get a 3 pt FG, the reason ya need better depth at WR is because of mistakes, why you expect our top 3 players to play mistake free ball is to me frankly insane thinking, it don't happen, in that PO game we had 6 or 7 dropped passes, to much? yes, but I think the average is 4, so not outlandish over the average, but some drops are more costly then others, like the TD pass to Adams that ended up on the grass.

when ya look at SF, Tampa etc they make about the same number of mistakes, difference is they have another stud or two that make up for it, and we didn't.

I know it's fashionable to blame Rodgers, I admit he's part of the problem, but our GM sure didn't help him out

Yoop wrote: ↑

18 Jul 2023 09:28

against the more vanilla defenses in the regular season, but in the PO's no more vanilla, instead it's exotic tootie fruity/with sprinkles.

Oh now you care about playoff wins funny, when I express the same desire, you lecture me about how wanting to win is a bad attitude!

getting over the top required more then one successful (and I call MVS successful with reservations) hit in 6 try's

Or maybe it didn't. MVS alone could arguably have saved us from both those playoff losses.

In 2020, Tampa double- and tripled-covered Adams all game. They had no answer for MVS though. Yes, yes, you don't like that MVS because "catch rate"-nonsense, and "look at the SuperBowl game" you say.

Sure, some games, he is MIA. He was not MIA that day. Throw just a few more passes his way, I think we win that game, not unlike how he was a big part of KC's AFCCG win. When he's the guy getting open, then for the love of god, throw to him. He was criminally underused that game.

In the 2021 SF, he was hurt, and we missed him, because our O couldn't get anything going after the Lewis fumble. Having MVS -or- playing Nijman at LT, alone, I think, would have been enough to change that outcome.

and what did we get? the 3 stooges, I call them that because they where not the answer I expected, and shouldn't have been yours either

My expectations are mine thank you very much. As a matter of fact, if MY expectations are being entertained...

My ideal at WR = 1 do-it-all player, 1 vertical threat guy, 1 big possession target, 1 shifty/savvy slot guy, and some adequate depth. A diverse collection of different skill-sets all of which are useful in various different situations.

In 2020, we had all of those minus the slot. In 2021, we *literally* had all of those things. For that matter, KC(!) had this sort of set-up last year.


And in both years, what we had was good enough for our QB to have an MVP-caliber season. So I ask again, how bad was it really?

Yoop wrote: ↑

18 Jul 2023 09:52

APB wrote: ↑

18 Jul 2023 09:21

This WR conversation just kills me.

The WR room was completely serviceable, if not above average, up until 2022. Adams leaving obviously set the room back and, yes, the lack of depth beyond Adams was exposed. But for Pete's sake, with Adams this offense, and WR position in particular, were plenty talented enough to compete for a championship.

This idea that some posters keep pushing, that you need multiple top players at the WR position to compete, is hogwash. You need exactly the type of roster (I'll concede 2022 roster) that was fielded - a great QB, a skilled and versatile RB, and no. 1 WR with other serviceable WR/TE/RB options to keep the offense moving - BUT you also need those elite players to perform at money time. Ours didn't, and they were summarily bounced from play.

Yes, you don't win championships with the likes of MVS, EQSB, and Whitewater Jesus leading the way. That wasn't happening, tho, over multiple years as some of you seem to be arguing. You need superstars, yes, and you need those superstars to play like superstars when it counts. They didn't. The no. 3 WR had absolutely nothing to do with those failures.

when ya look at SF, Tampa etc they make about the same number of mistakes, difference is they have another stud or two that make up for it, and we didn't.

I know it's fashionable to blame Rodgers, I admit he's part of the problem, but our GM sure didn't help him out

SF is a loser team led by a bunch of morons. The Packers have 2 SB rings since the 9ers last ring.

But in all seriousness. What is the obsession of wanting to be like other teams when the Packers have effectively the same resume in the same time frame?

TB is fair. They at least have a ring. But PHI and SF results would Garner the same bickering on this forum that the roster wasn't enough because the team lost by one play.

go pak go wrote: ↑

18 Jul 2023 10:25

Yoop wrote: ↑

18 Jul 2023 09:52

APB wrote: ↑

18 Jul 2023 09:21

This WR conversation just kills me.

The WR room was completely serviceable, if not above average, up until 2022. Adams leaving obviously set the room back and, yes, the lack of depth beyond Adams was exposed. But for Pete's sake, with Adams this offense, and WR position in particular, were plenty talented enough to compete for a championship.

This idea that some posters keep pushing, that you need multiple top players at the WR position to compete, is hogwash. You need exactly the type of roster (I'll concede 2022 roster) that was fielded - a great QB, a skilled and versatile RB, and no. 1 WR with other serviceable WR/TE/RB options to keep the offense moving - BUT you also need those elite players to perform at money time. Ours didn't, and they were summarily bounced from play.

Yes, you don't win championships with the likes of MVS, EQSB, and Whitewater Jesus leading the way. That wasn't happening, tho, over multiple years as some of you seem to be arguing. You need superstars, yes, and you need those superstars to play like superstars when it counts. They didn't. The no. 3 WR had absolutely nothing to do with those failures.

when ya look at SF, Tampa etc they make about the same number of mistakes, difference is they have another stud or two that make up for it, and we didn't.

I know it's fashionable to blame Rodgers, I admit he's part of the problem, but our GM sure didn't help him out

SF is a loser team led by a bunch of morons. The Packers have 2 SB rings since the 9ers last ring.

But in all seriousness. What is the obsession of wanting to be like other teams when the Packers have effectively the same resume in the same time frame?

TB is fair. They at least have a ring. But PHI and SF results would Garner the same bickering on this forum that the roster wasn't enough because the team lost by one play.

Yeah I mean the only team that can really brag at this point is the New England Patriots. Every other franchise is either on equal plane or worse off.

Labrev wrote: ↑

18 Jul 2023 10:08

In 2020, we had all of those minus the slot. In 2021, we *literally* had all of those things. For that matter, KC(!) had this sort of set-up last year.

just pull up our Roster compared to KC for both those season, and you can easily see the depth difference at skill position talent, don't even bother with Kelse, though he dominates that short passing part, we had MVS running his go routes, Adams as the go to receiver, and Jones as our short yardage guy .

why you put so much stock in a receiver who can't be counted on to catch more then 50% of targeted throws, or ever produced more then 700 yrds and runs straight line routes making for easy coverage and expect me to think of him as a #2 isn't going to persuade me to, same with Lazard and all these other mid tier receivers we've had.

Yoop wrote: ↑

18 Jul 2023 10:41

Labrev wrote: ↑

18 Jul 2023 10:08

In 2020, we had all of those minus the slot. In 2021, we *literally* had all of those things. For that matter, KC(!) had this sort of set-up last year.

just pull up our Roster compared to KC for both those season, and you can easily see the depth difference at skill position talent, don't even bother with Kelse, though he dominates that short passing part, we had MVS running his go routes, Adams as the go to receiver, and Jones as our short yardage guy .

why you put so much stock in a receiver who can't be counted on to catch more then 50% of targeted throws, or ever produced more then 700 yrds and runs straight line routes making for easy coverage and expect me to think of him as a #2 isn't going to persuade me to, same with Lazard and all these other mid tier receivers we've had.

I think all in all, our 2020 skill position lineup was a bit better than KC's skill position lineup this past year. But we lost the game to Tampa because of some really critical errors. The bomb at the end of the half, the Jones fumble, some missed opportunities when momentum swung.

But most of all, I will take this opinion to the grave. If Bak doesn't get injured, I think we easily win the Super Bowl in 2020 and possibly 2021 as well. He's that good and we missed him that much in both losses.