Legal Tampering News and Rumors

[Labrev]

as we know Rodgers opinion about ANYTHING has more to do with sounding right,

ALL evidence to the contrary.

what evidence would that be?

See what I added.

[Yoop]

ALL evidence to the contrary.

what evidence would that be?

See what I added.

actually I disagree with that also, again he says what will give him the reaction he wants, totally outlandish 180 degree against established norms with some and very evasive with others, half truths in a attempt to confuse more then enlighten, that way he's never wrong.

he's always been this way, far more so these last 4 or 5 years.

[Labrev]

what evidence would that be?

See what I added.

actually I disagree with that also, again he says what will give him the reaction he wants, totally outlandish 180 degree against established norms with some and very evasive with others, half truths in a attempt to confuse more then enlighten, that way he's never wrong.

he's always been this way, far more so these last 4 or 5 years.

None of that refutes my contention that he means what he says. He can achieve all of that by just speaking his mind, if his true beliefs are, in fact, controversial.

The evidence is against you on this. You would have us believe he just expresses stuff like vaccine hesitancy not because he believes in it, but because he is a troll seeking attention. Except, he did not take the vaccine, so he clearly believed what he was saying about that. It was not that he was just BS'ing people. He was speaking his mind, even if it gets backlash.

Face it, yoop. Rodgers does not share your opinion on the WRs nor was he a victim; he was a big reason we had the guys we did. In fact, even all the other people who agree with you about the WR situation agree that Rodgers hyping up scrubs was a big part of the issue.

You are the only person still living in lala land on this, because you have some strange need to make Rodgers a martyr as an expression of your own discontentment with the WRs as a fan. It's WEIRD.

[BF004]

[Yoop]

See what I added.

actually I disagree with that also, again he says what will give him the reaction he wants, totally outlandish 180 degree against established norms with some and very evasive with others, half truths in a attempt to confuse more then enlighten, that way he's never wrong.

he's always been this way, far more so these last 4 or 5 years.

None of that refutes my contention that he means what he says. He can achieve all of that by just speaking his mind, if his true beliefs are, in fact, controversial.

The evidence is against you on this. You would have us believe he just expresses stuff like vaccine hesitancy not because he believes in it, but because he is a troll seeking attention. Except, he did not take the vaccine, so he clearly believed what he was saying about that. It was not that he was just BS'ing people. He was speaking his mind, even if it gets backlash.

Face it, yoop. Rodgers does not share your opinion on the WRs nor was he a victim; he was a big reason we had the guys we did. In fact, even all the other people who agree with you about the WR situation agree that Rodgers hyping up scrubs was a big part of the issue.

You are the only person still living in lala land on this, because you have some strange need to make Rodgers a martyr as an expression of your own discontentment with the WRs as a fan. It's WEIRD.

whats funny is that just because I supported him as a Quarterback, You think I supported the person,I thinks thats where your getting this martyr opinion, if Rodger opinion concerning these jag receivers was so high, why did he develop tunnel vision with Adams, your letting his politeness with not tarnishing those jags cloud the reality.

Rodgers lobbied hard for a receiver the year Guty drafted Love, pretty sure he had prior drafts as well, once Watson and Doubs got up to speed you saw how happy Rodgers was to finally have a receiver again that could beat 1 on 1 coverage.

sure he was proud that he defiantly rejected league demands to vax, defiant about everything is who Rodgers is, aint know one going to tell him what to do, even if it's to help save others, personally what little respect I had for him was lost when I learned about that

[APB]

Does this mean Oren Burks is gonna be available again?? Oh boy!!

[CWIMM]

true, my point though is that if they where so good we would have found a way to keep them, to my knowledge Guty didn't even try with either.

Fortunately Gutekunst was smart enough not to offer Lazard or MVS the kind of money both received in free agency.

again I have doubts that we offered either of those two a contract extension, if so it would have been much lower then the Jets or KC paid, and the only reason they did as well for us as they did, was the position was void of starter talent, once they went to the Jets and KC we have seen there actual value, aren't they both UFA now? I don't don't pay attention to that stuff as much as you and others.

MVS is currently a free agent but Lazard is still under contract with the Jets. His base salary of $10 million for this season is fully guaranteed

[Scott4Pack]

MVS is currently a free agent but Lazard is still under contract with the Jets. His base salary of $10 million for this season is fully guaranteed

I'm still very happy for Lazard getting a contract like that. Good for him. But he is a textbook example of overpay. He isn't a $10M WR.

[go pak go]

MVS is currently a free agent but Lazard is still under contract with the Jets. His base salary of $10 million for this season is fully guaranteed

I'm still very happy for Lazard getting a contract like that. Good for him. But he is a textbook example of overpay. He isn't a $10M WR.

Almost all $10MM WRs can be classified as overpays. The mid WR market is completely overinflated.

It's why people are saying to just continue drafting WRs so we don't have to pay 8 digits for a mid #2/#3 WR.

[Yoop]

MVS is currently a free agent but Lazard is still under contract with the Jets. His base salary of $10 million for this season is fully guaranteed

I'm still very happy for Lazard getting a contract like that. Good for him. But he is a textbook example of overpay. He isn't a $10M WR.

Almost all $10MM WRs can be classified as overpays. The mid WR market is completely overinflated.

It's why people are saying to just continue drafting WRs so we don't have to pay 8 digits for a mid #2/#3 WR.

that was my point all along, we all Love Tae Adams, what we shouldn't love is paying him 29 million dollars, the only way out of that is to draft quality replacements every couple years, versus mid round reaches, sure ya can hit on one of those guys, not saying to not use a mid rounder on a receiver, just not to count on them being a starter in the rotation, which is what we did, and it failed, that is what frustrated me.

[Labrev]

I don't have a problem paying for an elite WR, especially one that commands double- and even at times triple-coverage like Adams did. That opens up the field for everyone, so you can have a productive offense without needing them to all be world-beaters.

KC just won a second title with Kelce and lots of nondescript WRs, because they save the resources to field a very complete all-around team than obsess over one position. There are 20 other starting positions that also need to be addressed in a draft (more if you count ST units).

[Yoop]

I don't have a problem paying for an elite WR, especially one that commands double- and even at times triple-coverage like Adams did. That opens up the field for everyone, so you can have a productive offense without needing them to all be world-beaters.

KC just won a second title with Kelce and lots of nondescript WRs, because they save the resources to field a very complete all-around team than obsess over one position. There are 20 other starting positions that also need to be addressed in a draft (more if you count ST units).

course you don't, and Adams never beat triple coverage, nice try, also KC took advantage of dumb defensive mistakes, take Kelce out of the game as we saw several times with Adams and they lose just as we did.

2 or 3 very good receivers is better then just one Adams or Kelce any day of the week.

can't even discuss stuff logically with you

[Madcity_matt]

I don't have a problem paying for an elite WR, especially one that commands double- and even at times triple-coverage like Adams did. That opens up the field for everyone, so you can have a productive offense without needing them to all be world-beaters.

KC just won a second title with Kelce and lots of nondescript WRs, because they save the resources to field a very complete all-around team than obsess over one position. There are 20 other starting positions that also need to be addressed in a draft (more if you count ST units).

course you don't, and Adams never beat triple coverage, nice try, also KC took advantage of dumb defensive mistakes, take Kelce out of the game as we saw several times with Adams and they lose just as we did.

2 or 3 very good receivers is better then just one Adams or Kelce any day of the week.

can't even discuss stuff logically with you

To be fair, at no point did [mention]Labrev[/mention] argue that Adams beat triple coverage. He said that he commanded double and triple coverage. You changed his text and then argued with him about it. And then you accuse him of not having a logical discussion.

[Labrev]

course you don't, and Adams never beat triple coverage, nice try, also KC took advantage of dumb defensive mistakes,

He does not -have- to beat triple-coverage, that's the point. You already won when they do that; the D stretched themselves too thin to cover everyone, so *someone* is in position to make the play (hence, KC's offense taking advantage of "dumb defensive mistakes").

2 or 3 very good receivers is better then just one Adams or Kelce any day of the week.

I didn't say one is "better" than the other, just that I do not have a problem with paying an Adams or Kelce.

I am cool with paying an Adams, but I also like our current set-up where there is no all-star receiver, just lots of guys with good talent.

My ideal at WR is a diversity of skills. All I want is: 1 vertical threat, 1 slot guy, 1 possession guy, 1 solid all-arounder (at minimum, but obviously, anything more than this is good). You would know this if you listened, but you do not, and ya TWIST mah wordz!

can't even discuss stuff logically with you

Your position has nothing to do with logic, just taste. You like loaded WR groups. That is fine.

But sorry, it is a FACT that you can win it all without what you want.

[go pak go]

I don't have a problem paying for an elite WR, especially one that commands double- and even at times triple-coverage like Adams did. That opens up the field for everyone, so you can have a productive offense without needing them to all be world-beaters.

KC just won a second title with Kelce and lots of nondescript WRs, because they save the resources to field a very complete all-around team than obsess over one position. There are 20 other starting positions that also need to be addressed in a draft (more if you count ST units).

course you don't, and Adams never beat triple coverage, nice try, also KC took advantage of dumb defensive mistakes, take Kelce out of the game as we saw several times with Adams and they lose just as we did.

2 or 3 very good receivers is better then just one Adams or Kelce any day of the week.

can't even discuss stuff logically with you

Hard to argue logically when you don't even know what you are arguing. All you are doing now is being triggered by the avatar and triggered by an 8 year grudge.

Re-read the post.

[Yoop]

course you don't, and Adams never beat triple coverage, nice try, also KC took advantage of dumb defensive mistakes,

He does not -have- to beat triple-coverage, that's the point. You already won when they do that; the D stretched themselves too thin to cover everyone, so *someone* is in position to make the play (hence, KC's offense taking advantage of "dumb defensive mistakes").

2 or 3 very good receivers is better then just one Adams or Kelce any day of the week.

I didn't say one is "better" than the other, just that I do not have a problem with paying an Adams or Kelce.

I am cool with paying an Adams, but I also like our current set-up where there is no all-star receiver, just lots of guys with good talent.

My ideal at WR is a diversity of skills. All I want is: 1 vertical threat, 1 slot guy, 1 possession guy, 1 solid all-arounder (at minimum, but obviously, anything more than this is good). You would know this if you listened, but you do not, and ya TWIST mah wordz!

can't even discuss stuff logically with you

Your position has nothing to do with logic, just taste. You like loaded WR groups. That is fine.

But sorry, it is a FACT that you can win it all without what you want.

my point is to draft a high tier receiver every other draft, 2 or 3 quality receivers stretch a defense thinner then one, thats logical un less you just don't want to draft receivers.

GPG, you damn right I got a grudge, all I've ever gotten from you and others is push back for wanting to draft receivers.

[mnkcarp]

GPG, you damn right I got a grudge, all I've ever gotten from you and others is push back for wanting to draft receivers.

Let go and live for today... especially if we draft another awesome receiver, lol.

[Labrev]

Yet if we draft a receiver, and it is clear before his rookie contract expires that he is really good, I want to keep them.

I do not agree with this idea pervading the forum that they are going to be expensive, so let them walk and keep drafting WRs over and over.

Well, so be it, an elite WR is worth their money; part of the value of a draft pick is that you (ideally) get guys to play for many years.

We had Adams for 8 years. His 1k-yard seasons were Years 5, 7, and 8 (he was 3 yards away from 1k in both Years 3 and 6). He also had two more 1k seasons as a Raider, so 9 and 10 were also very productive for him. His rookie-contract years were (comparatively) unimpressive.

You are going to miss out on that kind of play if you refuse to pony up for your homegrown talent, the very prime of their career.

[Pckfn23]

GPG, you damn right I got a grudge, all I've ever gotten from you and others is push back for wanting to draft receivers.

It's not even been a week and you're back to this nonsense? You didn't get pushback for wanting to draft receivers...

[Yoop]

GPG, you damn right I got a grudge, all I've ever gotten from you and others is push back for wanting to draft receivers.

Let go and live for today... especially if we draft another awesome receiver, lol.

Grudge was/is to strong a word, your right can't live in the past, still I think the best path concerning the position is to use a high pick (2nd rounder) on 1 every other draft, keep the best for a 2nd contract and replace when the contracts become to high.

always felt 2 or 3 good ones is better then just one great one, cheaper too, I'am glad we are in the position where we don't have to spend a 1st or even a 2 or 3rd round pick on a WR, in fact after the last 2 drafts we can skip the position this year.