Packers Huddle

Drj820 wrote: ↑

18 May 2021 10:10

Excellent observation about the Smiths. The D was BEGGING for an actual leader. The O is too when things get tight. Rodgers leadership style actually detracts from the goal because everyone is terrified to get a bad look or blamed for a failed conversion.

I actually think that leader is on the offense and his name is Aaron Jones. Whenever our offense would sputter and we needed a drive, Jones always delivered. And Dillon was ready to step in but he didn't get fed the ball after he showed he was ready to carry the offense.

I always think at MN in 2019 or Week 2 vs Detroit in 2020 when we were down by a lot.

And it makes sense too. Whenever Aaron Jones struggles....you can almost always be right when you say the Packers will lose.

Yoop wrote: ↑

18 May 2021 10:27

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

18 May 2021 09:20

Is the source wrong?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_S ... _champions

Obviously the Super Bowl winner made the right moves to win it all. The issue is that is only known in hindsight. There are countless teams that made the "right" moves but didn't win it all.

It's a baseless claim to say the Packers neglected the roster the last few years.

ya couldn't purposely look more complacent concerning surrounding Rodgers with more ready to play WR then the team has given Rodgers the last half dozen years, impossible, and force him to max out the potential of those we did give him, these are the facts, then when he completely revolts over decisions to stick status quo9 last year Guty breaks down and drafts a slot guy, which is good, but the kid looks more like a RB then a WR, Lupes point may have been a bit over blown, but it sure wasn't baseless.

25 teams have a more potent WR room then we do
https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-2020-nfl-s ... s-rankings

Why does EVERY THREAD devolve into Rodgers and Wide Receivers?

Aaron Rodgers has arguably the best WR in the game in Adams. Lazard is an average #2 and MVS is an adequate speed #3. Offenses aren't just wide receivers however. Would this #1 offense been more #1? What happened 3-4-5 years ago is irrelevant right now. There are more than enough weapons on offense to be the best offense in the league. It happened last year, BTW.

It is absolutely baseless to claim the roster has been neglected the last few years.

A year old article that doesn't take into account the 2020 season, fairly irrelevant.

Offensive contributors in 2021 will be:
QB - Rodgers
RB - Jones, Dillon
TE - Tonyan, Sternberger, Degura
WR - Adams, Lazard, Valdes-Scantling, Rodgers

That's an improvement over last years #1 offense. If Myers pans out I have no issues believe the offense will be even better in 2021.

go pak go wrote: ↑

18 May 2021 10:03

Also back to the point of this thread, sounds like Eric Stokes is pretty raw in his technique. He got beat on a TD by a no name WR.

It's early and techniquie is "teachable". But man we really need this guy to not be like every other non-Jaire Alexander and Casey Hayward draft pick this decade.

It's interesting because he never got beat deep in the SEC; like literally never, not like a hyperbolic exaggeration never. That's actually the one thing I'm NOT worried about. Actually the fact that he did shows that his "never get beat deep" mantra is being coached out of him to force him to focus on other things already. When learning new things and changing what you do, you mess up more often. I'm not saying it's a GOOD thing he got beat by a no name. I'm just saying that growing pains are often a sign of growth.

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

18 May 2021 10:41

go pak go wrote: ↑

18 May 2021 10:03

Also back to the point of this thread, sounds like Eric Stokes is pretty raw in his technique. He got beat on a TD by a no name WR.

It's early and techniquie is "teachable". But man we really need this guy to not be like every other non-Jaire Alexander and Casey Hayward draft pick this decade.

It's interesting because he never got beat deep in the SEC; like literally never, not like a hyperbolic exaggeration never. That's actually the one thing I'm NOT worried about. Actually the fact that he did shows that his "never get beat deep" mantra is being coached out of him to force him to focus on other things already. When learning new things and changing what you do, you mess up more often. I'm not saying it's a GOOD thing he got beat by a no name. I'm just saying that growing pains are often a sign of growth.

Gotta break it down to build it back up!

go pak go wrote: ↑

18 May 2021 10:31

Drj820 wrote: ↑

18 May 2021 10:10

Excellent observation about the Smiths. The D was BEGGING for an actual leader. The O is too when things get tight. Rodgers leadership style actually detracts from the goal because everyone is terrified to get a bad look or blamed for a failed conversion.

I actually think that leader is on the offense and his name is Aaron Jones. Whenever our offense would sputter and we needed a drive, Jones always delivered. And Dillon was ready to step in but he didn't get fed the ball after he showed he was ready to carry the offense.

I always think at MN in 2019 or Week 2 vs Detroit in 2020 when we were down by a lot.

And it makes sense too. Whenever Aaron Jones struggles....you can almost always be right when you say the Packers will lose.

how often have we seen Rodgers literally on his ability force balls to covered players to win us games, lots of times, this stuff with Rodgers not being a leader is not accurate, when we see him upset when a player screws up thats leadership, the problem isn't that Rodgers isn't a leader, it's true he's soft spoken. but so is Adams, so is Jones, it's true we lack players that have won the big games.

when we look back at how we lost to Tampa there are at least a half doz. plays that hurt our chances, to focus on the last drive is what everyone does to blame it on one player, typically thats the QB

go pak go wrote: ↑

18 May 2021 10:31

Drj820 wrote: ↑

18 May 2021 10:10

Excellent observation about the Smiths. The D was BEGGING for an actual leader. The O is too when things get tight. Rodgers leadership style actually detracts from the goal because everyone is terrified to get a bad look or blamed for a failed conversion.

I actually think that leader is on the offense and his name is Aaron Jones. Whenever our offense would sputter and we needed a drive, Jones always delivered. And Dillon was ready to step in but he didn't get fed the ball after he showed he was ready to carry the offense.

I always think at MN in 2019 or Week 2 vs Detroit in 2020 when we were down by a lot.

And it makes sense too. Whenever Aaron Jones struggles....you can almost always be right when you say the Packers will lose.

Good point about Jones. I would even give Jamaal Williams credit in this dept. It never mattered if we were struggling, although limited potentially in ability, he was going to bring an infectious energy that the team could feed off of. Even in the NFCCG he provided some sparks after fighting for 1st downs. Jamaal was a leader in his own way. I feel he even may have helped Jones in the mindset dept.

Yoop wrote: ↑

18 May 2021 10:27

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

18 May 2021 09:20

Is the source wrong?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_S ... _champions

Obviously the Super Bowl winner made the right moves to win it all. The issue is that is only known in hindsight. There are countless teams that made the "right" moves but didn't win it all.

It's a baseless claim to say the Packers neglected the roster the last few years.

ya couldn't purposely look more complacent concerning surrounding Rodgers with more ready to play WR then the team has given Rodgers the last half dozen years, impossible, and force him to max out the potential of those we did give him, these are the facts, then when he completely revolts over decisions to stick status quo9 last year Guty breaks down and drafts a slot guy, which is good, but the kid looks more like a RB then a WR, Lupes point may have been a bit over blown, but it sure wasn't baseless.

25 teams have a more potent WR room then we do
https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-2020-nfl-s ... s-rankings

Seriously? You tease somebody about using Wikipedia as a source and then use a PFF projection piece - from 2020 nonetheless - to bolster your weak WR room argument??

Those rankings were a PROJECTION.

In REALITY, the Packers passing game ranked 1st in pass efficiency game rating, 2nd in completion %, 9th in pass yds/gm, 9th in yds/catch, and 1st in total TDs per pro-football reference team stats.

That is the REALITY of how well the Packers receivers performed in conjunction with their QB.

But yeah, the WR room is a complete mess.

APB wrote: ↑

18 May 2021 10:59

Yoop wrote: ↑

18 May 2021 10:27

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

18 May 2021 09:20

Is the source wrong?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_S ... _champions

Obviously the Super Bowl winner made the right moves to win it all. The issue is that is only known in hindsight. There are countless teams that made the "right" moves but didn't win it all.

It's a baseless claim to say the Packers neglected the roster the last few years.

ya couldn't purposely look more complacent concerning surrounding Rodgers with more ready to play WR then the team has given Rodgers the last half dozen years, impossible, and force him to max out the potential of those we did give him, these are the facts, then when he completely revolts over decisions to stick status quo9 last year Guty breaks down and drafts a slot guy, which is good, but the kid looks more like a RB then a WR, Lupes point may have been a bit over blown, but it sure wasn't baseless.

25 teams have a more potent WR room then we do
https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-2020-nfl-s ... s-rankings

Seriously? You tease somebody about using Wikipedia as a source and then use a PFF projection piece - from 2020 nonetheless - to bolster your weak WR room argument??

Those rankings were a PROJECTION.

In REALITY, the Packers passing game ranked 1st in pass efficiency game rating, 2nd in completion %, 9th in pass yds/gm, 9th in yds/catch, and 1st in total TDs per pro-football reference team stats.

That is the REALITY of how well the Packers receivers performed in conjunction with their QB.

But yeah, the WR room is a complete mess.

those projections are based on the receivers those teams had, and compared to us where rated higher

whats true is we have one of the best receivers in the league and not much else, and minus Rodgers those stats are not possible, course your gonna find this out should Rodgers sit

It's funny to think of it like this, but MVS was a REALLY good 5th round pick. The problem is that he's not a pure #2 starter type. He's more of a 3rd option/deep threat guy. For a 5th round pick, producing at the level he has produced is very good/impressive. But we look down on him because he isn't what the team needed. If we had a steadier/better #2 option, we'd love MVS.

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

18 May 2021 11:22

It's funny to think of it like this, but MVS was a REALLY good 5th round pick. The problem is that he's not a pure #2 starter type. He's more of a 3rd option/deep threat guy. For a 5th round pick, producing at the level he has produced is very good/impressive. But we look down on him because he isn't what the team needed. If we had a steadier/better #2 option, we'd love MVS.

Yeah I think MVS is one of Brian's best draft picks.

Only Corey Linsley and Aaron Jones are better 5th rounders I can think of for the Packers in the past decade.

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

18 May 2021 11:22

It's funny to think of it like this, but MVS was a REALLY good 5th round pick. The problem is that he's not a pure #2 starter type. He's more of a 3rd option/deep threat guy. For a 5th round pick, producing at the level he has produced is very good/impressive. But we look down on him because he isn't what the team needed. If we had a steadier/better #2 option, we'd love MVS.

sure, I agree with this, heres my thinking, all 3 of those players, MVS, Brown and the other one who I forget the name of simply because he is so forgettable where of almost no production for there first two seasons, what they did produce was due to no one else getting open till after route breakups and scrams, thats hardly on schedule passing, when I say Rodgers has to work harder because of these type receivers, thats the reason.

Lafluer came in a provided better route schemes so they can get open quicker, but that stuff doesn't always work when facing better DB's thats when the better, more talented receivers do though.

Yoop wrote: ↑

18 May 2021 11:39

what they did produce was due to no one else getting open till after route breakups and scrams, thats hardly on schedule passing, when I say Rodgers has to work harder because of these type receivers, thats the reason.

However, that is ABSOLUTELY not reality. MVS's and ESB's production is not mostly/only/solely due to no one else getting open and route breakdowns... Much of what they have produced is a result of on schedule passing, not all, but much of it.

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

18 May 2021 11:42

Yoop wrote: ↑

18 May 2021 11:39

what they did produce was due to no one else getting open till after route breakups and scrams, thats hardly on schedule passing, when I say Rodgers has to work harder because of these type receivers, thats the reason.

However, that is ABSOLUTELY not reality. MVS's and ESB's production is not mostly/only/solely due to no one else getting open and route breakdowns... Much of what they have produced is a result of on schedule passing, not all, but much of it.

sure it is, go and rewatch the games, often one or the other where first reads, and Rodgers had to look to Adams or Graham because they where covered, when they where also covered he had to scramble, now obviously thats not completely true, but it was most of the time.

this defense that Rodgers had plenty of good receivers is debunked with th e PFF article, and I'am sure I could dig up more that show our receiver room was void of talent minus Adams.

hell I dont even have to do that, just look at our draft record since 014, Rodgers has had to do more with less for years.

Rodgers is like a guy holding a Ruger revolver with 5 empty chambers playing Russian roulette, thats been pretty much the situation with our receivers room.

doesn't matter who the QB is, Brady, the Mannings, Brees, Mahomes, take the bullets out of the gun and it's the same story, gesus you people can be frustrating to talk to.

Yoop wrote: ↑

18 May 2021 12:08

sure it is, go and rewatch the games, often one or the other where first reads, and Rodgers had to look to Adams or Graham because they where covered, when they where also covered he had to scramble, now obviously thats not completely true, but it was most of the time.

Not even remotely true. It is a narrative only used to try and "prove" that anyone outside of Adams is bad. It's a false narrative. The majority of our production has and does come through on schedule passing. There is always a progression in the passing game, that the first read is not who is thrown the ball does not mean the play broke down or was off schedule.

this defense that Rodgers had plenty of good receivers is debunked with th e PFF article, and I'am sure I could dig up more that show our receiver room was void of talent minus Adams.

That was never a defense and the article was a projection that proved to be inaccurate.

Football outsiders ranked Adams #1 and MVS #34 in 2020 among receivers with 50 targets. Lazard was #1 in receivers who had less than 50 targets. That doesn't sound like a receiver room devoid of talent... And that is NOT a projection.

Might want to change the narrative, because it is falling flat, again.

Let's go to Pro Football Reference and use their Approximate Value metric. This is more cumulative than FO.

Davante Adams - #2
Marquez Valdes-Scantling - #34
Allen Lazard - #60

Still doesn't look like a receiver room devoid of talent.

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

18 May 2021 12:53

Let's go to Pro Football Reference and use their Approximate Value metric. This is more cumulative that FO.

Davante Adams - #2
Marquez Valdes-Scantling - #34
Allen Lazard - #60

Still doesn't look like a receiver room devoid of talent.

MVS and Lazard are rated higher than I would have thought.

Then again we were the #1 offense in the league so it makes sense.

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

18 May 2021 12:53

Let's go to Pro Football Reference and use their Approximate Value metric. This is more cumulative than FO.

Davante Adams - #2
Marquez Valdes-Scantling - #34
Allen Lazard - #60

Still doesn't look like a receiver room devoid of talent.

did from 016 to and including 019, then the receivers gained experience with Lafluers schemes which helped them to become open on schedule more often, even then the best they could do with a HOF QB was rate #34 and 60, and neither would be a #2 or even #3 on a bunch odf teams

Yoop wrote: ↑

18 May 2021 13:17

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

18 May 2021 12:53

Let's go to Pro Football Reference and use their Approximate Value metric. This is more cumulative than FO.

Davante Adams - #2
Marquez Valdes-Scantling - #34
Allen Lazard - #60

Still doesn't look like a receiver room devoid of talent.

did from 016 to and including 019, then the receivers gained experience with Lafluers schemes which helped them to become open on schedule more often,

No one cares about 2016 to 2019. Those years have little bearing on 2021. 2020 gives us the best indication of what we can expect for 2021.

even then the best they could do with a HOF QB was rate #34 and 60, and neither would be a #2 or even #3 on a bunch odf teams

No, the best they could do was #2. Which teams had a better rated trio?

Which teams would Lazard or MVS not be a #2 or #3 on?

This is not fantasy football.

Yoop wrote: ↑

18 May 2021 13:17

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

18 May 2021 12:53

Let's go to Pro Football Reference and use their Approximate Value metric. This is more cumulative than FO.

Davante Adams - #2
Marquez Valdes-Scantling - #34
Allen Lazard - #60

Still doesn't look like a receiver room devoid of talent.

even then the best they could do with a HOF QB was rate #34 and 60, and neither would be a #2 or even #3 on a bunch odf teams

I don't think you know how numbers work.

Why are we so set of defending MVS and Lazard? They suck. Lazards best assett is what he does when he doesnt have the ball, he is competent at receiving the ball and not very good at getting open. He is a niche player due to great run blocking skills, and should come in for specific scenarios or be about WR4.

MVS is a one trick pony who can run fast in a straight line. He played really well in the NFCCG, but before that he had tons of drops in key spots and didnt get open very often..even with all attention going to Adams and Jones.

But guess what? It still doesnt mean the O doesnt have enough talent to succeed. The Packers had Adams, Jones, Tonyan, a HOF QB, the best center in football and LT. Combine that with a great schemer like MLF and they had plenty of gas to get the job done.

Yet still it can be true, even though MVS still has room to grow...he and Lazard both kind of suck.