DoddPower
11 years ago
Yeah, I'm just not very convinced that the net gain of having Randall Cobb returning kicks is worth the net loss that would occur should he get injured on special teams. Just like we often hear about managing running backs carries to not wear them out over the course of the season, the same logic should apply to Randall Cobb, imo. Even if the logic of taking him off of special teams isn't to minimize injury opportunities (which is solid reasoning), simply limiting his touches is an important management decision for the coaching staff to consider. Cobb needs to be fresh and healthy late in the season, and special teams isn't going to help that. I think I would rather POTENTIALLY (but not definitely) lose a little explosion from my kick returner and maintain the explosion that Cobb provides on offense. Sure, keeping him as the returner doesn't necessarily mean he would lose any explosion on offense, but it's definitely not going to help. I feel as if someone such as J. Ross et al. could still provide a solid returner option so Cobb could focus on becoming a dominating offensive weapon. Cobb is going to help the Packers the most on offense anyway, so it would be tough to convince me that anything that potentially hinders his offensive contributions is worth it.

The exact same reasoning could be applied to Clay Mathews (or several other starters). I think it's safe to assume that CM3 would be a better special teams contributor than some of the young guys. However, it seems to be recognized that the added repetitions on his body isn't worth the perceived slight increase in special team production.

I do agree with the argument that if Cobb truly is SUBSTANTIALLY better than any other returner option (and I mean it isn't even remotely close), then it should be strongly considered. I would still probably choose to have him focus on offense though, simply because I think that's the way he contributes the most to the Green Bay Packers.
nerdmann
11 years ago
I don't want blue chippers on ST, period.

Yes, Johnathan Franklin is a rookie. ST is a way to get him on the field. But I still, just don't like it.

Let a marginal player make the team via ST. You hate to think of certain players as disposable, but the fact is, some players have proven themselves more than others. Even if it was college production.

Let somebody who has potential, use that spot to prove themselves.

That said, I still don't like a rookie on PR in the playoffs.
“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”
yooperfan
11 years ago
Unless everyone else fails as a return man, I don't see Cobb on special teams anymore.
play2win
11 years ago
Good arguments for and against. This shows how important it is to have a dangerous return man back there at all times. I hope we find another in our group of players as good as Cobb. Worst case scenario, we still have Cobb to use back there in a pinch.

How many top skill position players in NFL history were also exceptional returners?

Tim Brown comes to mind. Hershel Walker. Deon Sanders... Didn't stop them from returning kicks.
sschind
11 years ago

Good arguments for and against. This shows how important it is to have a dangerous return man back there at all times. I hope we find another in our group of players as good as Cobb. Worst case scenario, we still have Cobb to use back there in a pinch.

How many top skill position players in NFL history were also exceptional returners?

Tim Brown comes to mind. Hershel Walker. Deon Sanders... Didn't stop them from returning kicks.

Originally Posted by: play2win 



I thought of Brown as well but a quick search showed that he didn't return many punts in his last 5 years. I'm not sure if this is because of his value as the Raiders #1 receiver or if they had found someone else who was as capable. Still, from 1993 through 1996 when he came into the forefront as a raiders receiver he was their main return guy as well.

Like I said, I hope someone, Ross perhaps or Franklin, or anyone, steps up and takes the return duties away from Cobb. If no one can do the job as well as he can however I still think he should be the guy back there.

wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
11 years ago

No, unless someone else can give the Packers equal or better field position as consistently as he does on Kick and Punt Returns.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



The answer you are looking for is "yes".

There is very little difference between the stats for the leading return men and the average returners.

Dodd said it, as much or more than injuries is the wear and tear he would face on ST. I don't want to see him sit out a play or two in order to catch his breath because he had to return the ball first.

There were 22 players that had 20 or more returns. Jacoby Jones lead the group with a 30.7 average. The lowest was 21.3 by Stefan Logan. The middle was around 25.4 which was Cobb's average. He was 11th out 22. We are probably only looking at a 5 yard difference between Cobb and who ever his replacement is. It really isn't that significant. All 22 players only accounted for 8 tds all year.

punt returns will have an even smaller difference in return yards.
UserPostedImage
agopackgo4
11 years ago
I've always said about Cobb that he is an extremely vaulauble WR. As many of you have already pointed out... But to me, even more, he is a valuable FOOTBALL player. He's the type of guy who can have so many demensions. I have always been a fan of keeping him on special teams. Part of what makes Cobb special is that he can play WR and return and he doesn't help the team out in 1 spot, but two. I have never wanted that aspect of his overall value taken away. That being said, there is no point in keeping him on if Ross can do the job. Most of my thoughts on Cobb were before Ross came along. If he can do it, then by all means.
PackerTraxx
11 years ago
I'll vote Yes. Hopefully we can find someone who can catch the ball.
Why is Jerry Kramer not in the Hall of Fame?
Fan Shout
Zero2Cool (1h) : We'd have same Division and Conference records. Strength of schedule we edge them
Zero2Cool (1h) : I just checked. What tie breaker?
bboystyle (1h) : yes its possible but unlikely. If we do get the 5th, we face the NFCS winner
Zero2Cool (1h) : Ahh, ok.
bboystyle (1h) : yes due to tie breaker
Zero2Cool (1h) : I mean, unlikely, yes, but mathematically, 5th is possible by what I'm reading.
Zero2Cool (1h) : If Vikings lose out, Packers win out, Packers get 5th, right?
bboystyle (1h) : Minny isnt going to lose out so 5th seed is out of the equation. We are playing for the 6th or 7th seed which makes no difference
Mucky Tundra (2h) : beast, the ad revenue goes to the broadcast company but they gotta pay to air the game on their channel/network
beast (3h) : If we win tonight the game is still relative in terms of 5th, 6th or 7th seed... win and it's 5th or 6th, lose and it's 6th or 7th
beast (3h) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly
Zero2Cool (3h) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.
bboystyle (3h) : i mean game becomes irrelevant if we win tonight. Just a game where we are trying to play spoilers to Vikings chance at the #1 seed
Mucky Tundra (3h) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv
Zero2Cool (4h) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno
beast (4h) : I agree that it's BS for fans planning on going to the game. But how does it bring in more money? I'm guessing indirectly?
packerfanoutwest (4h) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans
Zero2Cool (5h) : I see what you did there Mucky
Zero2Cool (5h) : dammit. 3:25pm
Zero2Cool (5h) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm
Mucky Tundra (5h) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground
Mucky Tundra (5h) : Yeah baby!
Zero2Cool (5h) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah
Zero2Cool (6h) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.
beast (6h) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue
Zero2Cool (7h) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's
Zero2Cool (7h) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.
packerfanoutwest (8h) : ok I stand corrected
Zero2Cool (8h) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th
Zero2Cool (8h) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?
beast (8h) : Saying no to the 6th lock.
beast (8h) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out
Zero2Cool (8h) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.
beast (8h) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games
beast (8h) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality
beast (8h) : We already have told you... if Packers lose all their games (they won't, but if they did), and Buccaneers and Falcons win all theirs
Zero2Cool (8h) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread
Zero2Cool (8h) : I literally just said it.
packerfanoutwest (8h) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't
Zero2Cool (8h) : Falcons, Buccaneers would need to win final two games.
Zero2Cool (8h) : Yes, if they win one of three, they are lock. If they lose out, they can be eliminated.
packerfanoutwest (8h) : as I just said,,gtheyh are in no matter what
Zero2Cool (8h) : Packers should get in. I just hope it's not 7th seed. Feels dirty.
packerfanoutwest (8h) : If packers lose out, no matter what, they are in
packerfanoutwest (8h) : both teams can not male the playoffs....falcon hold the tie breaker
packerfanoutwest (8h) : if bucs win out they win their division
beast (8h) : Fine, Buccaneers and Falcons can get ahead of us
packerfanoutwest (8h) : falcons are already ahead of us
beast (9h) : Packers will get in
beast (9h) : If Packers lose the rest of their games and Falcons win the rest of theirs, they could pass us... but not gonna happen
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2024 Packers Schedule
Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
Eagles
Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
Titans
Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
Rams
Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
CARDINALS
Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
Jaguars
Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
Bears
Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
49ERS
Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
DOLPHINS
Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
Seahawks
Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
Vikings
Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM
BEARS
Recent Topics
1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

7h / Random Babble / Martha Careful

22-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / packerfanoutwest

19-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

19-Dec / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

18-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

17-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

17-Dec / Featured Content / Zero2Cool

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

16-Dec / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Mucky Tundra

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.