Richard Rodgers > Jermichael Finley?· Page 4

buckeyepackfan
Veteran Member

9 years ago

I already stated my case. We all watched him last year. How could you conclude that he was ever going to be anything special? sschind posted some very damning statistics from PFF (which I don't really hold a lot of respect for) but they echo and mirror my thoughts that he wasn't very good at all last season. Meanwhile, the hype train on this kid rolls on for no other reason other than he's a Green Bay Packer. Now, despite of what we've seen last year, you have posted more of what I'm talking about by saying because our GM has a good track record. Yup, true. That has nothing to do with what we saw last year. Past results also don't guarantee future success. Finley and Rodgers being drafted in the same round has nothing to do with anything.

What is it that you personally have seen that has you excited in the least? What? There's nothing there but romanti fanticism that this guy is a high Packers draft pick.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa

Once again you are all conjecture.

Once again you are stating bullshit that nobody has said.

Funny that You never mention the rookies who excelled way beyond expectations.

Yet when R. Rodgers has a good year for a rookie you are already calling him a wasted pick.

Most on this forum WANT THE PACKERS DRAFT PICKS TO CONTRIBUTE AND DEVELOPE..
.You on the other hand hope they are complete failures, so you can keep up your weak ass argument That Ted Thompson doesn't know what he is doing..
TED THOMPSON DIDN'T SIGN YOUR BOY JIMMY GRAHAM!

Get the hell over it and move on.

Quit spamming every Damn thread!

You ever think some here are posting these threads just to bait you into doing exactly what you do.

Make yourself look silly!

I was addicted to The Hokey Pokey, but I turned myself around!

Zero2Cool
Elite Member

9 years ago

#32

Jermichael Finely showed a lot more than Richard Rodgers in their rookie seasons. I was excited to see what Finely would do next. Rodgers I'm not really even thinking about.

nerdmann
Premier Member Topic Starter

9 years ago

#33

I already stated my case. We all watched him last year. How could you conclude that he was ever going to be anything special?

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa

He did way, way WAY more than Finley did in his rookie year.

TO SUMMARIZE: Comparable speed, drafted in same round, did way more than Finley did as a rook, actually knows how to run routes (played WR in college) smart enough to understand the game plan without Aaron Rodgers having to take a special night before the game just to explain it to him, shuts his pie hole, does his job, does not proclaim he's "taking over the league" every year.

Damn, what's not to like?

“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.”

uffda udfa
Veteran Member

9 years ago

#34

Originally Posted by: buckeyepackfan

What you see as spamming and derailing is actually truth and points you can't refute. You want to play fantasies here. sschind posted his PFF grades...he was among the worst in the NFL per them. Somehow, per YOU, he had a GREAT season? HUH? He was BRUTAL. I saw NOTHING from him and I mean NOTHING that got me excited for his future only that he'll be another Andrew Quarless if he is ever his equal as a blocker.

Go reread you post... Yet when R. Rodgers has a good year for a rookie you are already calling him a wasted pick.

There is so much wrong with your MISstatement. He had a BRUTAL year number 1 and secondly I have NEVER called him a wasted pick. Where did I do that? I said he was unexciting and like any number of TE's who come in and out of this league. He's average. Nothing special. Somehow you have to go cuckoo over the truth and tell me how wrong I am but it's based on what? You saying he had a good year for a rook? What basis did he have a good year? He didn't.

Ted Thompson sits on his hands per former GM: "because they’ve had 25 fricking years of great quarterbacks. Of course it works. Try it without a special quarterback."

nerdmann
Premier Member Topic Starter

9 years ago

#35

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa

He had a far, far better rookie year than Finley. Does that mean he has potential to have a better second year as well?

“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.”

uffda udfa
Veteran Member

9 years ago

#36

He had a far, far better rookie year than Finley. Does that mean he has potential to have a better second year as well?

Originally Posted by: nerdmann

First, let's actually look into what you're saying here... RR had a better first year than Finley? Really? It would be much more accurate saying Richard Rodgers got more opportunities than Finley did.

Rodgers appeared in all 16 games and started 5. Rodgers was targeted 30 times all season.

Finley appeared in 14 games and started 1. Finley was targeted 12 times all season.

One guy came out early and one guy didn't.

Potential...yes. Realistic...no. Finley had 55 receptions in his 2nd season. I doubt Rodgers gets too close to that.

Ted Thompson sits on his hands per former GM: "because they’ve had 25 fricking years of great quarterbacks. Of course it works. Try it without a special quarterback."

68md
Member

9 years ago

#37

.I saw NOTHING from him and I mean NOTHING that got me excited for his future only that he'll be another Andrew Quarless if he is ever his equal as a blocker.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa

Sigh .. you have to stop with this stuff.

Exhibit A and B: Rodgers 32 yard catch and run

Runs a very nice route for 32... kills your lack of speed argument. Kills your I see nothing argument. Is he Finley ? No but at this time he's an above average serviceable TE that threatens the Redzone and the underbelly of zone defense when he plays.

Just once could we all not get our undies in a bundle because someone is stuck on a subject.

Porforis
Veteran Member

9 years ago

#38

Likewise, can we possibly continue an otherwise semi-heated but reasonable debate without bringing fantasies involving trolls and panties into the equation? I know we're all adults here, but a little too adult if you ask me.

QCHuskerFan
Member

9 years ago

#39

Originally Posted by: Porforis

Now I have an image of trolls in thongs in my head. That's just sick!

BAD EMAIL because the address couldn ot be found, or is unable to receive mail.

uffda udfa
Veteran Member

9 years ago

#40

Originally Posted by: 68md

I did want to ask how that clip showed RR had good speed? I would agree it showed he had speed but as a corrected paper of mine from elementary school reminds me...speed can imply slow, too. In the clip, he runs against air uncovered and then gets tackled pretty much immediately by someone who wasn't. In my objective honest opinion I don't know how that clip could be used as validation that he's plenty fast enough. I'm sure he has enough speed to play in the NFL, just it won't be an attribute that will help him become more than an average plodding TE> I hope he goes great guns but I don't see how.

EDIT: I didn't realize this guy only played 11 games at Cal. He had two TD's...one was a 75 yarder and some questioned his ability to be effective in the red zone. As for his speed, I thought our TE coach summed it up nicely from JSOline.com:

"Obviously not blazing speed," Fontenot said. "But he does some very good things with his footwork and he's efficient with his movement.

Went back and read various pieces on him...sounds like he can make some highlight reel catches but drops easy ones at times and has a limited catch radius to go with his lack of speed. I think we have Andrew Quarless II on this roster except this guy seems to be a bit smarter. He had a 22 wonderlic which is about average for a TE so he's not a genius as some might think because he went to Cal.

Ted Thompson sits on his hands per former GM: "because they’ve had 25 fricking years of great quarterbacks. Of course it works. Try it without a special quarterback."

Important Information:

The PACKERSHOME uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More Details Close

Fan Shout

Mucky Tundra (4m) : Where Carter falls prey to bad off the field influences (to be clear, not saying he'd clip someone though)

Mucky Tundra (5m) : Had Carter not gone to Philly were they already had a lot of old college friends, he ends up in a similar spot to Aaron Hernandez

Mucky Tundra (7m) : I think some of his coaches told scouts to stay away

Mucky Tundra (7m) : the street racing incident+conditioning and motivation problems

beast (12m) : Then Carter was street racing, where the other car crashed and people died... and other teams were scared to pick Carter for some reason

beast (13m) : I think the Saints traded up, giving their next year 1st to the Eagles, and then they sucked and Eagles got the 10th overall pick

packerfanoutwest (16m) : wtf Barkley?

TheKanataThrilla (23m) : Getting Carter and Nolan Smith in the first round in 2023 was pretty darn good

Mucky Tundra (31m) : for some reason i'm thinking of a draft where the Eagles where in the mid 20s and a top player fell all the way to them

TheKanataThrilla (31m) : I think so. I would need to look it up. Think it may have been Carolina's pick.

Mucky Tundra (32m) : i'm not sure who i'm thinking of now

Mucky Tundra (32m) : oh fuck me i messed that up

Zero2Cool (32m) : Jordan Davis was 13th overall

Zero2Cool (32m) : Carter was 9th overall

Zero2Cool (33m) : Eagles had 15th and 10th selections, moved to 13 and 9 to get Davis and Carter back to back

Zero2Cool (34m) : Eagles traded up for Carter, didn't they?

Mucky Tundra (44m) : Obviously he was a huge risk but getting a top 5 talent on the dline in the mid 20s is fortuitous

Mucky Tundra (45m) : Jalen Carter falling into their lap certainly helps

TheKanataThrilla (47m) : And we could only wish to have this type of D

TheKanataThrilla (47m) : It's not like Philly has had low draft picks, but has managed to get themselves a top notch pass rush. We spend so much draft capital of D

packerfanoutwest (48m) : another crap halftime show

TheKanataThrilla (49m) : I think it is over, but then I think of Atlanta and want Philly to go in with the same intensity in the second half

Mucky Tundra (58m) : And with a Pass Rush that might as well be on a milk cartoon and no Jaire

Martha Careful (59m) : I cant help but feel good about how well the Packers D played in Philly during the playoffs

Mucky Tundra (1h) : this game is over

Mucky Tundra (1h) : This might be the kill shot here

Mucky Tundra (1h) : oh that's such a bad penalty for KC after getting the 3rd down stop

TheKanataThrilla (1h) : Philly DL has come to play

TheKanataThrilla (1h) : Ceoper DeJean with the INT scored...bad memories of draft night

Mucky Tundra (1h) : ok scratch that

Mucky Tundra (1h) : Game feels like last years Super Bowl: 49ers started off in control, moved the ball well but didn't have much of a lead to show for it

TheKanataThrilla (1h) : KC jumped and they call it on Eagles. WTF refs

TheKanataThrilla (2h) : If he was offside why did you let him pop the QB?

TheKanataThrilla (2h) : I like that Eagles are controlling time of possession so far.

Mucky Tundra (2h) : If the Eagles are going to win, this is how they do it: jump all over the Chiefs and don't let it turn into a close one

TheKanataThrilla (2h) : Bad throw created that penalty.

TheKanataThrilla (2h) : Amazed Philly got that hit to the helmet call.

packerfanoutwest (2h) : refs just called an OPI,,,bullshit

dhazer (3h) : final score Chefs 24 Eagles 21 Refs 3

Mucky Tundra (5h) : feels like it hurts everyone but starters

Mucky Tundra (5h) : *cut down on snaps that

Mucky Tundra (5h) : beast, no not at all. Just seems counterproductive to cut down on snaps to help back ups get playing time and get potential money after cuts

Zero2Cool (6h) : So, Jets tell Rodgers they're moving on? QB2 for Packers haha

Zero2Cool (6h) : Hey, I'm not saying it's the great idea. I'm saying, it's what I think will happen.

beast (6h) : You think they give a crap enough about bubble guys to make rules for them?

Mucky Tundra (7h) : So games that will be even *more* sloppy the first two or three weeks of the season?

Zero2Cool (10h) : I think you can figure most starters won't be playing either of the two games at all.

Mucky Tundra (23h) : is 2 preseason games enough for bubble guys to make a mark?

packerfanoutwest (8-Feb) : true.forgot about that

Zero2Cool (8-Feb) : Unless they reduce preseason from three to two games.

Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2024 Packers Schedule

Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM

Eagles

29 - 34

Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM

COLTS

16 - 10

Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM

Titans

30 - 14

Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM

VIKINGS

29 - 31

Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM

Rams

24 - 19

Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM

CARDINALS

34 - 13

Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM

TEXANS

24 - 22

Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM

Jaguars

30 - 27

Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM

LIONS

14 - 24

Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM

Bears

20 - 19

Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM

49ERS

38 - 10

Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM

DOLPHINS

30 - 17

Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM

Lions

31 - 34

Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM

Seahawks

30 - 13

Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM

SAINTS

34 - 0

Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM

Vikings

25 - 27

Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM

BEARS

22 - 24

Sunday, Jan 12 @ 3:30 PM

Eagles

10 - 22