PackFanWithTwins
9 years ago

EXCELLENT Post! It irks me every time I see Jones name as being on the roster. We didn't need him, and having him there and presumably getting playing time is bound to stunt the development of more talented young receivers.

I would strongly hope damn Jones is inactive Week 1 - every week if it was up to me. I highly doubt he would make any special teams contribution. and he's a distant 5th IMO among WRs. Yet with the damn seniority based decisions the Packers so often seem to make, I expect he will be active.

Originally Posted by: texaspackerbacker 



He better be active because at this point he is the 2nd best WR on the team.

Taking playing time and stunt the development of young receivers? Really. If those young receivers are that talented, they will learn the system and earn their playing time just like every WR the Packers have developed. Its amazing Cobb is any good after having to sit behind Jennings, Driver, Jones and Nelson and basically Finley also.

One thing the Packers have shown is that they are not shy about letting "older" WR go when youth is ready to step in. The fact they signed Jones just shows that the youth at the position on this team are not ready, if they were, Jones would not have been brought back.
The world needs ditch diggers too Danny!!!
nerdmann
9 years ago

He better be active because at this point he is the 2nd best WR on the team.

Taking playing time and stunt the development of young receivers? Really. If those young receivers are that talented, they will learn the system and earn their playing time just like every WR the Packers have developed. Its amazing Cobb is any good after having to sit behind Jennings, Driver, Jones and Nelson and basically Finley also.

One thing the Packers have shown is that they are not shy about letting "older" WR go when youth is ready to step in. The fact they signed Jones just shows that the youth at the position on this team are not ready, if they were, Jones would not have been brought back.

Originally Posted by: PackFanWithTwins 



If Janis knew where to line up, was willing to go over the middle, was willing to go up and compete for the ball, could get his feet down inbounds, could run routes, etc then we wouldn't have needed to sign Jones.

Don't give me this bullshit about how Jones is gonna play "just because he's a veteran." That is frankly just F'n stupid.

Montgomery is gonna be a good one, but as with all players at his position, he will need a year of development. That's normal. Even Davante struggled a bit as a rookie.
“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.”
QCHuskerFan
9 years ago

He better be active because at this point he is the 2nd best WR on the team.

Taking playing time and stunt the development of young receivers? Really. If those young receivers are that talented, they will learn the system and earn their playing time just like every WR the Packers have developed. Its amazing Cobb is any good after having to sit behind Jennings, Driver, Jones and Nelson and basically Finley also.

One thing the Packers have shown is that they are not shy about letting "older" WR go when youth is ready to step in. The fact they signed Jones just shows that the youth at the position on this team are not ready, if they were, Jones would not have been brought back.

Originally Posted by: PackFanWithTwins 



So the 2nd best receiver on the Packers, a team favored by many to go to the Super Bowl, was so bad that he couldn't make 2 other teams rosters with losing records? Better hope Lacy doesn't get hurt because our WR's evidently suck!

Jones is on the team. I'm ok with that. We don't know the injury status of Cobb or Montgomery. Could be neither of them can play Sunday and we probably won't know until Sunday. I would say the signing of Jones has more to do with current injuries than youth.
BAD EMAIL because the address couldn ot be found, or is unable to receive mail.
DoddPower
9 years ago

I would say the signing of Jones has more to do with current injuries than youth.

Originally Posted by: QCHuskerFan 



I would say it has a lot to do with both, and more so just the overall depth of the group. Jones is easily the third best WR on the Packers AT THIS MOMENT, and he provides great insurance in the event of injuries. It's a win win. If the young guys out-perform him during practice, they will get snaps over him. I could see Montgomery getting some snaps over Jones in the near future, but Janis isn't close to Jones at this point, unless we are only talking about running go routes. This could all change by mid-season or so, and hopefully it does. But at this point, Jones is clearly the third best WR. Montgomery and Janis need to take advantage of the opportunity to learn from a seasoned vet and continue to improve. If they develop quickly enough, perhaps Jones could be pushed down to the 5th WR on the Packers roster. I wouldn't hold my breath this season, though. Especially when it comes to the red zone. Jones might be the #1 target in the red zone for most of the season.

Jones also gives the Packers more match-up options. If Janis could ever mature as a WR, he might very well be a better match-up than Jones against certain cornerbacks, and vice-versa. Jones will still be a very good red zone target, though.

Even in the absolute worst-case scenario, Jones is still much better than Myles White. There are always several Myles White's available in the NFL. If Jones flops, he can be cut since his salary is minimal and the Packers can sign another bum wide receiver like White or a couple dozen others. This is what happens when a team loses a top target for the season. Although Abbrederis could really be the wild card here. Perhaps the Packers will cut Jones for Abbrederis if he really develops.
texaspackerbacker
9 years ago

Agreed that he has no long-term place here and he stunts the development of the youngsters (although some people might say he'd help bring the youngsters along as a vet). That being said, which one of the youngsters do we ditch next year to make space for Jordy? Doubt said person would be tradable/have any value even if they did play a full year as a #5. Only person it would hurt at all is whoever's going to be the #5 in practice on the current roster as he's going to be on the field less (assuming Jones will be #4). So I don't think the effect on any youngsters we're actually going to have past this year is notable.

Originally Posted by: Porforis 



We could have and should have kept 6 WRs - 7 was not even out of the question. I did a couple versions of a 53 man roster that way.

I hope you're right that Jones is of good enough character to help along the young guys - I obviously can't say one way or the other about that. Playing is the main thing that brings them along, though, and if damn Jones is active, they will be doing a lot less of that. As I said, Jones SHOULD be a distant 5th. Now, with the stupid seniority system, I assume that will be Janis - who I would MUCH rather see catching the ball than an overripe lemon like Jones.

We still should win; We should go all the way to and win the Super Bowl; But we would have been better off WITHOUT James Jones than with him.

Expressing the Good Normal Views of Good Normal Americans.
If Anything I Say Smacks of Extremism, Please Tell Me EXACTLY What.
Zero2Cool
9 years ago

So the 2nd best receiver on the Packers, a team favored by many to go to the Super Bowl, was so bad that he couldn't make 2 other teams rosters with losing records? Better hope Lacy doesn't get hurt because our WR's evidently suck!

Originally Posted by: QCHuskerFan 



The Packers wanted James Jones BACK after his contract expired after 2013 season, but were late to the game per James Jones agent and the Packers weren't going to match the Raiders offer. It's not like Packers did NOT want James Jones.

Raiders fired the coaching staff that brought in James Jones.
Raiders drafted Amari Cooper very early in the draft.
Raiders didn't feel James Jones would a top two WR on their team and wanted to see the younger guys blossom.
Raiders are in rebuild mode with their roster and unlike the Safety position, they have youth on WR.

No reason to pay James Jones that salary to be WR3 on a team going no where fast.

I dunno, to me its obvious the Raiders cutting James Jones was more about them than James Jones talent.

I don't think the Giants had any intention of keeping James Jones and I think their OC had more to do with James Jones being given a chance and he didn't tear it up so they cut ties with him.

James Jones had a career year in receptions with the RAIDERS who again fired their entire staff and had a rookie QB at the helm. James Jones comes to the PACKERS as the WR3 giving the Packers the outside size they prefer while Randall Cobb maintains his slot position.

James Jones knows the Packers offense. James Jones knows Aaron Rodgers. Aaron Rodgers trusts James Jones.


I am all in favor of James Jones being with the Packers. I was NOT in favor of the Packers giving up ANY draft pick for him because I felt strongly that the Giants were going to release him and he could be had by simply signing him. Trading a draft pick for James Jones, I felt would have been like going to a car dealer and saying I'll give you $10k for the car you have priced for $8k. Just plain stupid in my view.


The Packers are going to stomp the shit out of the league and James Jones is going to get around 40 receptions for 500 yards and six TD's in the process and you are going to LOVE IT!!!

UserPostedImage
greengold
9 years ago

You all love statistics so here is one for you.

James Jones has 196 receptions over the last three seasons and 115 them went for a first down. That's not including his 23 TD's over the same period.

You can let that settle in ...

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



Here is another one. Myles White's salary is $510k as a second year player. James Jones has a $585K salary cap hit. So the Jones signing costs the Packers is a mere $75k against the cap. Awesome value if you ask me. 👍

steveishere
9 years ago

We could have and should have kept 6 WRs - 7 was not even out of the question. I did a couple versions of a 53 man roster that way.

I hope you're right that Jones is of good enough character to help along the young guys - I obviously can't say one way or the other about that. Playing is the main thing that brings them along, though, and if damn Jones is active, they will be doing a lot less of that. As I said, Jones SHOULD be a distant 5th. Now, with the stupid seniority system, I assume that will be Janis - who I would MUCH rather see catching the ball than an overripe lemon like Jones.

We still should win; We should go all the way to and win the Super Bowl; But we would have been better off WITHOUT James Jones than with him.

Originally Posted by: texaspackerbacker 



Jones isn't good enough nor making enough money to keep Monty and Janis on the bench if they are actually ready to play. Boykin showed last year that if Rodgers doesn't trust you then you aren't going to do a damn thing. Jones to me does nothing but make Montgomery and Janis have to earn that spot instead of having it given to them by Jordy's injury which does indeed make the team better than it was. The only thing we lose out on in this situation is Myles White and honestly who cares there are 100 of him out there without a team right now. Why should we have kept 7 receivers on the roster when the ones we cut made it to the practice squad?
PackFanWithTwins
9 years ago
He has been listed behind Devante on the depth chart. We need to make up for 1400 yards lost with Jordy, Jones can account for 700 of that. He will also be the best blocker in the WR group which is needed with the bubble screens and help for lacy. He was almost able to get 700 yards with a rookie QB on a bad team with Rodgers the only way he doesn't exceed that is if the young guys exceed expectations.
The world needs ditch diggers too Danny!!!
Barfarn
9 years ago

No, I said nothing of the kind. My take on the RB situation has been that we had 3 excellent young RBs, and it was unfortunate that we had to lose any of them.

Your take on the TE position seems way off base. Backman clearly showed more ability and performed better than Perillo.

Your post just above the one I quoted sounded extremely paranoid. You make these weird claims that smack of some sort of insider info, then you cry "personal attack" at the mere question of whether you are some damn media member or employee of the team or what. How about some full disclosure - or else not passing off speculation as knowledge.

Originally Posted by: texaspackerbacker 



In the thread: “Countdown to camp: No. 3 running back must emerge”

Tex said [2 months ago], “I don't agree with the need to have 3 RBs. It may happen if more than one of the young guys stand out, but it's not a necessity...You CAN get by with two - not that we will, but by keeping at least one, maybe two decent RBs on the practice squad, they can be activated if need be. Beyond that, as has been said, Kuhn has experience there and likely, Montgomery will get reps in practice there too, so in the unlikely event both RBs go down in the same game, they could be used along with the prospect of a one back offense or using a TE at fullback. So yes, it CAN be done.”

Ya got me a bit paranoid that my memory was goin’ bad, LOL.

It was insightful deciding that 2 RBs was possible. And if we applied it to the initial 53 it would work. Harris’ lack of ST play, points to Harris being inactive. Inactive and PS is effectively the same thing; just so long as someone doesn’t sign the PS guy to their roster. What I saw on TV was that Harris was good, but wasn’t at all special. Although special was him not fumbling with that cast when all those hungry NO 2nd and 3rd stringers fighting for a job would target that supposed weakness. Cutting White shows that Ted Thompson sees Harris as much more than the 53rd most talented guy on roster; because if he saw them equally talented he would have kept White given the WR issues.

I don’t think my TE evaluations were off at all: Backman has more upside, today Perillo is [by far] the better TE and STs player. This will become evident if a TE goes down and Perillo is active and Backman is inactive. If Q gets suspended and Backman plays ahead of Perillo,then I’d be WRONG- it’s as simple as that. It’s just my roster strategy probably would have seen Backman put on another team’s roster and TT’s strategy keeps Perillo if we need him AND Backman. And that’s why Ted Thompson and his staff run 1265 and not me.

A far as passing off speculation as insider knowledge that nonsensical notion was unequivocally destroyed by my post you decided to label as “paranoid.” If I state, “AR is starting in Chicago;” is this passing off speculation as insider info? Or is it just a statement that is so ridiculously obvious it requires no qualifier like “I believe” in front of it? But if I state, “Janis or Backman can’t run routes reliably;” perhaps you see that as me passing off speculation as inside info because you haven’t noticed how obvious it is. Think about it!

And if you saw, what many here see in Janis, Jones signing would not be so offensive. Ya gotta know this goes 100% against TT's typical behavior; obviously he sees it as a NECESSITY or he wouldn't have done it.
Fan Shout
Zero2Cool (9h) : Still HC positions available out there. I wonder if Hafley pops up for one
Zero2Cool (9h) : Trent Baalke is out as the Jaguars GM.
dfosterf (11h) : Jeff Hafley would have been a better choice, fortunately they don't know that. Someone will figure that out next off season
Zero2Cool (12h) : Aaron Glenn Planning To Take Jets HC Job
dfosterf (12h) : Martha- C'est mon boulot! 😁
Zero2Cool (13h) : Thank you
wpr (13h) : Z, glad you are feeling better.
wpr (13h) : My son and D-I-L work for UM. It's a way to pick on them.
Zero2Cool (13h) : Thank you. I rarely get sick, and even more rarely sick to the point I can't work.
wpr (13h) : Beast- back to yesterday, I CAN say OSU your have been Michigan IF the odds of making the playoffs were more urgent.
dfosterf (13h) : Glad to hear you are feeling a bit better.
Zero2Cool (14h) : I've been near death ill last several days, finally feel less dead and site issues.
Zero2Cool (14h) : It is a big deal. This host is having issues. It's frustrating.
Martha Careful (14h) : just kidding...it was down
Martha Careful (14h) : you were blocked yesterday, due to a a recalcitrant demeanor yesterday in the penalty box for a recalcitrant demeanor
dfosterf (14h) : Was that site shutdown on your end or mine? No big deal, just curious
beast (21-Jan) : That way teams like Indiana and SMU don't make the conference championships by simply avoiding all the other good teams in their own confere
beast (21-Jan) : Also, with these "Super Conferences" instead of a single conference champion, have 4 teams make a Conference playoffs.
beast (21-Jan) : Also in college football, is a bye week a good or bad thing?
Martha Careful (21-Jan) : The tournament format was fine. Seeding could use some work.
beast (21-Jan) : You can't assume Ohio State would of won the Michigan game...
beast (21-Jan) : Rankings were 1) Oregon 2) Georgia 3) Texas 4) Penn State 5) Notre Dame 6) Ohio State, none of the rest mattered
wpr (21-Jan) : Texas, ND and OSU would have been fighting for the final 2 slots.
wpr (21-Jan) : Oregon and Georgia were locks. Without the luxury of extra playoff berths, Ohios St would have been more focused on Michigan game.
wpr (21-Jan) : Zero, no. If there were only 4 teams Ohio State would have been one of them. Boise St and ASU would not have been selected.
Zero2Cool (21-Jan) : So that was 7 vs 8, that means in BCS they never would made it?
Martha Careful (21-Jan) : A great game. Give ND credit for coming back, although I am please with the outcome.
Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : FG to make it academic
Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : and there's the dagger
Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : ooooo 8 point game with 4 minutes to go!
Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : ooooooooohhhhhh he missed!
Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : Ooooo that completion makes things VERY interesting
Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : Game not over yet
beast (21-Jan) : Oh yeah, Georgia starting quarterback season ending elbow injury
beast (21-Jan) : Sadly something happened to Georgia... they should be playing in this game against Ohio State
beast (21-Jan) : I thought Ohio State and Texas were both better than Notre Dame & Penn State
Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : Notre Lame getting rolled
Martha Careful (21-Jan) : Ohio State just got punched in the gut. Lets see how they respond
Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : Notre Lame vs the Luckeyes, bleh
Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : Oh snap!!!
Zero2Cool (21-Jan) : Even Stevie Wonder can see that.
Zero2Cool (21-Jan) : Nah, you see Lions OC leaving to be HC of Bears is directly related to Packers.
Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : ohhhhhhh Zero is in TROUBLE
packerfanoutwest (21-Jan) : Zero, per your orders, check Bearshome, not packershome
Zero2Cool (20-Jan) : Then he'll land with another team and flourish.
Zero2Cool (20-Jan) : Ben going to Bears. He'll be out in 3 years.
Mucky Tundra (20-Jan) : what's so funny?
Zero2Cool (20-Jan) : BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Zero2Cool (20-Jan) : Bears are finalizing a deal to hire Ben Johnson as their head coach. (via @tompelissero )
Mucky Tundra (20-Jan) : Looks like Lions OC Ben Johnson is going to be the Bears coach
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
Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Jan 12 @ 3:30 PM
Eagles
Recent Topics
8h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

13h / Random Babble / packerfanoutwest

21-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

21-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

20-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

20-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

20-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

20-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

19-Jan / Random Babble / Martha Careful

18-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

17-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

17-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

17-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

16-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

16-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.