Davante as our WR1 · PACKERSHOME

uffda udfa
Veteran Member Topic Starter

7 years ago

Silverstein did a piece today on Adams being our WR1 and staff needing to use him better.

In a previous post, I stated Hundley was sunk because his WRs don't separate. That is true...they don't.

I was a little miffed at this idea of 17 being a WR1. He failed miserably in that role with Nelson out for the year. The charge is Davante is better than 2015.

Do you realize Davante has bested 66 yards receiving, once this season? The only game over 66 is where his stats were padded during garbage time at Atlanta.

We're in dire straits in the WR corps if 17 is our #1 WR. Nelson is fading so there's nobody else. Bennett has been terrible. Amazing what 12 did with this group. Hundley can't win with these guys.

Tell me I'm wrong and Adams is worthy of WR1 status, or am I right and he's only #1 by default because we have nobody else?

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."

Wanna join the discussion?! Login to your PACKERSHOME forum account or Register a new forum account

Zero2Cool
Elite Member

7 years ago

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa

I don't know how you don't understand that Davante Adams IS better than, FAR better than Sterling Sharpe!!!

Davante Adams is not a NFL WR1. A WR1 I will define as could start on all 32 teams as one of the top 2 WR. He is the best WR the Packers have, so he is the Packers WR1. His best attribute is how he consistently gets separation. Even Richard Sherman couldn't stay with him.

Adams failed miserably in 2015(?). He was (my opinion) a mental midget with the pressure of being WR1 for the Packers. Compounding the problem was the injury he wouldn't rest. Sure, we can call him tough for battling it out, but long term it hurt the team. He should have sat 2-4 weeks and came back as close to 100% as he could get instead of rolling out there at ~75%.

Adams being WR1 for the Packers does not mean we are in dire straits at WR. My gosh, that's crazy hyperbole there. We can blast him for total yards, but why ignore 5 TD's in 7 games while being covered by CB1's?

Teams are putting their best CB on Adams because they know he's the biggest threat at WR. Adams isn't the problem. Randall Cobb, Jeff Janis, Geronimo Allison, Trevor Davis and Jordy Nelson not exploiting the lesser CB's is the problem.

uffda udfa
Veteran Member Topic Starter

7 years ago

Not sure the CB1 thing started until last few games.

I think it does mean we're in dire straits if Davante is best we've got. Nelson being Nelson helped Adams and Cobb. Neither are capable without Jordy as a high producing WR1.

I got Adams in a FF trade last week and cut him for a kicker. That is how little I think of him with Hundley at QB. Oh, u might ask why I traded for him? I didn't. I wanted CMC and he was thrown to balance a 2 for 2 deal. His guy knew he sucked and was going to cut him so he threw him into the deal.

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."

Zero2Cool
Elite Member

7 years ago

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa

No, if Jeff Janis is the best we got, then we are in dire straits. You hate (strongly dislike?) Davante Adams because someone predicted him to be better than Sharpe. That bias has been made abundantly clear with you. And that is fine, I have no issue there.

No clue who CMC is or why people abbreviate obscure things most have no clue about.

We do not need a Julio Jones to win games. Our offense is not the problem. It is our defense. We have a really good top three (collectively speaking) WR. Our head coach is a good offensive mind. He just decided to put his head firmly up his ass vs Saints, who actually have been really damn good on defense since week 3. I think they've given up the least amount of yards passing.

Anyhow, defense is our problem. We can't get turn overs. We can't stop third and 10+ yards.

TheKanataThrilla
Veteran Member

7 years ago

Hitting Davante with some quick slants would do both him and Hundley a world of good.

PackFanWithTwins
Veteran Member

7 years ago

What does #1 WR mean, is it simply the person with the most yards or something else. Do you want to have a #1 who has twice the production of the next option? Or would you prefer two that are about equal. I don't care if we don't have a 1000 yard WR as long as the total production is where it needs to be.

Combined Jordy and Devante are 185 yards off where they were last year where they ended with 2254 yards combined. How much of that 185 yards is the result of Rodgers not playing 1 3/4 games.

Now the question is, how much to we pay to keep him. What we can't do is pay Devante as if it is Julio.

The world needs ditch diggers too Danny!!!

uffda udfa
Veteran Member Topic Starter

7 years ago

CMC is Christian McCaffery.

I don't dislike Davante because of the Sharpe thing, which is hilarious.

That WR draft was loaded and we came out with him. He was another typical Packers WR. The Panthers just traded Kelvin Benjamin because he's too similar to Funchess. I'd been lamenting a need for speed up to the draft and I still am! Adams is not what our O needed if we were to take a WR that high. It's like we always draft to maintain/replace and don't try to carry what we're doing. A big speed guy is what we need. We used a 7th on that bigger need while wasting a 2nd to get what we already had. It's maddening.

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."

Zero2Cool
Elite Member

7 years ago

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa

Okay, I'll bite. You believe 2014 was loaded at WR and that Davante Adams wasn't what our offense needed. I'm curious, who did the Packers need that could have been taken in Adams draft slot?

Cheesey
Preferred Member

7 years ago

Our WR's are not the major problem. Aaron Rodgers got the ball to them before he was hurt. The problem is, we don't presently have a QB that can get the ball out in the shot time the WR's are open.
That isn't so much his fault, as he doesn't have the chemistry or time that Aaron Rodgers had with the WR's.

I'm hoping for a win tonight.

uffda udfa
Veteran Member Topic Starter

7 years ago

#10

Our WRs are a problem if the GOAT wasn't lighting it up with them.

There were 4 guys I really liked. Mike Evans, Cody Latimer, Beckham and Donte Moncrief. Evans went well before our turn in Round 1 and OBJ, too. Latimer busted but is just now getting on the field. Saw 14 catch one from Osweiler and smiled yesterday.

Adams was one of them on my do not want list. Played in that inflated college O and had very average speed. His calling card was that he could jump. Another typical west coast offense Packers WR. Always the same...no diversity. It's why I loved Cobb. Guy was different element player. Not same mold time after time when it was clear we needed more speed. We know we need it. That's why Janis, Davis, Charles Johnson were drafted. We just don't prioritize it. We'll just feel lucky if we hit on a speed guy. Why isn't a speed guy a priority with a higher pick? It's important. Just now getting around to understanding a guy like Josh Jones can change our D with his speed.

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

beast (4h) : I'm confused, Pete Carroll and Brian Schottenheimer? When Todd Monken, Joe Brady, Kellen Moore, Kliff Kingsbury and Zac Robinson are availab

Zero2Cool (7h) : Any reason I'm catching a shot here about my intelligence?

Martha Careful (25-Jan) : thank you Mucky for sticking up for me

Martha Careful (25-Jan) : some of those people are smarter than you zero. However Pete Carroll is not

Mucky Tundra (24-Jan) : Rude!

beast (24-Jan) : Martha? 😋

Zero2Cool (24-Jan) : Raiders hired someone from the elderly home.

dfosterf (24-Jan) : I'm going with a combination of the two.

beast (24-Jan) : Either the Cowboys have no idea what they're doing, or they're targeting their former OC, currently the Eagles OC

Zero2Cool (23-Jan) : Fake news. Cowboys say no

Zero2Cool (23-Jan) : Mystery candidate in the Cowboys head coaching search believed to be Packers ST Coordinator Rich Bisaccia.

beast (23-Jan) : Also why do both NYC teams have absolutely horrible OL for over a decade?

beast (23-Jan) : I wonder why the Jets always hire defensive coaches to be head coach

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Still HC positions available out there. I wonder if Hafley pops up for one

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Trent Baalke is out as the Jaguars GM.

dfosterf (22-Jan) : Jeff Hafley would have been a better choice, fortunately they don't know that. Someone will figure that out next off season

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Aaron Glenn Planning To Take Jets HC Job

dfosterf (22-Jan) : Martha- C'est mon boulot! 😁

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Thank you

wpr (22-Jan) : Z, glad you are feeling better.

wpr (22-Jan) : My son and D-I-L work for UM. It's a way to pick on them.

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Thank you. I rarely get sick, and even more rarely sick to the point I can't work.

wpr (22-Jan) : Beast- back to yesterday, I CAN say OSU your have been Michigan IF the odds of making the playoffs were more urgent.

dfosterf (22-Jan) : Glad to hear you are feeling a bit better.

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : I've been near death ill last several days, finally feel less dead and site issues.

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : It is a big deal. This host is having issues. It's frustrating.

Martha Careful (22-Jan) : just kidding...it was down

Martha Careful (22-Jan) : you were blocked yesterday, due to a a recalcitrant demeanor yesterday in the penalty box for a recalcitrant demeanor

dfosterf (22-Jan) : 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

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