wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member Topic Starter
4 years ago

Lazzard went from not making the roster to being the starter in the same season... if that's not the definition of a surprise, then I don't know what is....

He should clearly be on this list more than anyone else...

Sullivan as well....

Goodson I got mixed feelings about, but he was good in a very limited role...

But trying to think of other names, that are better surprise in positivitie ways is tough.

Maybe Bulaga? Clark being used in a new role, which I don't think suits him as well, think he can be an all pro NT but not as good as the 3 tech, but did better than expected. S Greene until his injury.

Originally Posted by: beast 



Untrue. Players who start because of the outstanding quality is one thing. Players who start because of a total lack of better options is something completely different. There was no stand out WR after Adams.

Last year Josh Jones started some games. Hardly a ringing endorsement. So did Kentrell Brice, Josh Jackson, Antoino Morrison, Tony Brown and Jermaine Whitehead just to name a few. Jackson is the only one still on the team and his days are numbered.
UserPostedImage
go.pack.go.
4 years ago

Ugh, that wretched phrase again. 🤮 Has there ever been another top-flight quarterback about whose tender feelings reporters and commentators were so solicitous the way they are for Rodgers'? I don't remember ever hearing endless references to Peyton Manning's or Brett Favre's need for trust in their receivers. I don't hear it with Tom Brady or Drew Brees either. They make do with what they have.

That being said, the drop-off in production between the No. 1 receiver and the No. 2 receiver is pretty dramatic. Like fall-off-a-cliff dramatic.

Originally Posted by: Nonstopdrivel 



Yes. In fact, QB’s in the NFL (or at any level) have certain trust levels with certain receivers. It is not something specific to Rodgers. Look at the trust level between Brees and Michael Thomas compared to the rest of his receivers. It’s obvious that Thomas is trusted more than anyone with that number of targets.

UserPostedImage
beast
4 years ago

You mean to tell me you expected Jones to lead the league in TDs? He doubled his output from last year. No one saw that coming. Not even close.

Originally Posted by: wpr 

Actually I believe some people did see Jones numbers taking a large incline (maybe not those exact numbers but a good bump up) due to he fact the Packers pass the ball at a higher percentage under Mike McCarthy last year, more than any other team in years....

And the basic of LaFleur scheme is running the ball...

And there was concerns about Jones staying healthy, buy most of his injuries have come in the from pass blocking, which LaFleur asks his RBs to do less of, and gets them in receiving routes much more often.

Untrue. Players who start because of the outstanding quality is one thing. Players who start because of a total lack of better options is something completely different. There was no stand out WR after Adams.

Last year Josh Jones started some games. Hardly a ringing endorsement. So did Kentrell Brice, Josh Jackson, Antoino Morrison, Tony Brown and Jermaine Whitehead just to name a few. Jackson is the only one still on the team and his days are numbered.

Originally Posted by: wpr 

You completely missed the point... you're talking shit about starters... I'm pointing out a guy that was released by the team in the same exact year that same exact team made him their #2 guy at the position.

Not a single one of your many examples relates to that same standard...

They freaking released him...

People could have guessed your examples would become the starters for a few games. No one would guess the released guy...
UserPostedImage
Nonstopdrivel
4 years ago
I think what the venerable wpr is saying it that while you could say that the cut wide receiver managing to make a contribution was a pleasant surprise, the other way to look at it is that it's concerning that there was so little talent behind the No. 1 receiver, a player who had been cut became the de facto No. 2 receiver, despite generating less than half the production of the top receiver. Is that a sign that the coaching staff underestimated Lazard—or that they way overestimated the other receivers on the squad? I think it's a little of both, exacerbated by Rodgers' weird insistence on only working with his favorites.
UserPostedImage
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member Topic Starter
4 years ago
UserPostedImage
UserPostedImage
Fan Shout
Mucky Tundra (8h) : Oh I know about Jacobs, I just couldn't pass up an opportunity to mimic Zero lol
buckeyepackfan (8h) : Jacobs was just sat down, Watson re-injured that knee that kept him out 1 game earlier
buckeyepackfan (8h) : I needed .14 that's. .14 points for the whole 4th quarter to win and go to the SB. Lol
Mucky Tundra (8h) : Jacobs gonna be OK???
Zero2Cool (8h) : Watson gonna be OK???
packerfanoutwest (12h) : Inactives tonight for the Pack: Alexander- knee Bullard - ankle Williams - quad Walker -ankle Monk Heath
packerfanoutwest (12h) : No Jaire, but hopefully the front 7 destroys the line of scrimmage & forces Rattler into a few passes to McKinney.
packerfanoutwest (12h) : minny could be #1 seed and the Lions #5 seed
Zero2Cool (14h) : We'd have same Division and Conference records. Strength of schedule we edge them
Zero2Cool (14h) : I just checked. What tie breaker?
bboystyle (14h) : yes its possible but unlikely. If we do get the 5th, we face the NFCS winner
Zero2Cool (14h) : Ahh, ok.
bboystyle (14h) : yes due to tie breaker
Zero2Cool (14h) : I mean, unlikely, yes, but mathematically, 5th is possible by what I'm reading.
Zero2Cool (14h) : If Vikings lose out, Packers win out, Packers get 5th, right?
bboystyle (14h) : 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 (15h) : beast, the ad revenue goes to the broadcast company but they gotta pay to air the game on their channel/network
beast (16h) : 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 (16h) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly
Zero2Cool (16h) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.
bboystyle (16h) : 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 (16h) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv
Zero2Cool (17h) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno
beast (17h) : 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 (17h) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans
Zero2Cool (18h) : I see what you did there Mucky
Zero2Cool (18h) : dammit. 3:25pm
Zero2Cool (18h) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm
Mucky Tundra (18h) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground
Mucky Tundra (18h) : Yeah baby!
Zero2Cool (18h) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah
Zero2Cool (20h) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.
beast (20h) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue
Zero2Cool (20h) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's
Zero2Cool (20h) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.
packerfanoutwest (21h) : ok I stand corrected
Zero2Cool (21h) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th
Zero2Cool (21h) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?
beast (21h) : Saying no to the 6th lock.
beast (21h) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out
Zero2Cool (21h) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.
beast (21h) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games
beast (21h) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality
beast (21h) : 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 (21h) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread
Zero2Cool (21h) : I literally just said it.
packerfanoutwest (21h) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't
Zero2Cool (21h) : Falcons, Buccaneers would need to win final two games.
Zero2Cool (21h) : Yes, if they win one of three, they are lock. If they lose out, they can be eliminated.
packerfanoutwest (21h) : as I just said,,gtheyh are in no matter what
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
4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

7h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

20h / 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.