No receivers taken· Page 2

Zero2Cool
Elite Member

4 years ago

#11

This is strange.
image.png You have insufficient rights to see the content.

beast
Select Member

4 years ago

#12

This is strange.
image.png You have insufficient rights to see the content.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool

Yeah, that's one thing that I'm heavily questioning is value, as there are a couple of players that I wonder if someone just didn't fall in love with, and we over drafted them by a round or more (especially the TE).

Also while it certainly seems LaFleur had more say, how much say did he have, as usually coaches make bad scouts as they fall in love and over draft guys, and reportedly LaFleur has a good coachin friend that help coached the TE and yeah I wondered if that had anything to do with it.

Also shocked how many of the players we added have a connection To QB Love, as I think I read he worked out with the RB and ILB that we drafted, for UDFAs, we signed one of his college teammates, we signed one of his high school teammates, we talked with his 2018 coach, who's at a new school in 2019 and we signed an UDFA from there too.

When this kind of thing happens by accident, it's pretty cool... but this sure happened a freaking lot in this one single year, more than other years, kinda makes me wonder if this is not by coincidence. Not that they planned it this way, but some sort of subconscious biased? Or changes to scouting due to the Corona Virus?

That being said, I am impressed by the TEs versatility (with is important in this scheme, and the TE and some of the OL are aggressive and scrappy as hell, even if they get beat, they're still fighting to get back into the rep for the win. I don't think the OL are as upside talented (at least not athletically), but their aggressive style sorta reminded me of TJ Lang, which gave me hope for the future of the interior OL.

Zero2Cool
Elite Member

4 years ago

#13

“We thought (the receiver class) was really strong at the top. I don’t know that as we got to the middle and the end that we thought it was as strong as others did,” Gutekunst said. “The runs went pretty early and once we went to a certain spot ... we just felt there wasn’t a lot of great candidates who were locks to make our team.”

Hmm.

KRK
Veteran Member

4 years ago

#14

Packers were 5th in the league in passing yards per game and 4th in points per game.

So if our receivers suck so bad, Rodgers must be frigging great.

In Luce tua Videmus Lucem KRK

beast
Select Member

4 years ago

#15

Packers were 5th in the league in passing yards per game and 4th in points per game.

So if our receivers suck so bad, Rodgers must be frigging great.

Originally Posted by: KRK

I think you're looking at post season stats, if so, that's out of 12.

For the season, out of 32, they were 17th in the league in passing yards and 15th points per game.

Cheesey
Preferred Member

4 years ago

#16

I don’t understand this “get Aaron a ring” crap. If the Packers win another Super bowl, does that only benefit Aaron Rodgers???
So why put it like they are doing things to make Rodgers happy?
Some think Aaron Rodgers runs the entire franchise.
He doesn’t hire or fire anyone.
Isn’t the entire team and office people have the same goal to get a SB ring?
Helping Rodgers with getting weapons for him helps the entire franchise.
Isn’t that SUPPOSED to be the goal????

TheKanataThrilla
Veteran Member

4 years ago

#17

I asked the question in another thread about how many WRs we will be keeping on the active roster next season? I am guessing 5 given our RBs and TEs are expected to be more active in the offense.

WRs
MVS
Malik Taylor
ESB
Shep
Kumerow
Lazard
Funchess
Begelton
Adams
and that 1 UDFA Darrell Stewart

If we draft a WR or 2 and we only plan to keep 5 are we just keeping rookies on the active roster so they don't get scooped? I really think that this messed up offseason may have come into play as well. Rookies will likely struggle and if OTAs is limited what are the odds that any WR will develop any type of rapport with Rodgers?

I read articles with people saying that drafting a WR is about win now, but I am starting to have a problem seeing that as I don't see 7 WRs on the roster anymore.

go.pack.go.
Veteran Member Topic Starter

4 years ago

#18

Originally Posted by: Cheesey

Exactly. The fact that a lot of people think it’s only about getting Rodgers help is alarming. Getting Rodgers help = better offense which = more wins which = better chance at Super Bowl which = championships for the franchise.

beast
Select Member

4 years ago

#19

Originally Posted by: go.pack.go.

True, though there are multiple ways to help a QB, and an old phase that a good running game.is a QB's beat friend, which is basically basis of the Moto of this entire offensive scheme.

Take if from the first starting QB in this scheme and what he said about the second great QB in this scheme.

"Number one, we're going to have good balance on the offensive side," Elway, now the team's general manager, said Thursday. "What I can say, late in my career, that was my best friend, the running game. And I think that running game will be Peyton's best friend also."

NFL.com wrote:

This entire office is build around getting the running game going, to control the game and get the passing game going off of that, including play action passes, and using the RB in passing routes instead of pass protection, to force a LB to try to tackle the RB one on one, on a swing pass.

Though, I'll still argue that Brett Favre's best friend was the defense, because Favre would.make something happened TD or Int, he'd just need them to bail him out when it was the INT.

And we did sign a FA WR (though to a one year deal), but he's got a WR/TE tweener build, which might be good for this system.

Originally Posted by: TheKanataThrilla

Usually we keep 5 or 6. But yes, I had a similar thoughts about drafting later WR, we already have depth at WR, we've just missing a top end quality guy (or two).

But I'm not sure how much a mid to late round rookie will help vs say Kumerow. Though maybe if they develop, but that might take time.

Nonstopdrivel
Preferred Member

4 years ago

#20

If we draft a WR or 2 and we only plan to keep 5 are we just keeping rookies on the active roster so they don't get scooped? I really think that this messed up offseason may have come into play as well. Rookies will likely struggle and if OTAs is limited what are the odds that any WR will develop any type of rapport with Rodgers?

I read articles with people saying that drafting a WR is about win now, but I am starting to have a problem seeing that as I don't see 7 WRs on the roster anymore.

Originally Posted by: TheKanataThrilla

Exactly. Unlike Ted Thompson, Gutekunst seems to be a pretty straight shooter. If he says he didn't see any wide receivers on the board who were likely to make the roster, I'm inclined to believe him. Fans and pundits are roasting him now, but how furiously would they be raking him over the coals if one of the receivers he took ended up on the waiver wire? Which is worse: to not take a receiver at all, or to waste a pick on a player who fails to make the final cut? This was clearly a scheme-oriented draft with an eye to the next two or three years. If neither LaFleur nor the scouting staff saw a player they felt would be a fit in their system, it stands to reason that Gutekunst would prioritize other needs.

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 (4h) : Houston getting dog walked by Baltimore

packerfanoutwest (10h) : Feliz Navidad!

Zero2Cool (15h) : Merry Christmas!

beast (23h) : Merry Christmas 🎄🎁

beast (24-Dec) : Sounds like no serious injuries from the Saints game and Jacobs and Watson should play in the Vikings game

packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : both games Watson missed, Packers won

Martha Careful (24-Dec) : I hope all of you have a Merry Christmas!

Mucky Tundra (24-Dec) : Oh I know about Jacobs, I just couldn't pass up an opportunity to mimic Zero lol

buckeyepackfan (24-Dec) : Jacobs was just sat down, Watson re-injured that knee that kept him out 1 game earlier

buckeyepackfan (24-Dec) : I needed .14 that's. .14 points for the whole 4th quarter to win and go to the SB. Lol

Mucky Tundra (24-Dec) : Jacobs gonna be OK???

Zero2Cool (24-Dec) : Watson gonna be OK???

packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : Inactives tonight for the Pack: Alexander- knee Bullard - ankle Williams - quad Walker -ankle Monk Heath

packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : No Jaire, but hopefully the front 7 destroys the line of scrimmage & forces Rattler into a few passes to McKinney.

packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : minny could be #1 seed and the Lions #5 seed

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : We'd have same Division and Conference records. Strength of schedule we edge them

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I just checked. What tie breaker?

bboystyle (23-Dec) : yes its possible but unlikely. If we do get the 5th, we face the NFCS winner

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Ahh, ok.

bboystyle (23-Dec) : yes due to tie breaker

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I mean, unlikely, yes, but mathematically, 5th is possible by what I'm reading.

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : If Vikings lose out, Packers win out, Packers get 5th, right?

bboystyle (23-Dec) : 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 (23-Dec) : beast, the ad revenue goes to the broadcast company but they gotta pay to air the game on their channel/network

beast (23-Dec) : 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 (23-Dec) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.

bboystyle (23-Dec) : 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 (23-Dec) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno

beast (23-Dec) : 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 (23-Dec) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I see what you did there Mucky

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : dammit. 3:25pm

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm

Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground

Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : Yeah baby!

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.

beast (23-Dec) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.

packerfanoutwest (23-Dec) : ok I stand corrected

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?

beast (23-Dec) : Saying no to the 6th lock.

beast (23-Dec) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.

beast (23-Dec) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games

beast (23-Dec) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality

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

Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM

BEARS