ESPN-Ranking the 5 WORST NFL OFFSEASONS BY TEAM

[tynimiller]

Last season should work as a cautionary tale on what to expect out of the current receiving corps.

While draft position doesn't matter once players make it to the NFL none of the wide receivers aside of Lazard performed at a higher level than expectations entering the league.



True, you're ignorantly declaring that Gutekunst has upgraded the wide receiver position while everybody covering the league thinks otherwise.

False, utterly and completely false. I've heard numerous analyst's claim the Packers ignored it in the draft and didn't provide an upgrade there. However, I've not read anyone say the WR as a whole in Green Bay has regressed or even stayed the same. Shoot many of the articles I've read is purely based on attacking the draft outcomes, which of course you 100% know I wanted a WR in the first round. I'd have went Edwards in the 2nd round. Despite that utter misstep (IMO) the WR corps as a whole has undoubtedly been upgraded...does it end up being minimal or barely measurable, no one knows.

There is no ignorance on this topic coming from me. I'm ignorant about a lot of things though LOL

 

[rmontro]

I feel this is just a bunch of ******** the media creates. So two teammates ever (Jennings and Finley) don't speak highly of him as a leader, so let's just let them two speak for every teammate he has ever had.

I'm not talking about the complaints from some players, or the way his personality seems to rub certain people the wrong way. I couldn't care less about that. It just appears that he lacks some characteristic, you don't see him out there firing up his teammates and motivating them - not in the way we saw Patrick Mahomes firing up his guys when they were behind in the Super Bowl. Compare both their demeanors against the same team - the 49ers - when they were down. That's what I'm talking about.

Rodgers is more business-like in his approach, more aloof as some say. That's just a difference in style, and I'd still rather have him as quarterback than most others. But I'm not going to pretend every aspect of him is 100% perfect just because I'm a Packer fan, because no human is perfect.

I truly think some of his frustration is he was working with a number of guys that have immense promise all at once. Having one or maybe two guys like this is one thing, but to have that description fit EVERY guy not named Adams would be frustrating.

It must be frustrating for him also because the level of talent he's working with on offense these days isn't the same as it was earlier in his career. Especially now that he's older, and could really use the extra help. MLF's emphasis on the run game helps take some heat off of him, but it's not the same type of explosive offense he's worked with in the past.

 

[Mavster]

The Qb of a team shouldn’t need to act like a cliche sports movie character to get the team fired up.

 

[Taryn Miller]

I'm not talking about the complaints from some players, or the way his personality seems to rub certain people the wrong way. I couldn't care less about that. It just appears that he lacks some characteristic, you don't see him out there firing up his teammates and motivating them - not in the way we saw Patrick Mahomes firing up his guys when they were behind in the Super Bowl. Compare both their demeanors against the same team - the 49ers - when they were down. That's what I'm talking about.

Rodgers is more business-like in his approach, more aloof as some say. That's just a difference in style, and I'd still rather have him as quarterback than most others. But I'm not going to pretend every aspect of him is 100% perfect just because I'm a Packer fan, because no human is perfect.


It must be frustrating for him also because the level of talent he's working with on offense these days isn't the same as it was earlier in his career. Especially now that he's older, and could really use the extra help. MLF's emphasis on the run game helps take some heat off of him, but it's not the same type of explosive offense he's worked with in the past.

My thought on Rodgers, as to his sideline behavior or lack of, like that of Mahomes as mentioned, is Rodgers believes himself above that type of team invigoration and why I find it hard to see him going out of his way to help Love above and beyond what he deems is his Call To Duty.

In regard to his having less talent now than his earlier years, perhaps the issue that Gute and MLF have accepted about Rodgers is they feel the time Rodgers takes to actually satisfy his 'TRUST' issues with WR's is too time-consuming and a detriment to the new offensive scheme, which likely requires much less of a 'TRUST' program headed by Rodgers. However, trying to turn Rodgers into a 'just throw the ball' QB will be quite an accomplishment. Hence, the FO possibly saying 'You got what you got, and you're not getting anymore."

 

[Mondio]

i still think people are reading into this way too much. I don't think they picked a QB because they're tired of rodgers, they want to pressure rodgers, they don't think Rodgers has it anymore, they think Rodgers requires too much trust or anything else. I do think they felt the ID'd a kid that was going to be a great QB. I doubt they take any other QB in that draft if Love wasn't available. I also don't think they meant to tell Rodgers, you have what you have to work with.

I DO believe the FO when they say they had a couple guys pegged at some positions, but they weren't there to get. and for every person on every thread saying they reached for Love, they reached for Dillon and they reached for Degura etc, i suppose you would have been happy with a 3r or 4th round WR in the 2nd?

And even so, there are a hundred other ways to move the football in the NFL besides WR's. Adams is as good as they get. Funchess and lazard should be at least adequate or more and every QB taken in the 2nd round or later don't really impress me with their potential anymore than EQ does.

While I would have liked a new shiny toy, I don't think there were any sinister motives by the FO to not get one other than the value wasn't there.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

False, utterly and completely false. I've heard numerous analyst's claim the Packers ignored it in the draft and didn't provide an upgrade there. However, I've not read anyone say the WR as a whole in Green Bay has regressed or even stayed the same.

Every article I have read on the topic after the draft has wide receiver listed as the biggest need for the Packers.

In regard to his having less talent now than his earlier years, perhaps the issue that Gute and MLF have accepted about Rodgers is they feel the time Rodgers takes to actually satisfy his 'TRUST' issues with WR's is too time-consuming and a detriment to the new offensive scheme, which likely requires much less of a 'TRUST' program headed by Rodgers.

Rodgers targeting Lazard 52 times over the last 11 games of last season serves as evidence the trust issue with Rodgers is completely overblown.

 

[AmishMafia]

The Qb of a team shouldn’t need to act like a cliche sports movie character to get the team fired up.

"Leadership skills are not necessary for a QB and team chemistry is not a factor in team success. Trust me on this." - Jay Cutler 2008.

 

[rmontro]

The Qb of a team shouldn’t need to act like a cliche sports movie character to get the team fired up.

Is Mahomes a cliched sports movie character? Ideally, you shouldn't need a quarterback at all to get the team fired up, every player should be fired up on his own. Rodgers does exhibit some negative body language. He's not alone in that, we've seen Tom Brady do the same (of course Tom Brady has six rings). You don't need to be a "rah rah" guy, there are different styles of leadership. But leadership is a thing.

I'm not saying Rodgers is a bad leader, but I don't think he's the best leader ever either.

 

[tynimiller]

Every article I have read on the topic after the draft has wide receiver listed as the biggest need for the Packers.

Which still doesn't state no upgrade at all has been done.

 

[Mavster]

"Leadership skills are not necessary for a QB and team chemistry is not a factor in team success. Trust me on this." - Jay Cutler 2008.

That’s quite the leap

But have fun psycho analyzing an athletes perceived leadership and chemistry solely based on camera shots during the game

 

[Mavster]

Is Mahomes a cliched sports movie character? Ideally, you shouldn't need a quarterback at all to get the team fired up, every player should be fired up on his own. Rodgers does exhibit some negative body language. He's not alone in that, we've seen Tom Brady do the same (of course Tom Brady has six rings). You don't need to be a "rah rah" guy, there are different styles of leadership. But leadership is a thing.

I'm not saying Rodgers is a bad leader, but I don't think he's the best leader ever either.

And you know this because you’re in the locker room with him and practicing with and him, playing with him?

 

[Taryn Miller]

Every article I have read on the topic after the draft has wide receiver listed as the biggest need for the Packers.



Rodgers targeting Lazard 52 times over the last 11 games of last season serves as evidence the trust issue with Rodgers is completely overblown.

From week 9, when Adams returned and after Lazard began getting some play in the prior 3-4 weeks during Adams injury, this is the targeting of each;

Wk9-Adams 11 and Lazard 4
Wk10-Adams 10 and Lazard 6
Wk12-Adams 12 and Lazrad 2
Wk13-Adams 10 and Lazard 3
Wk14-Adams 6 and Lazard 3
Wk15-Adams 13 and Lazard 3
Wk16-Adams 16 and Lazard 9
Wk17-Adams 13 and Lazrad 0 I think Lazard didn't play or got dinged at some point in this game.
Totals-Adams 91 and Lazard 30

The 3-1 ratio doesn't speak to a high level of trust whether one thinks it bs or not, it's been a staple of Rodgers mantra and the numbers speak to it as being a reality.

Looking at Lazard and his competition in filling the void of Adams.

Wk5 shows Lazard not playing or at least not being targeted.
Wk6-Lazard 5 and Allison 7
Wk7-Lazard 4 and Allison 5
Wk8-Lazard 5 and Allison 3

The separation from these two and omitting Grahams average of 5 targets a week in these three weeks shows a lack of trust, especially when neither of the two are in GB anymore, couple this with the obvious loss of flavor when Adams returned, says Lazard was more a 'have to' than a 'want to' in the passing/target options.

Don't get me wrong here, I think Lazard has the ability to make a step up but even if a jump, will it be enough for Rodgers to turn an eye away from Adams. Rodgers getting older makes it harder to let loose the security blanket and doubt ones' own belief in another, regardless if it's Lazard, MVS or EQ.

If Rodgers finds himself forcing the ball to Adams, that doesn't speak well for any other WR in the group.

Have to and want to are quite a distance apart.

 

[tynimiller]

Unless we have another Top 30 caliber WR in the league opposite of Adams I don't want ANY WR getting half or more than half the targets Adams gets. The dude is legit a Top 5 WR arguably....Top 10 without blinking in the league right now, if he doesn't get 10 or more targets a game the gameplan needs revisited.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

I just look at the offseason and wonder what kind of offense this team is going to feasibly run. There really isn't any reliable player on the outside with speed to keep safeties worried. I get the idea misdirection and multiple plays out of similar formations, but this team is going to be facing a LOT of stacked boxes unless some of those young receivers make huge jumps.

That's probably my biggest worry with the offense (and it ties into the team not bringing any speed in); the Packers are not going to field an offense that features much in the way of a deep threat and that can make a LOT of the rest of the offense really hard. Luckily, the Packers have top-10 players at QB, RB, and WR, but having an actual deep threat emerge on offense would be an amazing improvement.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Rodgers targeting Lazard 52 times over the last 11 games of last season serves as evidence the trust issue with Rodgers is completely overblown.

People have to look REALLY hard for tiny things to pick on when criticizing one of the best (imo, THE best) QBs in NFL history.

 

[Fat Dogs]

Welcome to the forum. Well written and interesting thoughts.

I would just point out that Rodgers best games last season were when Adams was out and he was forced to go to other receivers. As far as his leadership goes, I think that has decreased. He doesn't behave the same as he used too. He used to be more confident and encouraging. I see him now glaring at the sidelines and less positive body language. He isn't Cutler out there, but he sure isn't AR of 7 years ago.

Can you blame him? He is a first ballet HOF QB. I think it’s crazy that we question his leadership. He has Adams and a bunch of guys who wouldn’t get playing time for any other team. We are getting excited over a CFL player for Gods sake. He’s getting older and has limited time to make another run. The offense has struggled for the past 5 seasons and people want to blame Rodgers leadership? These are our NFL offensive rankings in total yards from 2015-2019 (23rd, 8th, 26th, 12th, and 18th.) The FO has only drafted two offensive skill players (Ty Montgomery 3rd, and Jace Sternberger 3rd) in the first three rounds of those drafts. Rodgers carried us to a 13-3 record and look at how they repaid him. I would be very bitter. The best arm the league has ever seen was wasted by drafting countless DB’s, LB’s, and DT’s and we complain about his attitude. Crazy

 

[Pugger]

Every article I have read on the topic after the draft has wide receiver listed as the biggest need for the Packers.

And sports reporters know what the biggest need for the Packers is and not the GM or HC? Just because we didn't draft a WR doesn't mean we didn't address the offense. We signed 2 veteran WRs and MLF may want to emphasize the running game - P/A more than MM did this season which is why we drafted a RB and TE in the first 3 rounds.

 

[OldSchool101]

Welcome to the forum. Well written and interesting thoughts.

I would just point out that Rodgers best games last season were when Adams was out and he was forced to go to other receivers. As far as his leadership goes, I think that has decreased. He doesn't behave the same as he used too. He used to be more confident and encouraging. I see him now glaring at the sidelines and less positive body language. He isn't Cutler out there, but he sure isn't AR of 7 years ago.

I can partly see that. Do you think us letting Jordy or Cobb walk fed fuel to his attitude?

Im asking because if so, that frustration may be partly justified. We know for a fact that Rodgers is close on a personal level with both guys. He may have not outwardly been emphatic in the expression of his displeasure in the wake of those moves.. but over time maybe he can’t ignore that we haven’t come close to giving him adequate replacements.

All that not to mention we also kicked Monty to the curb. That’s a lot of high draft capital lost (THREE 2nd day WR selections that were all seasoned veterans)

 

[OldSchool101]

i still think people are reading into this way too much. I don't think they picked a QB because they're tired of rodgers, they want to pressure rodgers, they don't think Rodgers has it anymore, they think Rodgers requires too much trust or anything else. I do think they felt the ID'd a kid that was going to be a great QB. I doubt they take any other QB in that draft if Love wasn't available. I also don't think they meant to tell Rodgers, you have what you have to work with.

I DO believe the FO when they say they had a couple guys pegged at some positions, but they weren't there to get. and for every person on every thread saying they reached for Love, they reached for Dillon and they reached for Degura etc, i suppose you would have been happy with a 3r or 4th round WR in the 2nd?

And even so, there are a hundred other ways to move the football in the NFL besides WR's. Adams is as good as they get. Funchess and lazard should be at least adequate or more and every QB taken in the 2nd round or later don't really impress me with their potential anymore than EQ does.

While I would have liked a new shiny toy, I don't think there were any sinister motives by the FO to not get one other than the value wasn't there.

Some good reports coming out of Begelton’s corner. MLF has publicly expressed his pleasure with Begelton and his mental preparation already. One thing I also forgot was if you watch Begeltons’ highlights you’ll notice he’s a fantastic ST gunner. My guess is that’s his ticket onto the roster, but if he performs well in preseason I believe he’ll earn some snaps from the Slot. It won’t take him long to showcase that 71% catch rate. That’s probably his most impressive stat for me because it’s the most translatable into the NFL. He’ll have a few less with better competition and having to get both feet in bounds, but catch rate likely won’t vary more than
5-10% tops. He can highpoint a ball with the best of them. He’s also a seasoned veteran so his transition to the NFL is likely much faster than a college level player (draft pick).
I know everyone wants to see “proof” before getting excited or making projections. I understand the reluctance after what we’ve done to Rodgers at WR. But with EQ back, the Funchess signing, and Begelton competing this season? There’s no question in my mind that this WR grouping is at least going to finish better than last season.

Ironically, my biggest concern on this Offense is at TE. We desperately need Sternberger to produce. This position group has a big ‘ol ???

 

[rmontro]

The offense has struggled for the past 5 seasons and people want to blame Rodgers leadership?

Just to be clear: While I don't think leadership is one of Rodgers' strong points, I certainly do not blame that for any perceived lack of success GB has had.

I can partly see that. Do you think us letting Jordy or Cobb walk fed fuel to his attitude?

Im asking because if so, that frustration may be partly justified. We know for a fact that Rodgers is close on a personal level with both guys.

Seriously, if I was a Packer player and I wanted to hold on to my job, I'd be more worried if Rodgers was lobbying to keep me. Seems like every time he asks the team to keep someone, they end up off the team. It's like the kiss of death.

 

[Taryn Miller]

Just to be clear: While I don't think leadership is one of Rodgers' strong points, I certainly do not blame that for any perceived lack of success GB has had.


Seriously, if I was a Packer player and I wanted to hold on to my job, I'd be more worried if Rodgers was lobbying to keep me. Seems like every time he asks the team to keep someone, they end up off the team. It's like the kiss of death.

A players leadership can help players win the battle on the field, but when he's up against those who make decisions about players, he'll lose the battle and players.

 

[ARPackFan]

An NFL QB needs to know the route of any back, TE or WR for that particular play and changes to the route based upon coverage. Just for the XYZ receivers that is theoretically 1000 total combinations. Add in the TE or an RB and that number increases. Those players need to only know their route and then execute it so that they are in the right place with enough seperation to catch the ball. Why would a QB trust a receiver that cannot do their job? Why would a GM and coaching staff hold onto a player who cannot do their job?

https://weei.radio.com/blogs/ryan-hannable/tom-brady-explains-how-he-didnt-trust-some-wide-receivers

 

[Fat Dogs]

Just to be clear: While I don't think leadership is one of Rodgers' strong points, I certainly do not blame that for any perceived lack of success GB has had.


Seriously, if I was a Packer player and I wanted to hold on to my job, I'd be more worried if Rodgers was lobbying to keep me. Seems like every time he asks the team to keep someone, they end up off the team. It's like the kiss of death.

I just feel bad for the guy. Nobody Use to question his leadership. He is visibly frustrated at times and it’s understandable. I enjoy a feel good story like Reggie Begelton, Jake Kumerow, Jeff Janis, and Allen Lazard but a roster full of 6th, 7th and UFA’s would frustrate anyone.

 

[GleefulGary]

Taking a look at last year's depth chart at wide receiver entering the season it wasn't that surprising that the position group struggled though. Aside of Adams there wasn't a single one drafted before the fifth round.

It's true that Funchess might improve the unit but Begelton is a long shot to even make the team. Overall Gutekunst definitely didn't do enough to upgrade the position.

Perhaps avoid definitive statements until the season is over? Just some advice.

 

[Sanguine camper]

Besides Adams, the Packers have a bunch of low round draft choices and free agents at WR. At what other position group has that worked out? We saw what happened when Ladarius Gunter was a starting CB. It wasn't pretty in the 2016 NFCCG. While Funchess was a second round pick, I don't consider him a significant upgrade in talent over the 2-6 WR's. The Packers already have an elite RB and a decent running game. Improving a position of strength and neglecting a position of need just gives oppossing coordinators too many options in stopping the offense.