Lance kendricks

[brandon2348]

Absolutely. A yard of separation over 40 yards, or a foot of separation over 15 yards is huge in the NFL.

The NFL does not buy speed in some collective delusion.

If somebody's Money Ball calculations say buy a bunch of cheap 4.6 and 4.75 speed is the way to go, they better double check their math.

Bennett doesn't need 4.5 speed. He will beat you with his body. He is very physical and likes contact. He knows how to get separation and after the catch has a wicked stiff arm.

This guy is a beast and playing with 12 will only make him better.

I'm tired of "nice guys" and this team needed a Martellus Bennett.

 

[thisisnate]

This speed obsession is weird. Sounds like Al Davis when he drafted Darrius Heyward-Bay. Bennett is a game changer and will have a bigger impact, health provided, on our offense than Cook did.

 

[sschind]

As you know, I don't make any such agreements. That phrase is a transparent euphemism meaning, "I'd like to claim the last word."

I have little concern for who is or is not the #3 TE, and neither should you. So, like I said at the start, if we're to pencil in Kendricks at #2, its a swap of Bennett/Kendricks for Cook/Rodgers. That sure looks like a push to me and it should to you as well.

Now I see what you were saying. I thought you were talking about the #1, #2 and #3 spots and you were switching out Kendricks for Cook at #2. I disagree that that Bennett/Kendricks is a push with Cook/Rodgers. Bennett is better than Cook and Kendricks is better than Rodgers so it looks like an upgrade to me.

I won't presume to say it should to you as well because I don't feel it is my place to tell you your opinion. But that's just me.

As far as the agree to disagree comment you apparently didn't get the joke. I thought the wink would give it away but I guess not.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

lol that discrepancy is actually less than 2 tenths of a second.... I know we tend to focus on 40 times ... but I find it ironic that we consider somebody that can run a 4.3 to be a burner.... and somebody that runs a 4.8 (or exactly 1/2 of one second longer) to be slow..... honestly after 40 yards.... that extra 1/2 second isn't going to amount to much distance... and the 18 hundredths that we are talking about here mean even less.

A player running a 4.3 seperates more than four yards over 40 yards from one clocking in at 4.8. That's a huge difference.

 

[rodell330]

We can talk 40 times, and upgrades at Tightend all we want...but the Packers won't win a SB next season at this pace. Again they've done absolutely nothing to fix the back end...and now you have questions on the o-line and still at RB.

I love Ty Montgomery but he cannot be a three down back..we all saw that last year. His body cannot take the hits. He struggled staying on the field the latter part of the season.

The corners are not only fragile they can't cover either. Say what you want about rookie years idc... they can't cover. They are all what I like to call chasers. Guy's who seem to always be behind the Wr. Until they add a solid corner and depth at LB they won't win a darn thing.

 

[Curly Calhoun]

https://mobile.twitter.com/AdamSchefter/status/840678389509939201

Affordable signing that provides depth, and also could potentially put two athletic pass-catching tight ends on the field at the same time, something the Patriots are fond of doing.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I love Ty Montgomery but he cannot be a three down back..we all saw that last year. His body cannot take the hits. He struggled staying on the field the latter part of the season.

The Packers need to add more talent at running back but I don't ubderstand the perception that Montgomery can't turn into a durable three down back as he's the same size as some of the best players in the league at the position.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Bennett doesn't need 4.5 speed. He will beat you with his body. He is very physical and likes contact. He knows how to get separation and after the catch has a wicked stiff arm.

This guy is a beast and playing with 12 will only make him better.

I'm tired of "nice guys" and this team needed a Martellus Bennett.

I thnk this team needs a defensive player with intensity who can fire up the huddle and back it up with performance. I don't see that particular need on offense.

There's Daniels, but having that figure on the D-Line doesn't do all that much good because he doesn't see what's happening on the field. Where you really need that is in the D-backfield, a guy who sees what's happening.

I'm not sure who that guy is in NE; they may not even need that guy with their collective attitude of mutual accountability on the field, but you don't build that kind of culture out of thin air. The accountability in Green Bay sits in the sky box, in the film room, and that's where Capers likes to keep it.

The truly amazing thing about NE's SB comeback was not Brady's performance, which was plenty amazing. It's that the defense didn't quit no matter how deep the hole got. Crosby misses a FG, Ripkowski fumbles, and the Packer defense goes in the tank. And the record of closing out games on the defensive side of the ball is dismal.

In the absence of the collective mindset, this team needs a Woodson-type figure, even if that guy is not quite a DPOY. That's assuming Capers would allow it, which is doubtful.

 

[HardRightEdge]

I won't presume to say it should to you as well because I don't feel it is my place to tell you your opinion. But that's just me.

That sounds like an "agree to disagree" audible.

 

[Dantés]

It's not just that Bennett and Kendricks are better receivers than Cook and Rodgers (they are). It's also that the blocking between the two duos is night and day different. So not only are they better pass catchers in a vacuum, but their presence on the field doesn't allow teams to key on run or pass.

Teams would never respect the run with Cook and Rodgers out there in 12 personnel, because they could count on neither winning a block the majority of the time. Now they've got to account for arguably the best blocking TE in football, and a TE2 who is competent. That changes the dynamics. Not to mention the impact on the running game itself.

I'm agreeing to agree with me that I'm right to disagree.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

It's not just that Bennett and Kendricks are better receivers than Cook and Rodgers (they are). It's also that the blocking between the two duos is night and day different. So not only are they better pass catchers in a vacuum, but their presence on the field doesn't allow teams to key on run or pass.

According to PFF, which of course doesn't even have close to your knowledge, Bennett and Kendricks are an upgrade over Cook in pass protection but aren't even nearly as good as the former Packer blocking for the run.

 

[rodell330]

The Packers need to add more talent at running back but I don't ubderstand the perception that Montgomery can't turn into a durable three down back as he's the same size as some of the best players in the league at the position.

Perception? Well I don't think it's perception if he had to miss time last season because of injury. He even had to come out of several games because he got dinged up. He's only had one healthy season since he's been in Green Bay. He's still young...but those are facts.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Perception? Well I don't think it's perception if he had to miss time last season because of injury. He even had to come out of several games because he got dinged up. He's only had one healthy season since he's been in Green Bay. He's still young...but those are facts.

Unfortunately injuries are part of the game but Montgomery's size is fine to be a durable running back in the NFL.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

According to PFF, which of course doesn't even have close to your knowledge, Bennett and Kendricks are an upgrade over Cook in pass protection but aren't even nearly as good as the former Packer blocking for the run.

Interesting stat, while you hope your TE can pick up a blitz if called upon, if they are in there for a passing play, what percentage of the time are they asked to stay in and block? Basically what I am saying, I would rather have a TE who is more superior in run blocking than pass protection.

 

[rodell330]

According to PFF, which of course doesn't even have close to your knowledge, Bennett and Kendricks are an upgrade over Cook in pass protection but aren't even nearly as good as the former Packer blocking for the run.

Well this can be skewed because 98% of the time if it's a passing play the Tightend is going to be involved in the play call anyways. Now rather he's chipping and releasing? or just releasing into a route without the chip depends on the situation.

 

[rodell330]

Unfortunately injuries are part of the game but Montgomery's size is fine to be a durable running back in the NFL.

Well I'm not disagreeing that he has the size to be a durable back...im saying he hasn't been durable tho. Lacy has the size too but we all know about his durability right. Better yet, I'll give you a guy like Adrian Peterson who's nearly all Muscle and bigger than Monty but look at him.

 

[Dantés]

According to PFF, which of course doesn't even have close to your knowledge, Bennett and Kendricks are an upgrade over Cook in pass protection but aren't even nearly as good as the former Packer blocking for the run.

How precocious of me to not treat that website as the final word on all things football. Perhaps I should repent. We can all get subscriptions to PFF and no one will even have to quote each other. We can just post PFF grades all day and hit "agree." And if a heathen shows up that's not willing to fall in line, we can just have the mods delete his account.

Actually, come to think of it that might eliminate the need for a forum entirely.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Interesting stat, while you hope your TE can pick up a blitz if called upon, if they are in there for a passing play, what percentage of the time are they asked to stay in and block? Basically what I am saying, I would rather have a TE who is more superior in run blocking than pass protection.

Well this can be skewed because 98% of the time if it's a passing play the Tightend is going to be involved in the play call anyways. Now rather he's chipping and releasing? or just releasing into a route without the chip depends on the situation.

Kendricks (125 plays) and Bennett (118) pass blocked more often than Cook (23) last season.

Well I'm not disagreeing that he has the size to be a durable back...im saying he hasn't been durable tho. Lacy has the size too but we all know about his durability right. Better yet, I'll give you a guy like Adrian Peterson who's nearly all Muscle and bigger than Monty but look at him.

Hopefully Montgomery just has had bad luck over the past two seasons and is able to stay healthy from now on.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

How precocious of me to not treat that website as the final word on all things football. Perhaps I should repent. We can all get subscriptions to PFF and no one will even have to quote each other. We can just post PFF grades all day and hit "agree." And if a heathen shows up that's not willing to fall in line, we can just have the mods delete his account.

Actually, come to think of it that might eliminate the need for a forum entirely.

On the other hand we could use the information provided by a website like PFF to include into the discussion about players than flat out disregard it. I don't have the time, and I'm quite sure you don't have either, to fully analyze every single snap played in the NFL and FBS and therefore I believe they provide a decent indicator of a player's performance compared to a random poster on an internet forum telling to trust his evaluation.

 

[Dantés]

On the other hand we could use the information provided by a website like PFF to include into the discussion about players than flat out disregard it. I don't have the time, and I'm quite sure you don't have either, to fully analyze every single snap played in the NFL and FBS and therefore I believe they provide a decent indicator of a player's performance compared to a random poster on an internet forum telling to trust his evaluation.

I've often referenced it and included it in discussion. I've talked about loving their statistics. That's not the issue. The problem is that I dared to say that I don't accept it as the final word and that I think their grades are often flawed.

Because you don't merely "include it in the discussion." You treat it like you've got the key to the test. I've run into it on every forum I've ever been on-- someone with a PFF subscription who is going to tell the rest of us how it is and gets religiously ticked when anyone questions the site.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Unfortunately injuries are part of the game but Montgomery's size is fine to be a durable running back in the NFL.

He runs pretty high like Starks. Some runners need to do that for vision and quickness. You can get away with that if you get low before contact. However, over the course of 250 carries a high runner is going to mistime the hit and absorb more than his share of low hits to the legs instead of contacting at the pads than a runner who stays low.

The good ones, like Lacy, can stay low from the get go and still see the hole developing, with the quickness at the line (yes, Lacy was quick in 2015) to redirect.

The fact Lacy has had a 4.4 career average (and especially that 5.1 last year before going down) without the occasional long run to pad the average, is pretty remarkable. Why he's been less effective in short yardage/goal line seems to be a function of him being a finesse back at the line and a power back when up to speed at the second level. That's why you have a guy like Ripkowski.

Of course, being a low pad runner is hardly a guarantee. Few backs get through 16 games without missing time, and careers tend to be short. But the higher you run, the bigger the risk.

Montgomery is pretty amazing in one respect: He wants to play the position when the prospectus says he could have a longer career as a slot receiver. And he surely knows second contracts for RBs have a ton of risk aversion built in unless you're a Peterson or McCoy or similar high production, durable back.

Maybe Montgomery thinks he can be the second coming of one of those guys. God bless him for the effort.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I've often referenced it and included it in discussion. I've talked about loving their statistics. That's not the issue. The problem is that I dared to say that I don't accept it as the final word and that I think their grades are often flawed.

Because you don't merely "include it in the discussion." You treat it like you've got the key to the test. I've run into it on every forum I've ever been on-- someone with a PFF subscription who is going to tell the rest of us how it is and gets religiously ticked when anyone questions the site.

I don't accept PFF's grades as the final word either but as I've mentioned above as a decent indicator. I got ticked off because of you disregarding every other opinion about your take on a player as well as getting annoyed by my constant reminder of the Packers still in need of a #1 cornerback.

 

[Dantés]

I don't accept PFF's grades as the final word either but as I've mentioned above as a decent indicator. I got ticked off because of you disregarding every other opinion about your take on a player as well as getting annoyed by my constant reminder of the Packers still in need of a #1 cornerback.

I haven't disregarded anyone's opinion. That's why I'm here-- to engage with other opinions. But if I post a thought and someone replies by throwing a number grade at me, yeah I disregard the crap out of that. I read the site. I know what it says.

And not being able to post literally anything about a corner without you quoting it and saying "we need a #1" is crazy annoying. Do you really think anyone needs you to tell them that? Much less 5 times a day?

 

[Deleted member 6794]

And not being able to post literally anything about a corner without you quoting it and saying "we need a #1" is crazy annoying. Do you really think anyone needs you to tell them that? Much less 5 times a day?

It seems several posters need to be constantly reminded about it as there have been numerous suggestions of being fine at the position by bringing back House, sonething I vehemently disagree with.

 

[Dantés]

It seems several posters need to be constantly reminded about it as there have been numerous suggestions of being fine at the position by bringing back House, sonething I vehemently disagree with.

That's ********. Just because people are talking about options that are actually readily available doesn't mean that they don't recognize that long term the need is for a higher quality player. I know I for one have made that clear on multiple occasions. The #1 is a need, but if they can't get one that doesn't mean a mid level guy plus a rookie wouldn't at least help. But you're incapable of accepting that other people think that, so every time anyone posts about a mid level corner, you give them that mantra. Over and over and over. You're free to do that, but I'm also free to make fun of it.