Lazard Situation...

[Heyjoe4]

Question just occurred to me and I know it may not be part of the thread topic, but did anyone really expect anything different out of this offense out of the gate? Cuz I sure didn’t. It’s in its infant stage with these kids. I found it funny actually when Watson dropped that friggin pass. It’s like, well that was supposed to happen lol! What DID concern me was our defense getting handled how they did with all this hoopla surrounding it. I assume they’ll get in a groove but I was very disappointed out the gate.

Good points. And yeah, the D played poorly. What was more bothersome was an apparent unwillingness to make in-game changes. Jefferson was allowed to go anywhere. GB pays Alexander a lot to stop guys like that. Why wasn't he covering Jefferson.

 

[tynimiller]

Negative as he said we offered him more than he ended up taking later, but at the time his agent felt he could get more.

GB didn’t sit around waiting and signed Bennett….as options dried up Cook took less than he could have had from GB originally.

Someone else tell him this, cuz he blocked/ignored me for zero reason the other day.

 

[Pkrjones]

Not sure if it's been mentioned yet, but Bak,Lazard and Jenkins all practiced today.

They were "limited"...which could be anywhere from standing with the group before practice to taking part in walk-thru of new plays. At least they had a jersey on & were within spitting distance of the practice field.

 

[OldSchool101]

Question just occurred to me and I know it may not be part of the thread topic, but did anyone really expect anything different out of this offense out of the gate? Cuz I sure didn’t. It’s in its infant stage with these kids. I found it funny actually when Watson dropped that friggin pass. It’s like, well that was supposed to happen lol! What DID concern me was our defense getting handled how they did with all this hoopla surrounding it. I assume they’ll get in a groove but I was very disappointed out the gate.

Yeah it was disappointing, luckily we mostly got shredded in yards. Keep in mind we gave up 23 points, but 3 points was off the Rodgers fumble at the 33 yard line. Our D did not allow even 1 yard on that drive (-5). The Vikings were fortunate to hit a 56 yard FG there.
So I have 20 points allowed that’s on our Defense. If we did that every game last season we would rank top #8 in the NFL. We played poorly for this Defense and only allowed 20.0.
If we allowed 20.0 on every contest last season? We would’ve won 14 contests or a 14-3 record.

So the point I’d offer is while we played nowhere close to high expectation, let’s make sure we put things in perspective also. Now if we allow 30 points to Bears? I’ll be concerned. 20 to the Vikings? On the road? Game 1? Not much of a concern as you said. If there were 4 games I could wish away in our ‘23 schedule? @Vikings @Tampa @Bills Vs Rams would make the top 4-5 They’ve got a bunch of playmakers in MN.

Also. It’s very rare this Offense turns the ball over 3 times in a game and I think we’d all agree its almost an anomaly. The Bears Defense played pretty good against a injured Offense missing their projected leading WR and missing BOTH starting Tackles. That tough for really any team, maybe the next toughest from losing your starting QB. The team we saw? won’t be the team we finish with. Mark my words

If Lazard plays this week that’s a significant shot in the arm. If either Tackle plays that’s huge because it puts an All Pro in place of our weakest link. My guess is the Rookie WR’s will take a few weeks to calm down, they looked nervous as heck imo.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Yeah it was disappointing, luckily we mostly got shredded in yards. Keep in mind we gave up 23 points, but 3 points was off the Rodgers fumble at the 33 yard line. Our D did not allow even 1 yard on that drive (-5). The Vikings were fortunate to hit a 56 yard FG there.
So I have 20 points on our Defense. If we did that every game last season we would rank top #8 in the NFL. We played poorly for this Defense and only allowed 20.0

Yeah I think most would be very happy if the D only gave up 20 ppg in this offense-oriented NFL. The 1H was a disaster but the 2H was actually good. Well, not the offense. Anyway, it's not the end of the world and it's time to get healthy against Chicago.

 

[Jayzee1981]

Good points. And yeah, the D played poorly. What was more bothersome was an apparent unwillingness to make in-game changes. Jefferson was allowed to go anywhere. GB pays Alexander a lot to stop guys like that. Why wasn't he covering Jefferson.

Agreed bud. I think Jaire was wondering the same thing too. He had the “right” answer at the presser but reading between the lines you could tell he was like, WTF?!? Lol!

 

[Jayzee1981]

Yeah it was disappointing, luckily we mostly got shredded in yards. Keep in mind we gave up 23 points, but 3 points was off the Rodgers fumble at the 33 yard line. Our D did not allow even 1 yard on that drive (-5). The Vikings were fortunate to hit a 56 yard FG there.
So I have 20 points allowed that’s on our Defense. If we did that every game last season we would rank top #8 in the NFL. We played poorly for this Defense and only allowed 20.0.
If we allowed 20.0 on every contest last season? We would’ve won 14 contests or a 14-3 record.

So the point I’d offer is while we played nowhere close to high expectation, let’s make sure we put things in perspective also. Now if we allow 30 points to Bears? I’ll be concerned. 20 to the Vikings? On the road? Game 1? Not much of a concern as you said.

Also. It’s very rare this Offense turns the ball over 3 times in a game and I think we’d all agree its almost an anomaly. The Bears Defense played pretty good against a injured Offense missing their projected leading WR and missing BOTH starting Tackles. That tough for really any team, maybe the next toughest from losing your starting QB. The team we saw? won’t be the team we finish with. Mark my words

If Lazard plays this week that’s a significant shot in the arm. If either Tackle plays that’s huge because it puts an All Pro in place of our weakest link. My guess is the Rookie WR’s will take a few weeks to calm down, they looked nervous as heck imo.

Brother, if we put up 7 and give up what we did last week against the Bears, may God help us all. Lol!

 

[OldSchool101]

Brother, if we put up 7 and give up what we did last week against the Bears, may God help us all. Lol!

I will show you all what a true bridge jumper looks like. I won’t even hold up traffic on the bridge threatening a jump. I’ll just walk the bridge and disappear into the night.

 

[Pkrjones]

I will show you all what a true bridge jumper looks like. I won’t even hold up traffic on the bridge threatening a jump. I’ll just walk the bridge and disappear into the night.

Make sure your Week 3 Predictions are in, first. Don't want you plummeting in the rankings as fast as gravity takes you.

 

[PackerDNA]

They were "limited"...which could be anywhere from standing with the group before practice to taking part in walk-thru of new plays. At least they had a jersey on & were within spitting distance of the practice field.

I'll take it.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

And I don't recall Barry ever coming out of zone.

The Packers played too much zone coverages but their percentage doing it wasn't among the top three in the league in week 1. In addition you have to be aware that hardly any teams primarily play man coverage anymore.

I’m guessing but zone seems to work better in a cohesive unit.

Most NFL teams prefer to play zone coverage on most of the plays. The Packers' coaching staff should have realized quickly that it didn't work against the Vikings on Sunday.

Thanks. So it seems Cook just wanted out of GB and it wasn't about the money. I don't remember what GB gave Bennett. I think it was $6 mil/year for 3 years, all guaranteed. I recall they were chasing him to get money back after he quit.

Actually the Packers signed Bennett to a three-year, $21 million deal back in 2017. He ended up earning a total of $7.3 million playing in seven games for the team.

 

[Heyjoe4]

The Packers played too much zone coverages but their percentage doing it wasn't among the top three in the league in week 1. In addition you have to be aware that hardly any teams primarily play man coverage anymore.



Most NFL teams prefer to play zone coverage on most of the plays. The Packers' coaching staff should have realized quickly that it didn't work against the Vikings on Sunday.



Actually the Packers signed Bennett to a three-year, $21 million deal back in 2017. He ended up earning a total of $7.3 million playing in seven games for the team.

Thanks for the information. I know teams prefer zone and no team plays solely man coverage. But if man coverage was ever called for, it was Sunday. Barry and MLF have no excuses. They both knew or would have known how good Jefferson plays coming into the game. So they should have had Alexander on Jefferson from the start IMO. Even so, the inability to adjust and stop the damage was disappointing.

So Bennett got $7.3 million for playing seven games and doing pretty much nothing. Well, he fooled everyone and damaged his reputation forever in the bargain. I think he said he wanted to make or produce music. Good luck with that.....

 

[Heyjoe4]

I'll take it.

I guess it's literally one step closer to actually playing. And yeah, way better than not seeing them at all.

 

[mradtke66]

Thanks. So it seems Cook just wanted out of GB and it wasn't about the money.

Nope, 100% wrong. The short, exaggerated for humor timeline is roughly:

Packers: Hey Jared, nice job. We would like to offer you a contract of 3 years, 21 million.

Cook's Agent: NO! MORE MONEY NOW!!!

Packers: Seriously, this is a pretty nice contract.

Cook's Agent: WE WILL CONSIDER SIGNING WITH YOU FOR 1 BILLION DOLLARS! (Doctor Evil Picture here)

Time passes, other free agent tight ends are signing, leaving the Packers with fewer options.

Packers: Hey, Martellus Bennett, we could use a tight end. How does 3 years, 21 million sound? 6.3 million as a signing bonus.

Martellus Bennett runs to sign, faster than a fat kid at and all you eat buffet.

Cook Agent: Wait, what now?

Cook's agent is left scrambling.

Cook's agent: Hey, Jared, so, the market isn't playing out like I expected. Here's the best offer I got.

Jared Cook: Excuse me? 2 years, 10.5 million? Why didn't we sign with the Packers. They offered us more!

Cook's agent: Well you see, market factors, blah blah blah.

Jared Cook: Fine, I'll sign, but once I do...YOU. ARE. FIRED.

Cook's Now-Former Agent:

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

.....AND SCENE!

 

[tynimiller]

Nope, 100% wrong. The short, exaggerated for humor timeline is roughly:

Packers: Hey Jared, nice job. We would like to offer you a contract of 3 years, 21 million.

Cook's Agent: NO! MORE MONEY NOW!!!

Packers: Seriously, this is a pretty nice contract.

Cook's Agent: WE WILL CONSIDER SIGNING WITH YOU FOR 1 BILLION DOLLARS! (Doctor Evil Picture here)

Time passes, other free agent tight ends are signing, leaving the Packers with fewer options.

Packers: Hey, Martellus Bennett, we could use a tight end. How does 3 years, 21 million sound? 6.3 million as a signing bonus.

Martellus Bennett runs to sign, faster than a fat kid at and all you eat buffet.

Cook Agent: Wait, what now?

Cook's agent is left scrambling.

Cook's agent: Hey, Jared, so, the market isn't playing out like I expected. Here's the best offer I got.

Jared Cook: Excuse me? 2 years, 10.5 million? Why didn't we sign with the Packers. They offered us more!

Cook's agent: Well you see, market factors, blah blah blah.

Jared Cook: Fine, I'll sign, but once I do...YOU. ARE. FIRED.

Cook's Now-Former Agent:

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

.....AND SCENE!

If he didn't have me blocked like a child he'd already have learned this in my reply to him LOL

 

[OldSchool101]

Make sure your Week 3 Predictions are in, first. Don't want you plummeting in the rankings as fast as gravity takes you.

And here I thought you were going to try to prevent me from hopping over the side. I’m going to pull some people with me over the edge so I can finally answer my Dad.

He once asked me. “If your friends jumped off a bridge would you follow them?”
Heck Yea! I would not disappoint my Packer bridge jumping friends!

 

[McKnowledge]

I don't believe the Packers have actually pursued any noteworthy free agent receivers in the past.

What's reported in the press and what happens in reality can be two different things. Now unless you're affiliated with the Packers' front office, how can you be sure they haven't pursued high profile WR free agents?

 

[McKnowledge]

I don't believe the Packers have actually pursued any noteworthy free agent receivers in the past.

https://heavy.com/sports/green-bay-packers/aaron-rodgers-packers-pursuit-odell-beckham/

 

[Heyjoe4]

https://heavy.com/sports/green-bay-packers/aaron-rodgers-packers-pursuit-odell-beckham/

Interesting article on the Packers, and others, trying to sign OBJ. What caused his value to fall so far? Was he really that bad as a teammate? That seemed to be the party line on him. As far as I know, he behaved himself in LA before the ACL tear took him out. He's still a FA, right?

 

[McKnowledge]

Interesting article on the Packers, and others, trying to sign OBJ. What caused his value to fall so far? Was he really that bad as a teammate? That seemed to be the party line on him. As far as I know, he behaved himself in LA before the ACL tear took him out. He's still a FA, right?

True...he is a free agent.

Everthing else you said is heresay and speculation.

Considering that the 2021 Rams are THE best team OBJ has ever played on...

Of course he was happier...

Of course he "bought in"...

 

[Heyjoe4]

True...he is a free agent.

Everthing else you said is heresay and speculation.

Considering that the 2021 Rams are THE best team OBJ has ever played on...

Of course he was happier...

Of course he "bought in"...

Yeah it was only one team and one that got to the SB. Anyone on a team like that would be happy. I did think his value had decreased. He was one of the best receivers in the league at one point, just had a reputation as being hard to work with. I wasn't speculating, just repeating stories I had heard.

Leonard Fournette is also behaving himself in TB. Again, a SB winner. Everybody should be happy.

 

[OldSchool101]

Yeah it was only one team and one that got to the SB. Anyone on a team like that would be happy. I did think his value had decreased. He was one of the best receivers in the league at one point, just had a reputation as being hard to work with. I wasn't speculating, just repeating stories I had heard.

Leonard Fournette is also behaving himself in TB. Again, a SB winner. Everybody should be happy.

Yes. Winning fixes A lot.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

What's reported in the press and what happens in reality can be two different things. Now unless you're affiliated with the Packers' front office, how can you be sure they haven't pursued high profile WR free agents?

I don't know if the Packers pursued any high profile free agents at wide receiver but I didn't get the impression Gutekunst was all that much interested in spending a huge amount of money on a FA at the position.

https://heavy.com/sports/green-bay-packers/aaron-rodgers-packers-pursuit-odell-beckham/

OBJ wasn't a high profile WR at that point anymore.

True...he is a free agent.

Everthing else you said is heresay and speculation.

The Giants trading OBJ despite him being in his prime, the Browns waiving him and the Rams signing him to a moderate contract strongly indicates the league agreed he was difficult to handle.

 

[McKnowledge]

OBJ wasn't a high profile WR at that point anymore.

Even with injury and (heavily biased) perception of OBJ, the 3 men below certainly add to OBJ being a high profile agent. ↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓

According to Peter Schrager of Fox Sports, the Packers made a very “aggressive” pitch for the 29-year-old wide receiver. As Schrager notes, Aaron Rodgers, head coach Matt LaFleur and wide receiver Davante Adams all made pitches for the three-time Pro Bowl receiver.

 

[McKnowledge]

The Giants trading OBJ despite him being in his prime, the Browns waiving him and the Rams signing him to a moderate contract strongly indicates the league agreed he was difficult to handle.

How difficult is/was he when not 1 but 2 teams traded for him?

Giants organization is a glorified Mom/Pop operation. The Maras live off their namesake and got lucky with Eli Manning's preternatural clutchness.

The Browns...well...Jimmy Haslem is the owner. He has no clue. He chose Baker Mayfield over OBJ.

If indeed the league agreed he was dificult to handle (insert jerking motion), then he wouldn't have signed with LAR after meeting with and receiving attention from other teams.

Furthermore, your statement is YOUR opinion. Not based on factual evidence.

Outside of a 1 game suspenson nearly 7 years ago, OBJ hasn't had any trouble with the league.

The dislike for OBJ...it is what it is...but it shouldn't cloud the facts.

If/when healthy...OBJ will be highly coveted.