No ones talking about Tightend

[Deleted member 6794]

O'Leary is a better in-line blocker than Richard Rodgers is. I want us to get a TE that is a good in-line blocker and a decent threat to catch balls up field. That is exactly what O'Leary is.

Rodgers improved his run blocking over the course of the 2014 season.

 

[Half Empty]

I will be very concerned if Ted Thompson does not stay true to his board.

Which, of course, we'll never know.

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

I did see one mock draft that had the Packers taking Maxx Williams at #30. With our needs at corner and ILB I doubt that will happen, but Ted has been known to do what no one expects before.

I mentioned this idea in a thread. If you are going to add a TE, he better be better than Quarless. Who I think is dang good! If he's not better than Quarless, he might as well be a 7th rounder, because he wont see the field in all likelyhood. Maxx Williams on the other hand is 3rd generation NFL (like CMIII). Believed by many to be the best TE in the draft... Thats how you fill the position IMO. Nelson, Cobb, Adams, Lacy, Williams? Two TE set Rodgers/Williams? Could be a great way to justify not having a FB...

Gordon is another offensive weapon that would be good value at #30, and open some new doors. Solidify a position thats strong, but one injury away from being a major weakness...

 

[TJV]

Finley was a third rounder - the 91st player picked in the 2008 draft. Great players have been found throughout the draft, and after it. If a TE is a value pick later in the draft I'll bet Thompson picks him.

 

[thequick12]

Honestly who cares if Waller can block as long as he can jump over people on fades in the end zone and run by people down the seam. Adds a dimension to the offense as a likely 5/6 round pick. Who has the potential to impact the game playing like 10 snaps a game out of certain packages while learning the TE position in practice and at meetings.

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

Finley was a third rounder - the 91st player picked in the 2008 draft. Great players have been found throughout the draft, and after it. If a TE is a value pick later in the draft I'll bet Thompson picks him.

Finley......Im going to be nice and point out(like Quarless) that without the off field issues. They were possible 1st round prospects. Finley was coming around. But he was a mess those first few years. Quarless we never seen anything. If Quarless never got hurt, he would be a dominant stud right now IMO.
Maxx Willaims is a pure bred NFL player. Mid-western, and a class act. On top of that, he goes and gets it. Im just speculating, if TT picked him... We wouldnt have to worry about TE for a while.

 

[rodell330]

I honestly don't care who it is..but a tightend who was a threat in the middle of the field, and in the red zone?? There wouldn't really be a way to "defend" the Packers. I don't think Rodgers is that guy I'm sorry .

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Honestly who cares if Waller can block as long as he can jump over people on fades in the end zone and run by people down the seam. Adds a dimension to the offense as a likely 5/6 round pick. Who has the potential to impact the game playing like 10 snaps a game out of certain packages while learning the TE position in practice and at meetings.

I would prefer to add another TE capable of run blocking as well. Here's one thing in a scouting report about Waller that caught my eye though:

Almost impossible to guard on back-shoulder throws.

He could turn into a nice red zone target. Maybe he's worth spending a day 3 pick on him.

Finley......Im going to be nice and point out(like Quarless) that without the off field issues. They were possible 1st round prospects. Finley was coming around. But he was a mess those first few years. Quarless we never seen anything. If Quarless never got hurt, he would be a dominant stud right now IMO.
Maxx Willaims is a pure bred NFL player. Mid-western, and a class act. On top of that, he goes and gets it. Im just speculating, if TT picked him... We wouldnt have to worry about TE for a while.

Finley had a rough rookie season but started to become an important part of the offense during his second season and was dominant in 2010 before getting injured. It took him some tine to get back to that level but he was coming around late in the 2012 season and early in 2013 before suffering the neck injury.

Quarless has been a reliable TE but he isn't a special talent.

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

He was a special talent before the knee. Was suposed to be a good blocker and receiver. Where as Finley was a special receiving threat. He was a bad blocker. He did come around on that, but Finley never reached his potential! Always something. Drama early. Injuries and dropped balls in middle. And when he put it all together his career ended...

Lets just say if Finley and Quarless never had the devestating injuries. We wouldnt need any TE right now.

We dont need a TE either. Just a position that could be up graded and have a little more depth.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

He was a special talent before the knee. Was suposed to be a good blocker and receiver. Where as Finley was a special receiving threat. He was a bad blocker. He did come around on that, but Finley never reached his potential! Always something. Drama early. Injuries and dropped balls in middle. And when he put it all together his career ended...

Lets just say if Finley and Quarless never had the devestating injuries. We wouldnt need any TE right now.

We dont need a TE either. Just a position that could be up graded and have a little more depth.

Finley was a decent run blocker. I agree the Packers would be set at the position if he wouldn't have gotten injured.

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

I think if Quarless never blew his knee. He would have taken Finleys spot. And Finley never would have gotten the 2 year (16mil?) deal. He may have gotten a deal, but he wouldnt have had any real leverage, and probabally would have talk his way out of town... Thats what I was expecting at least.

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

I really like Richard Rodgers. He is a #1 TE IMO. A brute, who makes some pretty good catches pretty consistantly. Quarless seems to be playing hard, and is getting his game going strong at times... But our depth is basicly unproven. I would like a guy who competes for that #1 spot. Make the roster spot worth while.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I really like Richard Rodgers. He is a #1 TE IMO. A brute, who makes some pretty good catches pretty consistantly. Quarless seems to be playing hard, and is getting his game going strong at times... But our depth is basicly unproven. I would like a guy who competes for that #1 spot. Make the roster spot worth while.

I would feel better about the position with Rodgers or Quarless being the #2 TE. With more pressing needs on defense there's no reason to address the position early in the draft though.

 

[sschind]

I would feel better about the position with Rodgers or Quarless being the #2 TE. With more pressing needs on defense there's no reason to address the position early in the draft though.

This describes my feelings as well. I don't think this is a position the Packers have to focus on. An upgrade would be nice but I don't think it is crucial to the success of the Packers offense in 2015 or beyond. I wouldn't trade away players or picks to bring in someone unless it was a great value on an up and comer (someone not like Mercedes Lewis) who showed more promise than Rodgers whom I think could still develop into a decent #1. I'd just use a later pick on one.

I think either Quarless or Rodgers could be a top 5 TE statistically in the league if MM and AR wanted it to happen. I just don't want to see it happen unless it is a natural part of the offense and not part of them making it happen intentionally. I like the fact that when AR goes back to pass he has a lot of good targets to choose from, I'd hate to see him start forcing things to one guy for whatever reason.

 

[Mondio]

we don't need a top 5 TE, Lacy, Cobb, Nelson and Adams plus a 2nd year Rodgers are PLENTY of weapons. There's one ball and we have the guys to create mismatches. Sometimes things happen because we aren't perfect, ala Nelson stumbles coming out of his break and Rodgers throws it 2 inches wide in the endzone and it goes off his fingertips instead of a catch for 7 points, but we have the weapons. Weapons are not an issue. There's still one ball, that's it.

If we have a TE that can block and run to a first down marker, turn around and catch a ball while getting hit, we're set at TE

 

[Half Empty]

So, are we set at TE?

 

[Ace]

I'm fine with what we have. I know I started a topic on Marcedes Lewis but that was more of a discussion point rather than me actually wanting him. If we add someone then great if not I'm perfectly fine with Rodgers.

 

[sschind]

we don't need a top 5 TE, Lacy, Cobb, Nelson and Adams plus a 2nd year Rodgers are PLENTY of weapons. There's one ball and we have the guys to create mismatches. Sometimes things happen because we aren't perfect, ala Nelson stumbles coming out of his break and Rodgers throws it 2 inches wide in the endzone and it goes off his fingertips instead of a catch for 7 points, but we have the weapons. Weapons are not an issue. There's still one ball, that's it.

If we have a TE that can block and run to a first down marker, turn around and catch a ball while getting hit, we're set at TE

Not sure if this was directed at me or not but I agree, we don't need a top 5 TE and I never said we did. All I said was is that if MM and AR wanted a top 5 TE we could have one with Rodgers or Quarless.

 

[Mondio]

Not sure if this was directed at me or not but I agree, we don't need a top 5 TE and I never said we did. All I said was is that if MM and AR wanted a top 5 TE we could have one with Rodgers or Quarless.

I agreed with you, just reiterating

 

[HardRightEdge]

So, are we set at TE?

Probably not.

There are only 3 on the roster, one of which is Justin Perillo who could not unseat the 18-targets-in-2-years Bostick.

Further, there's no FB on the roster, and neither Quarless nor Rodgers have looked all that good at H-back. A post-bye change overlooked with the Matthews hubbub was Kuhn getting snaps again. The fact the Packers tried to make Kuhn expendable in going to an H-back approach at the start of the season, and the fact they're in no hurry to bring Kuhn back, would indicate they'll try it again if they can round up the right block-some-catch-some player.

It's a situation similar to the RB position. There are few names on the roster as of now; some will be added to make the #3 spot competitive. I would expect a TE and RB drafted at some point, and then there's the UDFA market.

By the by, excluding Richardson, there are 61 guys currently on the roster. That leaves a generous 29 spots still available. I'd expect a couple of TEs, a couple of RBs, maybe a FB and 17 ILBs brought in to compete.

 

[sschind]

I agreed with you, just reiterating

Got it, wasn't sure if you misunderstood.

 

[Vrill]

Jesse James in the middle rounds would be nice. So would Nick O'Leary.

 

[Sky King]

So, are we set at TE?

Since the complete TE is not currently on the roster, I guess that leaves little option than to coach-up the incumbents or to draft a guy who already has it all. With so many other needs to fill the latter choice may be out of the question. I'll take great solace in the fact that last year's offense was special, even with the TEs that are already on the roster.

 

[Ace]

I think if Quarless never blew his knee. He would have taken Finleys spot. And Finley never would have gotten the 2 year (16mil?) deal. He may have gotten a deal, but he wouldnt have had any real leverage, and probabally would have talk his way out of town... Thats what I was expecting at least.

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

Granted this is an old video but when have you ever seen Quarless make plays like this? I think some forget how good Finley was for a stretch... 2:55 mark in the video, Quarless isn't making that catch in any lifetime.

 

[HardRightEdge]

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

Granted this is an old video but when have you ever seen Quarless make plays like this? I think some forget how good Finley was for a stretch... 2:55 mark in the video, Quarless isn't making that catch in any lifetime.

For me, his signature catch is the one at 1:50 against the Steelers.