Offensive Talent

[OldSchool101]

I still see us lacking in the short passing game to the RBs. We finally executed a nice screen and lo and behold.. picked up 17 yards. Problem was we needed 20 yards and had to punt.

Also rely on our veteran TE Marcedes a bit more. You don’t have to feed him full time, but hit him for more 5-10 yard throws 1st n 2nd downs.

The antidote to an aggressive rush is to have 2-3 quick short options. Let them bring 6? Just exploit the area just beyond the pass rush. Enough running pass plays behind the LOS and allowing the D to stop us shy of LOS. Where’s the quick slant? Where’s the player coming back to the ball on the sideline?

 

[Patriotplayer90]

Have to revisit this thread. I've been unable to see any games outside of the first, but have caught up on the highlights. It's just a very underwhelming group of skill players. MVS has been a great option on PA, but there's no consistent receiver outside of Adams, nor anyone who can qualify as a play maker.

 

[AKCheese]

Unfortunately there is no trophy for “Best Team That Has Virtually Ignored The WR Position For Years”.

Rodgers is missing throws...

.... and we currently have no playmakers other than Adams (hence he’s easy to contain)

Glad we’re off to a 3-0 start but this is not a recipe for long term success this season

They SHOULD have had a plan in place before they let Cobb go...

“Hope” is not a plan

 

[tynimiller]

We want to place all the blame squarely on the shoulders of the WRs...but fact is playcalling hasn't been what many hoped AND Rodgers has flat missed throws every game. Some throws have been TERRIBLE.

 

[Patriotplayer90]

We want to place all the blame squarely on the shoulders of the WRs...but fact is playcalling hasn't been what many hoped AND Rodgers has flat missed throws every game. Some throws have been TERRIBLE.

And then he's made some great plays. I don't buy that these receivers haven't been able to show what they can do.

 

[tynimiller]

And then he's made some great plays. I don't buy that these receivers haven't been able to show what they can do.

Oh trust me I ain't gonna try and sell this group as amazing when most haven't even played two seasons in the league yet. Merely stating it isn't all them.

 

[OldSchool101]

We want to place all the blame squarely on the shoulders of the WRs...but fact is playcalling hasn't been what many hoped AND Rodgers has flat missed throws every game. Some throws have been TERRIBLE.

I agree with that. But there’s plenty of blame to go around. I’m 100% confident that if we had a true veteran receiver opposite Adams, we’d be more effective.
MVS is a nice 3rd option that may or may not develop into a “leadership” role.

The rest are largely unproven and I agree, this shouldn’t be anything but testing ground as #4s to see if they can develop into next season. Graham is an unknown and he has 2-3 weeks to prove himself or I’d yank him altogether. Let’s feed Lewis and Tonyan until Sternberger is back.

We desperately need a possession WR and we need it before the trade deadline. Sooner the better.
We’re 3-0. We have a chance for a push this season but our QB needs another premium, known target.

 

[gbgary]

We want to place all the blame squarely on the shoulders of the WRs...but fact is playcalling hasn't been what many hoped AND Rodgers has flat missed throws every game. Some throws have been TERRIBLE.

...or expected. we expected rams-like formations, pace, success. what we're getting is a blend of the old offense and what MLF can manage to shoehorn in from the new offense. another wr, or two, a good te, would be nice and could help...but then rodgers would take 3 years to "trust" them. he'll be 39 by then too and trying to mesh with head coach josh mcdaniels.

 

[Mondio]

^^^^

There's a surprising take LOL

 

[gbgary]

^^^^

There's a surprising take LOL

it's not a take...it's a joke-like sentence with a bit of truth to it.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Hate to throw another FA name out there, but Michael Crabtree was released by the Cardinals yesterday. With the team only a month, barely played and might still have some gas in his tank. Yeah, Yeah, he just turned 32 and that's old by some peoples standards for a WR.

I would at least keep him on a short list, if he doesn't get signed by the Patriots before the end of the week.

At Crabtree’s best, you have a receiver who could be a viable number two or three receiver. At his worst, he wouldn't cost you much and he probably would still be better than everyone but Adams and MVS.

 

[GleefulGary]

Hate to throw another FA name out there, but Michael Crabtree was released by the Cardinals yesterday. With the team only a month, barely played and might still have some gas in his tank. Yeah, Yeah, he just turned 32 and that's old by some peoples standards for a WR.

I would at least keep him on a short list, if he doesn't get signed by the Patriots before the end of the week.

At Crabtree’s best, you have a receiver who could be a viable number two or three receiver. At his worst, he wouldn't cost you much and he probably would still be better than everyone but Adams and MVS.

I'll pass.

 

[greengold]

Wait till Thursday. When that game is done I believe everyone will be feeling better about our O. Well, maybe a few more people here might be feeling slightly better... possibly.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

While the personnel isn't helping, I just feel like coaching and getting used to the offense are the bigger issues. There are plenty of teams that would kill to have the offensive talent the Packers have but appear more consistent on offense. I was willing to blame the offense's issues on the defenses they face the first two weeks but that Broncos game was just plain bad. You can't tell me the 49ers, Vikings, Seahawks, Colts (!), and Titans (!) all have better offensive personnel than the Packers and yet they all rank above the Packers in points scored.

Yes, the Packers have faced two very good defenses, but I'm sorry, the talent disparity on offense between the Colts, Titans, and 49ers should more than make up for defenses faced. The Packers don't have an identity on offense and are running a system that refuses to emphasize their best players (how else do you explain MVS having as many targets as Adams?). I mean, about the only thing MM did right on offense last year was target Adams 11+ times a game and give Jones the ball; Packers are somehow going backwards on that.

 

[Mavster]

While the personnel isn't helping, I just feel like coaching and getting used to the offense are the bigger issues. There are plenty of teams that would kill to have the offensive talent the Packers have but appear more consistent on offense. I was willing to blame the offense's issues on the defenses they face the first two weeks but that Broncos game was just plain bad. You can't tell me the 49ers, Vikings, Seahawks, Colts (!), and Titans (!) all have better offensive personnel than the Packers and yet they all rank above the Packers in points scored.

Yes, the Packers have faced two very good defenses, but I'm sorry, the talent disparity on offense between the Colts, Titans, and 49ers should more than make up for defenses faced. The Packers don't have an identity on offense and are running a system that refuses to emphasize their best players (how else do you explain MVS having as many targets as Adams?). I mean, about the only thing MM did right on offense last year was target Adams 11+ times a game and give Jones the ball; Packers are somehow going backwards on that.

I highly doubt many teams would kill to have the Packs offensive talent. Outside of Adams and Jones there really isn't another noteworthy offensive player on the Pack. I don't understand why people say this.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I highly doubt many teams would kill to have the Packs offensive talent. Outside of Adams and Jones there really isn't another noteworthy offensive player on the Pack. I don't understand why people say this.

Really? You forgot about Bahk and Bulaga and Linsley is no slouch. Turner was just rated the #1 G in the NFL in pass blocking for the first 3 games of the season. Some teams would kill for our OL.

Now if you are only talking about play makers, I would agree with you and IMO, that revolves around our receiving group (both WR and TE).

 

[OldSchool101]

I think we should track these next several games very closely. I believe during the offseason projections we were prepared for a possible setback Offensively because of all the major changes top to bottom, particularly on Offense. That’s one of several reasonable or warranted expectations. However, on the flip side, we came out extremely strong Defensively. I would surmise towards the top end of our expectations of our projected ceiling.

We got out of the blocks fast at 3-0 with dominating Defensive performances. IMO, that warrants increasing consideration by using a strategy of doubling down on additional Offensive player personnel. The longer we go undefeated, the better opportunity we present ourselves with to win now.

You obviously always bet on a hot hand, but not so much you scare your opponents either. We are just a couple of game changing players away from a complete team. One that would be truly dominant when the Offense starts clicking.
We need another stellar Receiver. I would ideally like to use a future day 2 pick for a multiple year contract veteran receiver, but I’d go higher if the perfect opportunity presented itself. I’m not normally a guy who wants to mortgage future assets. but we finally have a top 10 D. Time to open the throttle and see what she’s got under the hood.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

I highly doubt many teams would kill to have the Packs offensive talent. Outside of Adams and Jones there really isn't another noteworthy offensive player on the Pack. I don't understand why people say this.

So, you're argument is that if we ignore the top-5 WR and a top-10 RB then the Packers wouldn't have good offensive talent? That's not really how this works...

 

[swhitset]

Agree and when the other 5 WR's are made up of a 5th rounder and 4 UDFA's, what else should we really expect? Throw on top of that none of the 5 are really all that experienced and you probably are going to have a hopeful group of "meh".

Nobody needs to point out to me what Donald Driver, a 7th rd. pick did as a Packer, because so far, none of those 5 guys look like Donald Driver. Nor do you have to point out that it takes more time for late round and UDFA's to develop. That is fine when they are doing that as your #5 and #6 WR behind a more experienced group, but not as your #2-4.
Someone needs to point out the last Packer WR (besides Driver) that amounted to anything that was obtained after the 3rd round (James Jones, Antonio Freeman, Robert Brooks were all 3rd Rounders), because I went back 30+ years and couldn't find any.

I know a lot of posters wanted the Packers to use a high draft pick on a WR this year, but I still think this was one area that needed to be addressed via Free Agency and with a well known commodity. Not to pick on TT too much, but this seems more like a strategy that he would employ, not one Gute would endorse. Maybe a pitfall when you have a FHOF QB, thinking that he can make Champagne out of beer?

The entire team can not be changed in a single year. I’m quite happy with the changes made thus far... I would agree that next year’s draft should feature a receiver in the first 3 rounds.. personally i’d like to see one in the first two.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I think we should track these next several games very closely. I believe during the offseason projections we were prepared for a possible setback Offensively because of all the major changes top to bottom, particularly on Offense. That’s one of several reasonable or warranted expectations.

I'm going to piggyback that with a "yes", but those setbacks should not have included complacency or an unrealistic evaluation of your receiving group.

Something that hit me today is just how this offense has been "built" over the last few years, mainly in regards to the Receiving corp and how it relates to Rodgers. Has having Rodgers created an over confidence in what our receiving corp should be able to do?

Rodgers injury in 2017 really didn't allow the Packers to fully evaluate the weapons that Hundley had to work with, nor how the offense as a whole functioned. Then in 2018, Rodgers gets hurt again and plays most of the season injured. Yet another season, where the talent of the receivers can't be completely evaluated. So now we are in 2019 and the only Receiver that Rodgers has that was on the team pre-2017 is Adams. Allison was, but he was a rookie and really didn't play that much. During that period, Rodgers looses both Nelson and Cobb and they are replaced with later round picks and UDFA's. Cook moves on and is replaced by Bennett and Graham.

I get this feeling that the Packer front office feels that Rodgers can really make any WR average or better, which has some validity to it. However, the problem is, you loose consistency and above average play. Rogers and the Packers were most successful when they had 3-4 pretty decent targets for Rodgers to choose from. Now he has one and that not only limits production, but allows defenses to focus more on just that one guy, Adams, further reducing production.

So I have to wonder if Rodgers being so good, coupled now with the excuse of the last 2 season of him either not playing or playing hurt, has put Gute in a dangerous mindset of "We have #12, lets focus mainly on the defense, that obviously needs fixing, the receivers we have will be better with another year and playing with a healthy #12."

I really hope I am wrong and I hate to keep beating this drum, but this not only a very inexperienced group of receivers, but somewhat lacking in talent when they first arrived in the NFL.

 

[Mondio]

Complacent is not a term I'd use to describe this front office.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Complacent is not a term I'd use to describe this front office.

How about "potentially delusional" than, when it comes to the Receiving group? Or better yet, "The Dom Capers Syndrome".

The definition of Complacent is:

"contented to a fault with oneself or one's actions"

Again, I hope I am wrong, but I do think there are grounds to be concerned when you look at the past 2 + seasons of our offense. Graham, Moore, MVS, EQ and Sterberger were Gutes response to the situation, lets see how it turns out.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

The entire team can not be changed in a single year. I’m quite happy with the changes made thus far... I would agree that next year’s draft should feature a receiver in the first 3 rounds.. personally i’d like to see one in the first two.

I gave you an agree on it, but if by the end of this season, the Packer organization decides they need more offensive weapons, then don't wait just for the draft. This is something you want to try and fix immediately in Free Agency with a proven player. Yes, a high draft pick could end up being a way to solve it, but how long will that take? Adams took 2-3 years to become the player he is now. I would go after a high end WR in Free Agency and spend a high pick on one.

I would be even happier if they tried to find one now via a trade.

 

[Mondio]

He drafted 3 WR's last year, 3. It takes a season or 2 or 3 to let them develop. Even proven guys that were headed to the HOF don't pan out for new teams. last year doesn't count, that coach and everyone is gone. This year we have a new coach and it takes full season to implement an offense. That likely has as much, if not more to do with what we're seeing than anything else. AND there are limited resources. Graham was a "proven vet" has it worked? There are no guarantees. But with all the moves, trading players that are getting cut for draft picks, picking up guys almost every week. They aren't complacent and if someone they thought could actually help them were there i'm sure they wouldn't just sit on their hands. We're still 2 weeks away from really seeing if it's the offense not in synch or if it's the players that can't get in synch with any degree of certainty.

Big name WR's available this offseason, Randall Cobb, not many people wanted to keep paying him. Sign a Cole Beasly for 30 million? Geronimo was a fairly highly rated WR free agent this offseason by more than a couple publications.

There's still time to trade and there is still time to evaluate, but this office doesn't seem to be delusional, complacent, or lazy. If anything it appears they're constantly evaluating players and roster and willing to make a move the moment they decide it's time.

 

[Mavster]

So, you're argument is that if we ignore the top-5 WR and a top-10 RB then the Packers wouldn't have good offensive talent? That's not really how this works...

Calling Jones a top 10 back is a stretch.