Packers sign Devin Funchess

[HardRightEdge]

That post was about the Colts and their potential motivation to trade up.

Whoops! Consider it a pre-emptive response to the next "GB QB with a high pick" post.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I'm not an expert on all 32 teams, but I started mocking the first couple rounds, and it seemed pressing enough for enough teams that I have 8 going in the first 40 picks.

Interesting. I am not even convinced that it necessarily will be teams with "pressing needs at WR's" that are drafting them. Everybody likes a bargain. Think about a draft that was top heavy in outstanding OLB's or CB's, expensive positions but coveted ones. Obviously there are a few teams that are pat at WR and have far bigger needs, but for those teams that adhere to BPA, the temptation of adding a WR that they might have as first round value, might be enough to sway them to grab one in the second round and wait to draft players to fill other positions.

 

[HardRightEdge]

I'm not an expert on all 32 teams, but I started mocking the first couple rounds, and it seemed pressing enough for enough teams that I have 8 going in the first 40 picks.

That's a lot, but assuming you're right that leaves 8 more with 6.3 or better Zierline grades.

 

[Dantés]

Interesting. I am not even convinced that it necessarily will be teams with "pressing needs at WR's" that are drafting them. Everybody likes a bargain. Think about a draft that was top heavy in outstanding OLB's or CB's, expensive positions but coveted ones. Obviously there are a few teams that are pat at WR and have far bigger needs, but for those teams that adhere to BPA, the temptation of adding a WR that they might have as first round value, might be enough to sway them to grab one in the second round and wait to draft players to fill other positions.

However, sometimes the reverse effect happens. Teams with multiples needs, one being WR, take another early because they prefer their chances of getting the WR later.

 

[Dantés]

That's a lot, but assuming you're right that leaves 8 more with 6.3 or better Zierline grades.

This is true. What we don't know, and you've mentioned this, is the FO's preferences.

I am guessing, but I imagine that they want someone with speed and YAC ability. The offense lacks those skills, and LaFleur's offense relies on them frequently.

So maybe there are 8 highly rated receivers left, but perhaps only 2 that fit the bill? Lots of variables.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Whoops! Consider it a pre-emptive response to the next "QB with a high pick" post.

I wasn't going to say anything, because I figured you would come to your senses or Dantes would point it out.

Funny thing is, as much as I don't want to see the Packers use a first round pick on a QB, if the 2005 Aaron Rodgers situation arose and a QB that the Packers coveted did a free fall to #30, I might initially be disappointed if Gute selected him, but it would tell me that the Packers see #12's sunset coming sooner than most of us expect and I would accept that.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I am guessing, but I imagine that they want someone with speed and YAC ability. The offense lacks those skills, and LaFleur's offense relies on them frequently.

Given that most of the WR's on the team are tall, bigger bodied, and slower (except MVS) guys, I have to believe the Packers are going to target a fast, pure slot receiver in the draft. Which I think is an advantage to landing one of the top ones over what other teams may be looking for out of a WR.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Interesting. I am not even convinced that it necessarily will be teams with "pressing needs at WR's" that are drafting them. Everybody likes a bargain. Think about a draft that was top heavy in outstanding OLB's or CB's, expensive positions but coveted ones. Obviously there are a few teams that are pat at WR and have far bigger needs, but for those teams that adhere to BPA, the temptation of adding a WR that they might have as first round value, might be enough to sway them to grab one in the second round and wait to draft players to fill other positions.

I just don't think that happens very often. The closest you get is a redundancy with a core player in his contract year or depth behind a questionable injury history.

There are two kinds of resources, cap and the draft picks. Do you see teams spending meaningful cap for redundancy in free agency? Pretty rare. I'm not sure why one would think differently about upper round draft picks.

The Packers might draft an OT in the upper rounds. When folks point out those redundancies they often don't check to see who that guy is penciled in to replace beyond competing now for a starting spot. People like to have more than one reason for a decision.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

There are two kinds of resources, cap and the draft picks. Do you see teams spending meaningful cap for redundancy in free agency? Pretty rare. I'm not sure why one would think differently about upper round draft picks.

I think we saw an example of such with the Packers selecting Gary last year. That pick totally took me by surprise. Gute had just spent pretty big bucks on 2 FA OLB's in the 2 Smiths, so one of the last positions I thought he would use a #12 pick on was OLB. He obviously saw great value in selecting Gary, despite a recent large cap and long term investments in what appeared to be 2 starters. That pick to me was one of the pure examples of something I don't necessarily agree with, "Best Player Available".

 

[HardRightEdge]

I think we saw an example of such with the Packers selecting Gary last year. That pick totally took me by surprise. Gute had just spent pretty big bucks on 2 FA OLB's in the 2 Smiths, so one of the last positions I thought he would use a #12 pick on was OLB. He obviously saw great value in selecting Gary, despite a recent large cap and long term investments in what appeared to be 2 starters. That pick to me was one of the pure examples of something I don't necessarily agree with, "Best Player Available".

The plan was to have all three players on the field for nickel/dime, more than what we saw would be a good assumption.

It would also be a good assumption they would have liked to Gary sub more for the Smiths more often so those guys would not log 84% snap counts. There were some games where the Smiths looked gassed. There were a couple of situations where Z or P was on the ground, an injury time out was called, walked off the field, sat one play, and bounced back in rather than wave in a replacement for a blow.

It's reasonable to think the Packers were hoping for or expecting a 50-60% snap count from Gary, eating into what became Fackrell's 40% snap count, along with more blows for the Smiths. That would have been a decent number of snaps for a rookie edge. First round edge players are often not 3-down players to start with. Also getting 36 out of 36 games from the Smiths should be considered an outlier. A couple of games of injury replacement high snap counts for Gary would have bumped his number higher.

In 2016, the one good year the Packers got out of Perry, the numbers looked like this in a 19 game season including playoffs:

Perry, 17 of 19 games played, 59% snap count
Matthews, 15 of 19 games played, 59% snap count
Peppers, 19 of 19 games played, 57% snap count
Datone Jones, who was an OLB at that point, 18 of 19 games played, 53% snap count
Fackrell: 16%
Elliott: 13%
Bradford: 1%

One thing these defenses have in common is scheming 3 OLBs on the field simultaneously with various roles in various situations on a meaningful number of snaps. Factor in rest rotation and injury replacement and having 3 horses who can play is not a luxury. That Gary didn't turn out to be one in his rookie year is whole other question, with the answer coming in 2020, one way or the other. I don't recall anybody thinking that there was luxury somewhere in the Matthews-Perry-Peppers triad.

Aonther so-called Packer luxury pick often cited as a presumed BPA is Nelson, the #4 behind Jennings, Driver and Jones in his rookie year. The Packers were fortunate in getting 32 of 32 games out of Jennings and Driver. However, Jones missed 6 games.

That 6 games missed is about what you should expect out of the 3-WR group in a typical year, something I point out this time of year and already have. The picture gets a lot worse if your #1 blows an ACL in camp as happened with Nelson. If your offense is oriented toward winning through the air, depth is not a luxury. I don't recall whether any of the top 3 were in contract years, but that may also have been a factor. Official snap counts were not recorded back in 2008, but I'm sure Nelson got a decent portion with the Jones games missed. Expect this year's #4 to do the same if it is a typical injury year, more if worse than normal.

As I recall, few here questioned the Spriggs pick in 2016, a straight up bench player behind to two very good OTs. Bulaga came off a season missing 4 games with an accumulating injury history already to that point. I think most fans appreciated the attempt at risk mitigation. Bakhtiari was entering a contract year. You know what I always say--people like more than one reason behind a decision.

If the Packers go high for an OT and go down the board for a WR or some other preferred need in one mind or another, I'm sure there will be some commentary about spending on luxuries. Maybe less so in thinking he'd compete for the starting RT under the perception that Wagner is a step down and a merely adequate replacement for Bulaga. However, Wagner's got an injury history himself which should be appreciated. What seems to be less appreciated is that Bakhtiari is in a contract year.

In short, I don't believe in luxury picks beyond the perception of the beholders. The insiders have their need perceptions to one degree or another, which can often be found by scratching below the surface into scheme, injury risk mitigation or contract year risk mitigation.

 

[HardRightEdge]

This is true. What we don't know, and you've mentioned this, is the FO's preferences.

I am guessing, but I imagine that they want someone with speed and YAC ability. The offense lacks those skills, and LaFleur's offense relies on them frequently.

So maybe there are 8 highly rated receivers left, but perhaps only 2 that fit the bill? Lots of variables.

Lot's a variables, to be sure, which is my point. There may be a WR they love, with higher grade than Zierlein or the consensus accords.

Gutekunst loved Savage who had a 6.3 Zerlein grade at pick #21. That grade, NFL.com tells us, is at the low end of, "Will be a starter in the first two years." It was pretty evident Gutekunst's perspective was he sure will be a starter in the first year, which equates closer to a Zerline 6.7 - 6.8, "Year 1 quality starter", expectation.

[As an aside, I find the 6.5 "boom or bust" grade is a little misleading for high ceiling/low floor guys. It seems to me an "off" grade with a specified range makes more sense.]

The guys right above and below Savage were Simmons at 7.0, Fant at 6.4, Dillard at 6.7 and Howard at 6.3. Love, and draft boards, are unique.

I see one mock where the Packers trade up to #19 for Simms; Zierline has him as the #15 highest graded WR which would place him lower 2nd. round to middle 3rd. We don't know where Gutekunst would place him.

As you say, we are not in the room, which is my point. I can think of some other needs positions where, unbeknownst to us, there could be unexpected love for a guy that the consensus sees as either a fall down the board or that is perceived as a reach, which of course is a 20/20 hindsight irrelevancy without a detailed breakdown of the thinking behind it which GMs never provide.

Anyway, there could be Gutekinst love for an DT, OT, slot corner (or preferably a guy with slot/perimeter swing potential, a la Alexander), or even another 3-down ILB who leans toward coverage strength. All are possibilities in whatever order you might prioritize them.

Further, in this business, love is relative. You might love a guy at #50 but not at #30 and so on down the board. Or you may not have any particular love for any one player at any one point, but see a number of possible strong friendships with a number of guys who present various skill sets at a particular spot in the draft. It could be more than two.

 

[HardRightEdge]

However, sometimes the reverse effect happens. Teams with multiples needs, one being WR, take another early because they prefer their chances of getting the WR later.

Conversely, if WRs are flying off the board with teams grabbing their guy while the grabbing is good, a common preference in these pages with a curious variety of names, by the time you get to #30 the purported WR depth in the draft doesn't look that deep anymore for that draft position. In the process, having all those WRs drafted means that many players at other positions were not, which increases the possibility of a good value/need proposition at #30 at another position.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Given that most of the WR's on the team are tall, bigger bodied, and slower (except MVS) guys, I have to believe the Packers are going to target a fast, pure slot receiver in the draft. Which I think is an advantage to landing one of the top ones over what other teams may be looking for out of a WR.

Faster is always better, all things being equal, but there are different kinds of speed, some not refleted in a 40 time. And the other things that go into making a good receiver, even as a deep threat, are not equal.

A guy who runs 4.30 is bound to be fast all along the acceleration curve. In contrast, Nelson ran a 4.51. He ran a 10.68 3A state championship 100 meters in high school as well as championships at 200 meters, 400 meters and long jump.

100 meter runners typically reach peak speed at 50 meters with some variance. A short strider typically gets there earlier, a long strider later. In our years of watching Nelson in his prime, before the ACL, you would not see DBs closing on him after he pulled down a deep sideline or post. That's called long speed from a long strider where peak acceleration is further along the curve and is not fully reflected in a 40 time.

Conversely, the guy who might best fit your profile among the top prospects is probably Aiyuk, though he has slot/perimeter versatility. He's very quick, accelerating into speed in a jiffy, so you wouldn't think he ran only 4.5 if all you saw were his breakaway short routes into YAC. But if you watch some of his longer plays, where he's in stride around 50 yards or so, you will see DBs closing the gap. His speed peak is earlier in the curve vs. a guy like Nelson. So there's different kinds of speed.

You'll often hear people talk about field speed vs. track speed. You'll hear some ex-scouts and GMs say they rely on the tape and don't pay much attention to a Combine 40 time.

There are a few things that go into field speed.

If somebody said a Nelson or an Aiyuk has better field speed than their 40 time, they are probably noticing exceptional speed at one point in the acceleration curve or the other.

Then there's the matter how guys carry their pads. An NFL WR's helmet and pads might run around 10 pounds give or take. Some guys may be less inhibited by that than others.

Then there are things good receivers can do to substitue for speed. Selling a move at the top of the route, making the catch, and getting some YAC out of separation in a short route is more than one play. It sets up other things, like a double move into a deep route that gets the corner leaning the wrong way or flat footed as he knows to guard against the thing that fooled him previously.

Then you have receivers without blazing 40 times who are prized for their size, vertical and ability to high point the ball over what is almost universally shorter corners. Speed and separation is compensated for.

Some guys have a better knack for finding the running lane or to elude a tackler after a catch in space which translates to yards beyond the speed factor.

It comes down to the whole package. Speed is where the player can find it and that is not necessarily on a stop watch. Where he finds it, and a scheme and role where it is maximized, is what is about. Good coaches make adjustments to maximize the strenghts of the players at his disposal. I think LaFleur is a good coach.

 

[BrokenArrow]

Who hasn't he been willing to throw to?

He's been willing to throw to the likes of Jarrett Boykin, Geronimo Allison, Jake Kumerow, and Allen Lazard. Those guys aren't exactly exceptional talents.

This has been discussed to death. After Adams got back from injury, Rodgers went straight back to tunnel vision mode. He routinely ignored other guys who were open for modest gains and either took sacks or threw to Adams instead, even if he was covered. There are a myriad of articles out there with the same view. Google helps. His trust issues are well documented.

 

[Mondio]

This has been discussed to death. After Adams got back from injury, Rodgers went straight back to tunnel vision mode. He routinely ignored other guys who were open for modest gains and either took sacks or threw to Adams instead, even if he was covered. There are a myriad of articles out there with the same view. Google helps. His trust issues are well documented.

Great, it proves a lot of people regurgitate the same article over and over and over and think it means more. Outside of a handful or less of plays every couple games where Rodgers wasn't perfect, it's mostly garbage journalism looking for controversy and clicks. His "trust" issues are as made up as this drum people still like to beat. AFTER Adams came back, how many times was Lazard targeted? and UDFA who didn't even make the initial roster this year.

If you're working and doing what you're supposed to be, you're going to see the ball. History proves that and is well documented.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Again, I point out MVS and Allison, both guys who were viewed as our #2 and #3 guys for 2019. Their position on the depth chart did not automatically make them solid contributors.

The difference being that MVS was a fifth round pick and Allison went undrafted.

Your last add-on there "otherwise Gutekunst might have chosen the wrong one" is kind of odd. Sounds like you are hedging a bit and not willing to see what that rookie WR does in his 2nd or 3rd seasons? He is a bad pick if he doesn't perform in year 1?

My point is that the Packers need to draft a wide receiver capable of having an immediate impact during his rookie season. Otherwise it might be possible that the passing offense will struggle for another season with Rodgers' championship window closing fast.

I am fine with agreeing to disagree, but it seems like you are equating the idea that simply by draft position and depth chart placement, a high round rookie will automatically be a #2 guy and thus will perform like one. I just can't get on board with relying on that for 2020. I just don't want to rely on a rookie getting on the same page with Rodgers, learning the playbook, getting acclimated to the NFL and all this while COVID-19 will probably eliminate much of the work a rookie normally gets after he is drafted.

Well, at this point I don't see any other options though. With that being said I'm still waiting for you to present another one aside of spending an early rounder on a rookie receiver.

I realize that, but the fact that we didn't sign Hooper or any TE, besides Lewis, doesn't seem to have changed his opinion on what a rookie WR should do for the Packers.

Actually the Packers not signing Hooper or another veteran tight end besides Lewis increases the importance of a rookie wide receiver putting up decent numbers next season.

Right now, the best case scenario for the Packers and I think what Gute feels will happen. Adams continues to be Adams. Lazzard continues to get better. Funchess is a solid #3 or #4, with an outside possibility of he actually blooms in Green Bay. Then either MVS, ESB or the rookie steps in and contributes. If that scenario plays out and in a relatively injury free season as well, my concerns were all for naught.

At this point the best case scenario is a rookie receiver earning the second spot on the depth chart behind Adams and living up to expectations.

It’s really more of a gut feel that I’ve developed since around 2015. To me it really became noticeable about the time the chatter from the talking heads got loud about his TD/Int ratio. It is my opinion that got into Rodgers psyche in a noticeable way. His game seemed to change around that time. Again, that’s my perception and opinion. I’m not about to spend time in deep data analysis or review his game tapes from that time period. We all view things differently and I respect your point of view. It just seemed to me at the time that the guy “changed”.

It's pretty easy to refute your gut feeling considering Rodgers targeted Lazard 52 times over the last 11 games last season though.

I don't think it would matter if the receiver was not in the exact position he is supposed to be in as long as he was sufficiently open (in Roger's mind). It is possible he does not include someone in his progression if he already believes he won't be open.

The receiver being in the exact position Rodgers expects him to be is of utmost importance. Otherwise it will be close to impossible to inlcude him in his progression.

Funny thing is, as much as I don't want to see the Packers use a first round pick on a QB, if the 2005 Aaron Rodgers situation arose and a QB that the Packers coveted did a free fall to #30, I might initially be disappointed if Gute selected him, but it would tell me that the Packers see #12's sunset coming sooner than most of us expect and I would accept that.

I don't think that would be a positive outlook for next season though. And as HRE has pointed out in this thread it's more likely that even a quarterback selected in the first round doesn't live up to expectations.

As I recall, few here questioned the Spriggs pick in 2016, a straight up bench player behind to two very good OTs.

I can't speak for other posters but I didn't like the Packers trading three picks to move up to select Spriggs from the beginning.

This has been discussed to death. After Adams got back from injury, Rodgers went straight back to tunnel vision mode. He routinely ignored other guys who were open for modest gains and either took sacks or threw to Adams instead, even if he was covered. There are a myriad of articles out there with the same view. Google helps. His trust issues are well documented.

It's total BS though as Rodgers targeting Adams on only 31.8% of his attempts after the receiver came back from his injury. With him being by far the most talented player at the position it would be ludicrous to expect that number to be lower.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

My point is that the Packers need to draft a wide receiver capable of having an immediate impact during his rookie season. Otherwise it might be possible that the passing offense will struggle for another season with Rodgers' championship window closing fast.

I am glad that we finally agree, this has been my point all along. The Packers have almost put themselves into a position of having to rely on a rookie to step up and make an immediate impact. I have never said that they couldn't, simply that I would not want to solely rely on it or just because of the draft class, fully expect it to happen.

Existing variables that might mitigate how much reliance is put on said rookie:

• We see continued improvement from Lazard.
• Funchess plays really well.
• One or two of MVS, ESB, Begelton or Kumerow step up and become legit starters.
• Sternberger has a breakout second season.

Potential moves that might mitigate how much reliance is put on said rookie:

• sign or trade for another vet FA WR.
• double down on the position in the draft.

I would liken this situation a bit to having one excellent DB and then a lot of question marks after that. Your secondary is probably going to be a big concern. Adding a high round rookie is one thing that could potentially improve it, but what if that rookie doesn't perform up to expectations?

 

[tynimiller]

Funchess contract reported:

https://lombardiave.com/2020/03/28/packers-devin-funchess-contract-low-risk/

Assuming the incentives are "not likely to be earned", the cap cost is $2.5 mil.

The difference between the deal amount and the base salary sounds like some kind of bonus, either signing or "likely to be earned" such as game day roster bonuses. So, there could be some minor guarantee in the signing bonus or none whatsoever.

Yup only a million is guaranteed.

 

[gopkrs]

The receiver being in the exact position Rodgers expects him to be is of utmost importance. Otherwise it will be close to impossible to inlcude him in his progression.

Just don't agree here. I guess you think that when a QB is standing in the pocket and looking around; that he is simply going through progressions. I think what he is doing is looking for an open receiver at that point. He goes through his progressions very quickly and as soon as he has to move himself from the rush or has gone through his progressions; he is just looking for someone to be open. And as he is going through his progressions; if someone is open, but not in exactly in the right place (because the DB anticipated), he will throw it to him. There are more options on a play than you think.

 

[tynimiller]

Just don't agree here. I guess you think that when a QB is standing in the pocket and looking around; that he is simply going through progressions. I think what he is doing is looking for an open receiver at that point. He goes through his progressions very quickly and as soon as he has to move himself from the rush or has gone through his progressions; he is just looking for someone to be open. And as he is going through his progressions; if someone is open, but not in exactly in the right place (because the DB anticipated), he will throw it to him. There are more options on a play than you think.

I don't believe either of you are necessarily wrong. As long as Rodgers holds the ball, I think his initial read progression is done by the time he throws the ball often...so you both are not wrong IMO.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

As I've posted above the 2019 rookie receiver class actually wasn't anything special compared to past seasons.



The Packers would be significantly improved by adding a reliable slot receiver as well.

The production of AJ Brown, McLaurin, and Samuel was pretty unusual from a historical point of view. That doesn't mean it's never happened before, but that it tends to NOT happen quite a bit more than it does happen.

And I never said the Packers couldn't use a slot receiver, but having a receiver that could play slot OR outside is more valuable than having a guy who can only play slot.

 

[gopkrs]

I've still got hopes for Shepherd. But Lafleur would have to show some flexibility with his offense. I can see big slots being used for running. But don't like em for receiving. I mean slots that line up close to the tackle.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Just don't agree here. I guess you think that when a QB is standing in the pocket and looking around; that he is simply going through progressions. I think what he is doing is looking for an open receiver at that point. He goes through his progressions very quickly and as soon as he has to move himself from the rush or has gone through his progressions; he is just looking for someone to be open. And as he is going through his progressions; if someone is open, but not in exactly in the right place (because the DB anticipated), he will throw it to him. There are more options on a play than you think.

You lose me at about 1.0 second into the play, maybe up to 2.0 seconds with the primary a deep route. Up to that point the QB may be adjusting the progression according to what he's reading, taking in the whole field and perceiving, as Tony Romo has characterized, "spacial relations", for lack of a better term. It's a general impression of where the primary opportunity lies relative to the route calls, defensive positioning and how the receiver attacks the route. There's a progression in the playbook. There's an adjustment at the line. Then an adjustment post snap if he doesn't like the release of the first guy and how it is defensed.

Now, you may have an offense designed for a rookie or one of the less sharp knives in the drawer with a heavy dose of pre-set progressions, short, intermediate and long routes where the QB can check them off in the sequence of breaks. This is not that.

At some point, very quickly post snap, a primary opportunity is selected and the QB has to switch from the generalized impression to a detailed focus on the target. Nobody can be any good if he's not looking where he plans to throw, right? He does not have eyes on the side of head or three brains operating simultaneoulsy. If, for example, his first choice for focus is left side, he's not going to see a guy running free up the right sidelines. This is why open receivers are "missed" in every game with every QB.

If that first take is not developing the way he likes, and checks to the next guy, that second guy better have run the route on time to the spot he's expected to be according to the QBs internal time clock. It doesn't matter much if the guy has separation but not in the right way. There's no time to be hunting for the guy.

Then there's the other stuff. Linemen are big, they block views and throwing lanes. There's pressure that moves the QB off his spot that disrupts timing. And then there's the extended play where nothing is working, where the underappreciated receiver skill in running the scramble drill comes into play. I can't tell you how many times I see guys jogging that out. With Rodgers? There's yards and money out there to be had.

Rodgers doesn't have trust issues with Adams because Adams is fine route runner, makes the right reads and executes the route accordingly as that "2nd. QB on the field" good route runners as said to be. Rodgers is comfortable throwing him open because he has trust that he'll come out of the break the way he expects. Receivers that are inconsistent with their technique, who make mistakes or poor judgements, in a world where the QB is always right because that's the only way to be successful, and who need to be found or waited on--there isn't much time for that.

If more trust is desired, get more trustworthy receivers, good route runners. Rodgers is a detailed and demanding guy and you have to get on his page to get the ball.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I am glad that we finally agree, this has been my point all along. The Packers have almost put themselves into a position of having to rely on a rookie to step up and make an immediate impact.
Adding a high round rookie is one thing that could potentially improve it, but what if that rookie doesn't perform up to expectations?

Well, with an extremely weak receiving corps entering this offseason it was pretty obvious the Packers will have to rely on a rookie to make an immediate impact.

While I would prefer to have three bona fide veterans atop the depth chart as well that was completely unrealistic to expect entering next season.

If the rookie doesn't perform up to expectations the passing game will most likely struggle in 2020 again. It's that easy.

Yup only a million is guaranteed.

With Funchess all but guaranteed to make the roster he will at least earn $2.25 million.

Just don't agree here. I guess you think that when a QB is standing in the pocket and looking around; that he is simply going through progressions. I think what he is doing is looking for an open receiver at that point. He goes through his progressions very quickly and as soon as he has to move himself from the rush or has gone through his progressions; he is just looking for someone to be open. And as he is going through his progressions; if someone is open, but not in exactly in the right place (because the DB anticipated), he will throw it to him. There are more options on a play than you think.

A quarterback will first move through his progressions to find an open receiver. It's close to impossible for him to find one if the WR isn't in the correct spot at that point.

That changes once the QB has to scramble to throw the ball but that shouldn't be the case on a regular basis.

The production of AJ Brown, McLaurin, and Samuel was pretty unusual from a historical point of view. That doesn't mean it's never happened before, but that it tends to NOT happen quite a bit more than it does happen.

You're right that last season's top rookie receivers (I included Metcalf in the list as well) were pretty good compared to other years.

The top four in receiving yards rank fifth in combined receptions, second in yards and third in touchdowns compared to their pals since 2008.

They weren't anywhere close to the best class of 2014 though.

And I never said the Packers couldn't use a slot receiver, but having a receiver that could play slot OR outside is more valuable than having a guy who can only play slot.

True, although I wouldn't mind the Packers drafting a receiver solely excelling in the slot.

 

[Do7]

Great, it proves a lot of people regurgitate the same article over and over and over and think it means more. Outside of a handful or less of plays every couple games where Rodgers wasn't perfect, it's mostly garbage journalism looking for controversy and clicks. His "trust" issues are as made up as this drum people still like to beat. AFTER Adams came back, how many times was Lazard targeted? and UDFA who didn't even make the initial roster this year.

If you're working and doing what you're supposed to be, you're going to see the ball. History proves that and is well documented.

Bingo. He's not perfect by any means, but we've been spoiled by him for so long that's what we come to expect at this point.