My only caveat would be that Nelson was an unexpected loss. But they know from the getgo that they don't have a #1WR at this point.
While there's some truth to it the Packers had enough time before the start of the season to prepare for Nelson's loss after he was injured in a preaseason game in Pittsburgh.
Even with Rodgers coming off an MVP season at that point as well they weren't able to make up for it all season long though.
I disagree.
Lazard in a good sample size has shown proficient. With a larger sample size I could see perform well into that WR2 role (750+). Playoff experience
Cobb is older, but if given more looks could easily surpass that lower WR2 level (750+). Playoff experience
Sammy has dealt with injuries, but has proven when on the field hes formidable. As long as he plays 10-12 of 17 games he’s an easy pick of this group to our veteran leader. There was a reason KC hired him, the only nick he has is availability, that doesn’t fit your “unproven” remark at all. He’s had multiple seasons as what I’d call a WR2+ lower WR1- area. Over 1,000 yards.
Playoff experience
Watson is a complete unknown, yes. ALL Rookies are. Yet he is one of this drafts higher prospects and he’s paired with yours truly.. #12. Every season has rookies and if paired with a great QB, they tend to perform far better. You can’t get a better scenario for Watson. He’s an unknown, but his bigger issue is recent surgery. He’s an easy projected WR3 if he’s on that field. With potential of a WR2 numbers early on. Much due to a highly unusual WR room, as you said.
College playoff champion
It's a fact that the Packers don't have any receiver currently on the roster who put up numbers like Cobb and Jones in 2014.
It's possible the offense will still perform well but there's no doubt the receiving corps is a huge question mark entering the season. A bigger one that it has ever been before since Rodgers became the starter in 2008.
Captain, we are nowhere near as bad as you have us in receiving.
Is there a ?? On who will be the riser? absolutely. If you are insinuating that we will highly underperform in our receiving room compared with the league, you will be wrong this January. For a guy that touts his QB so highly, you sure seem to highly underestimate what he can do with a room full of potential.
Once again, take a look at his numbers in 2015 to at lease acknowdlege that even Rodgers can't perform at an MVP level without some talent at wide receiver.
I agree the receiving corps has potential but that doesn't automatically result in a decent performance on the field.
Let's take a look at the receiving corps of some other contenders around the league:
Bills: Diggs, Davis, Crowder
Bucs: Evans, Godwin, Jones
Chiefs: Hardman, Smith-Schuster, MVS
Rams: Kupp, Robinson, Jefferson
Considering the Chiefs have Kelce at tight end and the Bills have a talented one in Knox as well there's absolutely no way anyone should prefer having the Packers' receiving corps over any of those teams listed.
I don't care that they might have more talent than a team like the Bears at the position as they won't be a team to compete with for a Super Bowl.
If you think Davante Adams was the Nucleus of 39 Wins you are greatly mistaken. You act like we are a dysfunctional franchise and you’re like a pitbull on losing Adams. There was life before Adams and how many Super Bowl Rings does he have?
You're completely exaggerating if you truly believe I act like the Packers are a dysfunctional franchise.
With that being said, taking a look at the offensive line, wide receivers and tight ends there's definitely reason to be concerned for a Super Bowl contender.