Rebuild a new LaFleur offense or get what Pettine needs on defense?

[brandon2348]

Its time to get out of denial and get the offense some "elite talent"

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

 

[Deleted member 6794]

That's why I used points scored first. Could the Packers use help on offense? Of course! They were THREE points a game from being top-10 last year but somehow some fans are convinced the team is in dire straits on offense.

The Packers offense definitely has the ability to end up being a top 10 unit as long as Rodgers is the starting quarterback. My point is there's no reason to rely on it after what happened last season.

AND we repeatedly had games where they left so many plays on the field.

True, that could be attributed to a lack of talent though.

 

[Mondio]

The Packers offense definitely has the ability to end up being a top 10 unit as long as Rodgers is the starting quarterback. My point is there's no reason to rely on it after what happened last season.



True, that could be attributed to a lack of talent though.

It can be. But I've seen Rodgers make better throws under more challenging conditions

It could also just be lack of focus, inexperience etc.

 

[PackAttack12]

It can be. But I've seen Rodgers make better throws under more challenging conditions

It could also just be lack of focus, inexperience etc.

I think the fundamental difference in your opinion versus others' opinions is that you're using the measuring stick of "I've seen Rodgers make better throws". I absolutely agree with that assessment. By his historic standards, he was most certainly underwhelming for much of the season.

But I'm beyond the point of having to rely on Rodgers to make extraordinary plays on a regular basis just for the Packers to struggle to remain relevant. And I know you're going to counter with "but there were also some instances where guys were wide open and Rodgers missed". And you won't get any argument from me.

At the end of the day though, Rodgers and the Packers would greatly benefit from more offensive talent to take some of the pressure off of Rodgers' shoulder pads.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

My goodness.

Since three points per game doesn't matter, hell why not go backwards 3 points a game if going forward 3 points a game doesn't matter. That'll put us with the likes of Denver and Detroit at 25th in the league.

The margin is so small in the NFL that every little thing matters.

Top 10 gets us back in business, but I'm shooting for top 5 anyway. But then again that's only a difference of 3.6 points per game so it doesn't really matter much either.

Well, since three points per game more is how much the Packers needed to score to be a top-10 offense it does kinda matter. I brought up the difference to illustrate the point that with an injured QB, without the projected #2 WR, with rookie WRs playing extensively, and a coach that refused to use Jones for half the season, the Packers were really close to being a top-10 offense. Some people seem to think the Packers need a LOT of help to become a top-10 offense while actually looking at what happened last year would seem to imply that the team wasn't that far from being top-1o even with all of the handicaps last year.

But hey, I get it, you'd rather the team focus on the offense in the off-season; offense is fun to watch so there's certainly an upside to going all-in on offense. I just happen to think the defense needs far more help than the offense.

 

[brandon2348]

Well, since three points per game more is how much the Packers needed to score to be a top-10 offense it does kinda matter. I brought up the difference to illustrate the point that with an injured QB, without the projected #2 WR, with rookie WRs playing extensively, and a coach that refused to use Jones for half the season, the Packers were really close to being a top-10 offense. Some people seem to think the Packers need a LOT of help to become a top-10 offense while actually looking at what happened last year would seem to imply that the team wasn't that far from being top-1o even with all of the handicaps last year.

But hey, I get it, you'd rather the team focus on the offense in the off-season; offense is fun to watch so there's certainly an upside to going all-in on offense. I just happen to think the defense needs far more help than the offense.

We need too build an offense that can score 30 pts a game and that's not gonna happen with just adding LaFleur to the talent we currently have on offense. By doing it now through the draft we secure those players for 4-5 years wrapping up Rodgers career.

The "defensive fantasy" was never going to happen and the Packers should plug holes on defense accordingly through free agency.

 

[GreenNGold_81]

We need too build an offense that can score 30 pts a game and that's not gonna happen with just adding LaFleur to the talent we currently have on offense. By doing it now through the draft we secure those players for 4-5 years wrapping up Rodgers career.

The "defensive fantasy" was never going to happen and the Packers should plug holes on defense accordingly through free agency.

I think trying to plug holes through FA and with whatever we miss out on through the draft should be our strategy with Rodgers now likely in the downslope of his prime.

 

[Heyjoe4]

With free agency looming and the draft on the horizon I'm hearing a lot of player names that fans want. Unfortunately with only so many resources available to acquire new players what do people believe is more important to get the Packers back to WINNING?

Thoughts?

I think the O-line has to be solidified. Yes there are glaring needs on defense, seems there are every year. But if the line can’t protect ARod, then all the changes on D will be for naught. I haven’t looked ahead to the draft yet. I have heard it’s rich in edge rushers. If the right guy is available at #12, I’d have no problem with Gluten taking a RT or RG. The left side of the line is solid with Bakhtiari and Linsley is a v good center. Shore up the right side first, and use FA, the draft, signing waived players to add depth to the O line.

 

[Heyjoe4]

I'd lean most towards helping the offense and getting the best o-line possible since AR outside of 2015-2016 has been injured every season since 2013.

Well said Lambeau. It seems like every year, the first three draft picks are for the D. It’s time to help the O line, specifically RT and RG. Rodgers has taken too many hits, as you note. Protecting Rodgers is protecting the franchise. I don’t care if it’s FA or the draft, but Gluten needs to find 2 or 3 very solid people for the O line. Until that happens, the rest is just talk.

 

[brandon2348]

Well said Lambeau. It seems like every year, the first three draft picks are for the D. It’s time to help the O line, specifically RT and RG. Rodgers has taken too many hits, as you note. Protecting Rodgers is protecting the franchise. I don’t care if it’s FA or the draft, but Gluten needs to find 2 or 3 very solid people for the O line. Until that happens, the rest is just talk.

Cobb is as good as gone so I would add slot reciever to the RG, RT upgrades.

 

[GleefulGary]

With the Browns signing Kareem Hunt, I would try to use a 5th round pick or so to get Duke Johnson. Dude would slay in LaFleur's offense.

 

[brandon2348]

I've always liked Duke Johnson and would have no problem with the Packers making an effort to get him in a LaFleur offense.

 

[GreenNGold_81]

Duke is a great pass catching RB - akin to a James White level of talent. He's had some durability concerns but would be an upgrade to our guys in terms of his ability to catch the ball out of the backfield. He's not really a three down back though.

 

[brandon2348]

Duke is a great pass catching RB - akin to a James White level of talent. He's had some durability concerns but would be an upgrade to our guys in terms of his ability to catch the ball out of the backfield. He's not really a three down back though.

He isn't a 3 down back but these are the types of conversations I hope Gute is having with LaFleur etc etc. IMO the Packers need to use all avenues available to upgrade this roster.

 

[GleefulGary]

Duke is a great pass catching RB - akin to a James White level of talent. He's had some durability concerns but would be an upgrade to our guys in terms of his ability to catch the ball out of the backfield. He's not really a three down back though.

He doesn't need to be a 3 down back. Always nice if a guy is, but it's not a necessity.

 

[PackAttack12]

Well, since three points per game more is how much the Packers needed to score to be a top-10 offense it does kinda matter. I brought up the difference to illustrate the point that with an injured QB, without the projected #2 WR, with rookie WRs playing extensively, and a coach that refused to use Jones for half the season, the Packers were really close to being a top-10 offense. Some people seem to think the Packers need a LOT of help to become a top-10 offense while actually looking at what happened last year would seem to imply that the team wasn't that far from being top-1o even with all of the handicaps last year.

But hey, I get it, you'd rather the team focus on the offense in the off-season; offense is fun to watch so there's certainly an upside to going all-in on offense. I just happen to think the defense needs far more help than the offense.

I’m not an advocate of going all offense, but this “all defense” approach has been the mindset for a long time and has yeilded minimal results.

The Packers need to invest some draft capital back into the offense.

 

[brandon2348]

I’m not an advocate of going all offense, but this “all defense” approach has been the mindset for a long time and has yeilded minimal results.

The Packers need to invest some draft capital back into the offense.

That's just it. Since we have been going "all defense" for several years nobody around here even knows what an "all offfense" draft looks like. It's like speaking a different language.

I've simply recommended the Packers spend the 30th pick on a receiver and some people think that's crazy telling me I was Matt Millen. I couldn't even imagine the push back there would be if we went offense at pick 12 or our first four picks on offense like they have been doing on defesne every damn year.

Whether people like it or not we need to keep Rodgers happy and continuing to ignore the offense isn't a good idea with that in mind.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Cobb is as good as gone so I would add slot reciever to the RG, RT upgrades.

Agreed Brandon. There are other areas of the O that need help. I’d prefer a veteran slot or wide receiver to complement Adams. And I’d also like them to add a seam-splitting TE. I’m not that happy about Graham coming back, he looks to be well past his prime. And finally, maybe add a RB, even a FB, in round 4 or 5 as depth for Jones and Williams and added protection for #12.

 

[brandon2348]

I am so sick and tired of people saying to develop MVS and Brown and Jones etc etc. Basically a bunch of day 3 picks.

Like really?

I call ********! They need to develop King, Jackson, Alexander. Burks, J. Jones, Fackrell, Montro Adams, ****, they got all kinds of top picks to develop on defense. They need to cut that **** off and develop all the premium picks they have. The level of entitlement is sickening.

 

[brandon2348]

Agreed Brandon. There are other areas of the O that need help. I’d prefer a veteran slot or wide receiver to complement Adams. And I’d also like them to add a seam-splitting TE. I’m not that happy about Graham coming back, he looks to be well past his prime. And finally, maybe add a RB, even a FB, in round 4 or 5 as depth for Jones and Williams and added protection for #12.

A TE that can split the seam would be great but with the word that there gonna roll with Graham i'm not sure they can go that route right now. Not if its gonna get in the way of replacing Cobb or the right side of the OL.

 

[mradtke66]

I am so sick and tired of people saying to develop MVS and Brown and Jones etc etc. Basically a bunch of day 3 picks.

Like really?

I call ********! They need to develop King, Jackson, Alexander. Burks, J. Jones, Fackrell, Montro Adams, ****, they got all kinds of top picks to develop on defense. They need to cut that **** off and develop all the premium picks they have. The level of entitlement is sickening.

Just because a pick is late, it doesn't make the player bad.

Just because a pick is early, it doesn't make the player good.

Even at the recent height of our o-line play, we had 4 4th round picks or later starting--Bhak, Lang, and Sitton were 4s, I think Linsley was a 5.

I'm not opposed to taking b**** offensive players, but if the better ones available on defense, take the better player. Hypothetically, if a 2nd tier WR is taken when a 1st tier DE/OLB is available, that's probably a bad move.

EDIT: Better -> Offensive in the last paragraph. I can't find the strikethrough formatting option...

 

[GleefulGary]

That's just it. Since we have been going "all defense" for several years nobody around here even knows what an "all offfense" draft looks like. It's like speaking a different language.

I've simply recommended the Packers spend the 30th pick on a receiver and some people think that's crazy telling me I was Matt Millen. I couldn't even imagine the push back there would be if we went offense at pick 12 or our first four picks on offense like they have been doing on defesne every damn year.

Whether people like it or not we need to keep Rodgers happy and continuing to ignore the offense isn't a good idea with that in mind.

Absolutely nobody has said that you're crazy, or Matt Millen, for suggesting we take a WR at 30.

Grow up and quit lying. You're 46. Act like an adult.

 

[GleefulGary]

Just because a pick is late, it doesn't make the player bad.

Just because a pick is early, it doesn't make the player good.

Even at the recent height of our o-line play, we had 4 4th round picks or later starting--Bhak, Lang, and Sitton were 4s, I think Linsley was a 5.

I'm not opposed to taking better players, but if the better ones available on defense, take the better player. Hypothetically, if a 2nd tier WR is taken when a 1st tier DE/OLB is available, that's probably a bad move.

You're in for a world of fun you crazy person you.

INSANITY!!!

 

[brandon2348]

Just because a pick is late, it doesn't make the player bad.

Just because a pick is early, it doesn't make the player good.

Even at the recent height of our o-line play, we had 4 4th round picks or later starting--Bhak, Lang, and Sitton were 4s, I think Linsley was a 5.

I'm not opposed to taking better players, but if the better ones available on defense, take the better player. Hypothetically, if a 2nd tier WR is taken when a 1st tier DE/OLB is available, that's probably a bad move.

The probabilities of a player panning out is much higher with using top picks. Thats just a fact.

Yes, the Packers have done a decent job picking later with OL and a handfull of position players. However, it's obvious the overall talent on offense has suffered using such practices as there only method.

 

[brandon2348]

Absolutely nobody has said that you're crazy, or Matt Millen, for suggesting we take a WR at 30.

Grow up and quit lying. You're 46. Act like an adult.

Actually your "Lover Boy" Dante called me that .