Wide Receiver Options

[Sunshinepacker]

His 3rd year..1st 2 he looked horrible

Now do Love! Note: This isn't meant to denigrate Love, just pointing out that very few QBs look good their first 2 seasons.

 

[Voyageur]

Now do Love! Note: This isn't meant to denigrate Love, just pointing out that very few QBs look good their first 2 seasons.

Very true.

 

[PackerDNA]

This current wide receiver group will not be good enough come playoff time. In my opinion, they have to make a deal for a good veteran.

 

[Voyageur]

This current wide receiver group will not be good enough come playoff time. In my opinion, they have to make a deal for a good veteran.

You might be right, but if their trajectory of growth is what it appears to be at this point, they could be more than adequate. Also, we'll have Watson back, which adds even more to the group.

 

[realitybytez]

When we use Nixon as the nickel back, beware! He was out there against the Bucs, because he was all that was left.

he played very well as a backup for jaire. had a couple big plays. when you consider that nobody was expecting him to even have to play at all, i was impressed.

 

[Voyageur]

His grade wasn't good. But, like you said, he was thrown into a situation he probably wasn't prepared to handle. He'll get a lot of work on that this week, in practice. What surprised me is how bad Walker graded out. He was kind of a no-show all night. We dodged a bullet with Smith having a poor night. Seeing Stokes and Lowry higher on the list made me smile. I felt they were playing well all night. Clark was awesome. He was plugging the middle constantly. Required two blockers, and still was effective.

Top 5 defense​

1. DL Kenny Clark: 87.4
2. CB Eric Stokes: 75.9
3. CB Rasul Douglas: 75.3
4. DL Dean Lowry: 71.5
5. OLB Rashan Gary: 67.5

Bottom 5 defense​

1. LB Quay Walker: 36.3
2. OLB Jonathan Garvin: 45.9
3. S Darnell Savage: 51.8
4. OLB Preston Smith: 55.7
5. CB Keisean Nixon: 55.8

 

[realitybytez]

Clark was awesome. He was plugging the middle constantly. Required two blockers, and still was effective.

and he was held. a lot. and he was still effective.

 

[Voyageur]

and he was held. a lot. and he was still effective.

If they had called half the holding penalties they should have, by the Bucs, they would have continuously been backed up so far that Brady would have eventually have had to buy a ticket to get back into the stadium!

 

[PackerDNA]

You might be right, but if their trajectory of growth is what it appears to be at this point, they could be more than adequate. Also, we'll have Watson back, which adds even more to the group.

We'll have Watkins back for how long? Even with the expected improvement over the course of a year this group is not going to be good enough. Wasn't good enough with Adams.. The Bucs and 49ers will chew us up in the playoffs.

 

[Voyageur]

We'll have Watkins back for how long? Even with the expected improvement over the course of a year this group is not going to be good enough. Wasn't good enough with Adams.. The Bucs and 49ers will chew us up in the playoffs.

IF we don't do well, it won't be because of our WRs. It will be because our defense can't make big plays against good teams. But, everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

Personally, I think the offense will be capable of putting up 30-31 points a game. Now, can the defense handle that? We've seen over the last few years that they couldn't.

 

[elcid]

IF we don't do well, it won't be because of our WRs. It will be because our defense can't make big plays against good teams. But, everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

Personally, I think the offense will be capable of putting up 30-31 points a game. Now, can the defense handle that? We've seen over the last few years that they couldn't.

Ehm, did you happen to watch the last playoff game we are in? Certainly not the defense that lost us the game

While Doubs absolutely is a pleasant surprise, Im not banking on Watson this summer. As has been the case for the past 5 years, we need to bring in another WR.

 

[Mondio]

The biggest problem in our last playoff game was the same as the one the year before, our offensive line got their butts handed to them from start to finish.

 

[OldSchool101]

Just an FYI.... 6% of $28,000,000+ equates to $1,680,000+

^ $1.5M+ is a good chunk of change for MOST people LOL. Not to mention he doesn't have to worry about FEETs of snow in winter, and single digit to negative degree weather

Just an FYI....

The Super Bowl thing, I mean sure... every athlete is competitive and wants to "win". Every man/woman who pushes him/her self will want to compete and "win". But at the end of the day, do you really think that that was as big of a factor as you think? It's a factor, sure, but I don't think he really cares as much as some really think

Did Terrell Owens, Larry Fitzgerald, Tim Brown, Randy Moss, etc... the list goes on, did they ever win a Super Bowl? Does ANYONE doubt that those aforementioned players are Hall of Famers? NO

I don't think he cares as much as some think. Davante did what was best for Davante, good for him... that's what he should have done

Im pretty sure for many of those players they would’ve have loved to have a SB ring. So saying it’s not a factor when it’s a top goal is what I’m disagreeing with. These guys live for a Ring.

While you are probably correct on that figure (close enough), his cash flow would be adjusted by his output and according to recent info, the cost of living in Nevada is 117% off the US median and the cost in WI is 82% off median. That means it’s a 10:7 expenditure ratio Nevada:Wisconsin in approximate terms.

So the point I made was never that $1.6M is peanuts, the point I made was when yourself (likely hearing a half truth heard that from somewhere) and others covered cash flow…. It conveniently left out the full economic picture. Where’s the output/expenditures? We know the 1.6M is really about 1.1M in Nevada. Now we have to hit his expenditures. Plus, Where’s the figure $$ GB supposedly offered him above 28.25M?? That might’ve been $1M right there for all we know.

So in effect, I’m just saying that playing that tax argument means we have to balance the ledger sheet like any good accountant would do. Credits against debits or it’s only half that full story. Last thing you argued it’s a lot of money to MOST people. I’d agree. But Davante’s ledger isn’t a realistic MOST people figure, so toss that statement out right now. It’s impressive for you and I for sure.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Should inquire about Kendrick Bourne

I don't think Bourne presents an upgrade over the receivers slated to play the majority of snaps for the Packers.

Then there's Amari, who should improve, and a case for Toure becoming more effective when he grasps the concepts.

I'm not convinced Amari will actually improve moving forward.

IF we don't do well, it won't be because of our WRs. It will be because our defense can't make big plays against good teams. But, everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

I'm definitely concerned about the receiving corps being good enough to make it work in the playoffs. I fully expect the Packers front office to wait until the trade deadline to get a better feel on the group before deciding if a move is necessary to upgrade the position.

 

[Voyageur]

Ehm, did you happen to watch the last playoff game we are in? Certainly not the defense that lost us the game

While Doubs absolutely is a pleasant surprise, Im not banking on Watson this summer. As has been the case for the past 5 years, we need to bring in another WR.

I watched the game. It was a miserably cold day, and no matter who you had at WR, you weren't going to do much better than the Packers did. The wind, and even snow during the second half. A wind chill below zero. According to a lot of people, the 5th worst weather conditions ever for a playoff game. You aren't going to score a lot of points in that kind of weather, or a field that's temperature controlled, and footing begins to disappear.

Yes, the Packers only scored 10 points, but they were only outscored by a FG.

Anyhow, it isn't that one off game that determines whether or not you have the talent. It's the long haul, when you count up all the wins at the end of the year, and see where you stand against the league. To win in the playoffs, you need talent, but even more important, you need a bit of luck that your game plan overshadows the opponent.

On a warm, dry field, last January, the Packers would have put up near 30 points, and won that game.

 

[Arod2gjdd]

I don't think Bourne presents an upgrade over the receivers slated to play the majority of snaps for the Packers.

I strongly disagree; he might immediately be our best receiver.

 

[Curly Calhoun]

Interesting take here:

Why the Packers have already won the Davante Adams trade​

Why the Packers have already won the Davante Adams trade

Throughout Week 1, everywhere you looked, you would find comparisons between the Green Bay Packers' wide receiver numbers and Davante Adams' in his Las Veg...

lombardiave.com

 

[OldSchool101]

Interesting take here:

Why the Packers have already won the Davante Adams trade​

Why the Packers have already won the Davante Adams trade

Throughout Week 1, everywhere you looked, you would find comparisons between the Green Bay Packers' wide receiver numbers and Davante Adams' in his Las Veg...

lombardiave.com

Not to mention that his team plays @KC in 2 weeks. If they lose 4 of their first 5 the probability of making a playoff run drops even more than that 2.5%. They’d have to win 10 of the last 12 contests to have a legit shot of sneaking in on a wild card ticket.
Yards are fun, but SB’s are better.

 

[tynimiller]

To be fair, IF what Adams said this move was primarily family driven, how his team does shouldn't bother him. Outside of normal competitor bother that is.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I watched the game. It was a miserably cold day, and no matter who you had at WR, you weren't going to do much better than the Packers did. The wind, and even snow during the second half. A wind chill below zero. According to a lot of people, the 5th worst weather conditions ever for a playoff game. You aren't going to score a lot of points in that kind of weather, or a field that's temperature controlled, and footing begins to disappear.

I agree it's unrealistic to expect to score a lot of points in weather conditions like that but the Packers having had another receiver capable of putting up numbers like Adams did in the game might have made a huge difference.

I strongly disagree; he might immediately be our best receiver.

I highly doubt that Bourne would be the most talented receiver on the roster. Considering his lack of knowledge of the Packers' system he most likely wouldn't immediately become the team's #1 on the depth chart anyway.

 

[Arod2gjdd]

I highly doubt that Bourne would be the most talented receiver on the roster. Considering his lack of knowledge of the Packers' system he most likely wouldn't immediately become the team's #1 on the depth chart anyway.

Integration would take time, certainly. I am referring to the combination of ability/experience. He has more of the former than anyone other than Doubs.

 

[Voyageur]

I agree it's unrealistic to expect to score a lot of points in weather conditions like that but the Packers having had another receiver capable of putting up numbers like Adams did in the game might have made a huge difference.



I highly doubt that Bourne would be the most talented receiver on the roster. Considering his lack of knowledge of the Packers' system he most likely wouldn't immediately become the team's #1 on the depth chart anyway.

I've been to a lot of ice cold games with snow, or sleet falling in Green Bay, and I have only seen a couple where QBs and receivers locked up for considerable yardage. Most of the time, the games are won or lost in the trenches, not in the air. To expect a team to put up average, or better points on a day like that, and blame the loss on not having enough good receivers, after the team has won... what??? 13 or 14 games during the year???.............. Is not logical.

As a coach, and player, I've experienced it all. Quite frankly, I won't change my mind, and never will anyone else who's been there.

 

[Half Empty]

I've been to a lot of ice cold games with snow, or sleet falling in Green Bay, and I have only seen a couple where QBs and receivers locked up for considerable yardage. Most of the time, the games are won or lost in the trenches, not in the air. To expect a team to put up average, or better points on a day like that, and blame the loss on not having enough good receivers, after the team has won... what??? 13 or 14 games during the year???.............. Is not logical.

As a coach, and player, I've experienced it all. Quite frankly, I won't change my mind, and never will anyone else who's been there.

I'm confused. It looks like the post to which you referred (1) agreed that points in bad weather are hard to come by and (2) felt that adding an all-pro WR would help. How did you take that and chastise him for 'expecting to put up average, or better points'?

 

[Snoops]

Ehm, did you happen to watch the last playoff game we are in? Certainly not the defense that lost us the game

While Doubs absolutely is a pleasant surprise, Im not banking on Watson this summer. As has been the case for the past 5 years, we need to bring in another WR

Ehm, did you happen to watch the last playoff game we are in? Certainly not the defense that lost us the game

While Doubs absolutely is a pleasant surprise, Im not banking on Watson this summer. As has been the case for the past 5 years, we need to bring in another WR.

And that receiver is Odell I don’t want any excuses they give him what he wants when he is ready to go in November

 

[Voyageur]

I'm confused. It looks like the post to which you referred (1) agreed that points in bad weather are hard to come by and (2) felt that adding an all-pro WR would help. How did you take that and chastise him for 'expecting to put up average, or better points'?

Not chastising him whatsoever. It was never my intent. If it appears that way, I apologize.

Just pointing out that no matter who you have at WR, in games like that, doesn't really matter too much, because you have to turn to a ground pounding running game, with ball control, and avoid turnovers. It's that old 3-4 yards per carry, and slosh your way down the field. Get what points you can, and be glad you got them. Not only is the passing game a no-show, but usually the kicking game as well. Making extra points is even difficult.

When I played, as a kid in HS, we were going against arguably one of the better teams in the state. We had a losing record, they were unbeaten, and throwing up 50+ points a game against everyone. We were, to them, a "practice" with the JV, so they thought.

It rained for two days, then on game day, the temperature dropped 25 degrees, and was below freezing. We were getting a slushy snow when the game started. At halftime, the score was 0-0, and they had two first downs, and we didn't have any. In the 3rd quarter, our coach decided that myself and another guy would run as a tandem backfield, and pretty much carry every other play. We'd run between the tackles, and nowhere else.

To make a long story short, we won the game 6-0, and I slipped and fell, trying to kick the extra point. We were better mudders than they were. As for our ends and theirs? Nobody caught a pass that day, and very few were thrown, because the ball actually slipped out of both QBs hands when they tried to throw.

Anyhow, I'm talking from experience. It's what it is, playing on a field like Lambeau. The weather can totally change the trajectory of a game, and eliminate your most dangerous weapons.

I always remembered that game, and coached teams in the worst weather, and made them work harder in it, so they knew for themselves what they needed to do to win. And, by the way, I don't remember us ever losing a foul weather game, because we always had that alternate game plan that the players understood.

But, that said, everyone is entitled to their opinion.