WR being Packers biggest post-draft weakness???

[Pokerbrat2000]

I'm torn when evaluating our WR group, especially after last season. Nelson and probably Cobb are really the only 2 in the group that I would say could play on any other team and put up decent #'s no matter who the QB was. The rest of the group, I attribute to being on the roster because of their "potential" and most of what they have done to this point is either not that special or can mainly be attributed to sharing the field with #12 and #87. But also have to keep injuries last year in mind.

A safe assumption and one I think most are making is that as long as #12 and #87 are healthy and out there playing, the rest of the WR's will look a lot better. But "looking a lot better" is where I have a hard time evaluating the group as well as saying "we have a deep WR group". Sure, we have a deep group of WR's with potential, but so does every team. Currently, we have 2 starting WR's and 5 guys who could potentially be starting, sitting on the bench or not make the 53 man roster. That scares me a bit. This isn't 5 guys that we are all saying "man, they are all so good, who do you choose?" These are 5 guys that we all seem to have various opinions on as far as potential, but I doubt any of us would say "he is a lock at #3 or #4" and be confident. We need a sure #3. Who will that be?

Camp and preseason will be interesting in regards to the WR group. I'm confident that with #12 behind center, #87 healthy, the addition of some speed at TE and a better run game, that this offense will get back on track. But my confidence in our WR group as a whole is mainly based on those things and not the group of guys not named Jordy or Randall.

 

[adambr2]

I'm torn on evaluating our WR group, especially after last season. Nelson and probably Cobb are really the only 2 in the group that I would say could play on any other team and put up decent #'s no matter who the QB was. The rest of the group, I attribute to being on the roster because of their "potential" and most of what they have done to this point is either not that special or can mainly be attributed to sharing the field with #12 and #87.

A safe assumption and one I think most are making is that as long as #12 and #87 are healthy and out there playing, the rest of the WR's will look a lot better. But "looking a lot better" is where I have a hard time evaluating the group as well as saying "we have a deep WR group". Sure, we have a deep group of WR's with potential, but so does every team. Currently, we have 2 starting WR's and 5 guys who could potentially be starting, sitting on the bench or not make the 53 man roster. That scares me a bit. This isn't 5 guys that we are all saying "man, they are all so good, who do you choose?" These are 5 guys that we all seem to have various opinions on as far as potential, but I doubt any of us would say "he is a lock at #3 or #4" and be confident. We need a sure #3. Who will that be?

Camp and preseason will be interesting in regards to the WR group. I'm confident that with #12 behind center, #87 healthy, the addition of some speed at TE and a better run game, that this offense will get back on track. But my confidence in our WR group as a whole is mainly based on those things and not the group of guys not named Jordy or Randall.

I can get on board with that. But Jordy and Cobb is a pretty nice 1/2 to have. Not a lot of teams have 3 or more proven solid assets at WR.

At least with the others, there's upside there. I just am surprised people are so down on a position because of one year in which our entire offense including our QB struggled at times. No one really gave WR a second thought before last year. In fact when we drafted Montgomery the usual reaction was 'another receiver? ?'

 

[thisisnate]

And Bleacher Report has the Packers as the #2 best WR corps in the league for this upcoming year. *shrug*

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I can get on board with that. But Jordy and Cobb is a pretty nice 1/2 to have. Not a lot of teams have 3 or more proven solid assets at WR.

No doubt, the combination of #12, #87 and #18 could possibly be the best in the NFL. Like I said, those 3 I have confidence in and if they all stay healthy, we will be fine.

All I was saying is, we don't really know what we have beyond Jordy and Cobb. Hard to look at any of those remaining 5 and ooze with confidence. So if you are evaluating the entire group, I find it difficult to grade 3-7 on anything but potential.

 

[tynimiller]

Did you read the article? He did mention Janis and Abbrederis. So I sure think he should at least have brought Montgomery up when mentioning our depth. And yes, it does discuss depth, it literally word for word says, 'you'd like to see more depth here'.

Exactly...if one feels Janis and Abby are worthy of mentioning....Monty definitely deserves mention. To exclude him entirely makes me care .02% for what the article has to say as a trustworthy source.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Unfortunately it seems the author forgot about Ty Montgomery being a part of the receiving corps.

Yeah, and he forgot about Cook who we can expect to be split out 1/2 the time, and all the time on obvious passing downs.

He also called Cobb a "youngster", lumping him in with Adams, while overlooking he's going into his 6th season with a Pro Bowl caliber year in 2014. His off year in 2015 accounted for 829 yards and 6 TDs, out of the slot exclusively no less.

This is a case of a guy mumbling for a living. Great work if you can get it.

There are bigger concerns than the WR group, and even among that group everybody's biggest concern should be whether Nelson is a (1) 100% in one year ACL snap back guy or (2) 100% two year ACL guy or (3) a 100% never again ACL guy.

 

[sschind]

I can get on board with that. But Jordy and Cobb is a pretty nice 1/2 to have. Not a lot of teams have 3 or more proven solid assets at WR.

At least with the others, there's upside there. I just am surprised people are so down on a position because of one year in which our entire offense including our QB struggled at times. No one really gave WR a second thought before last year. In fact when we drafted Montgomery the usual reaction was 'another receiver? ?'

I know I was giving it a second thought and if I am not mistaken Poker had some questions as well. I'm not saying I'm special or anything or that I saw what others didn't I just didn't see what a lot of others did and to be honest I still don't. There is no way in heck I will say our receivers from #3 on down are any better than the majority of other NFL teams. We have a very good #1 and #2 but after that its all still very much up in the air. Any one of the remaining guy could emerge as the #3 and, though not as likely, any one of them could slip to #5 or #6.

For the record, if the value is there I wouldn't mind a day 2 WR every year. I'm not saying we should but anytime we take a WR in the 2nd or 3rd I get a little excited. Day three, not so much but then that's pretty much true with any position.

 

[adambr2]

I know I was giving it a second thought and if I am not mistaken Poker had some questions as well. I'm not saying I'm special or anything or that I saw what others didn't I just didn't see what a lot of others did and to be honest I still don't. There is no way in heck I will say our receivers from #3 on down are any better than the majority of other NFL teams. We have a very good #1 and #2 but after that its all still very much up in the air. Any one of the remaining guy could emerge as the #3 and, though not as likely, any one of them could slip to #5 or #6.

For the record, if the value is there I wouldn't mind a day 2 WR every year. I'm not saying we should but anytime we take a WR in the 2nd or 3rd I get a little excited. Day three, not so much but then that's pretty much true with any position.

Off the top of my head I'm trying to think of teams around the league that have an obviously superior #3 WR and I can't come up with much. John Brown in Arizona for sure. There are probably others but nothing comes to mind.

I do agree that our #3 is way up in the air this year but based on the number of good candidates I do fully expect someone to emerge as a good #3 this year.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Off the top of my head I'm trying to think of teams around the league that have an obviously superior #3 WR and I can't come up with much. John Brown in Arizona for sure. There are probably others but nothing comes to mind.

I do agree that our #3 is way up in the air this year but based on the number of good candidates I do fully expect someone to emerge as a good #3 this year.

There are a lot of layers that go into evaluating a teams group of 3 starting wide receivers. The hardest thing IMO to separate from that layer of evaluation is the QB they are playing with and how much better or worse would a particular group of 3 be with another QB. Imagine what Fitzgerald, Brown and Floyd could do with AR as their QB?

While our #1 and #2 are good, I don't think, they are a top 5 tandem, especially if you factor in who is throwing to them. So that puts more emphasis on needing a quality #3, as well as a quality TE. Hopefully, Cook is the answer at TE.

Finally, when you have a QB like AR, why settle for an average or below average #3? Sure you have to spread the ball around, you have cap limitations and we draft and develop, but imagine how scary the Packers offense would be with Nelson, Cobb and (insert name here). Was it one of these name? Adams, Janis, Montgomery, Abby or Davis.

 

[adambr2]

Imagine what Fitzgerald, Brown and Floyd could do with AR as their QB?

I think Palmer is at that same level himself. Well not going forward, I certainly wouldn't take Palmer over Rodgers, but last year he certainly was at the same level as Rodgers or better.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I think Palmer is at that same level himself. Well not going forward, I certainly wouldn't take Palmer over Rodgers, but last year he certainly was at the same level as Rodgers or better.

Was Palmer at AR's level because of Palmer? Or was he at AR's level because of Fitzgerald, Brown and Floyd?

 

[adambr2]

Was Palmer at AR's level because of Palmer? Or was he at AR's level because of Fitzgerald, Brown and Floyd?

Chicken or egg, hard to say. I thought Fitz was pretty much done 3 years ago to tell you the truth, but he's really rebounded.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Did you read the article? He did mention Janis and Abbrederis. So I sure think he should at least have brought Montgomery up when mentioning our depth. And yes, it does discuss depth, it literally word for word says, 'you'd like to see more depth here'.

Also regardless of how old Cobb is, a 6th year veteran is not a 'youngster' in NFL terms that should be lumped in with a 3rd year WR. 6 years is longer than most NFL careers.

I know people are excited about Montgomery and the author should have mentioned him, I fail to see how his exclusion changes anything about the conclusion of the piece. Montgomery had less than 200 yards receiving and played in six games. If the team is counting on that kind of unproven player to be a significant upgrade then that sort of proves the position is weak.

With a fully healthy Nelson the packers receivers are good. Everyone saw what happens without Nelson last year though; the offense was a shell of what it usually is. If Nelson gets hurt again or if his injury has slowed him down, what did the Packers do to make you think 2016 would be much different?

Another thing that's getting lost here is that the article is about the team's biggest weakness. That doesn't necessarily mean the team in actually "weak" at WR. Talent wise, ILB is obviously much weaker than WR but being bad at ILB is not nearly as bad from an overall team standpoint. It's sorta hard to find a "weak" group on a Super Bowl contending team; by their very nature those teams don't really have glaring flaws.

Finally, Cobb is young. Not sure how he's not allowed to be a "youngster". Perhaps you view that word differently than I. I think youngster just means that Cobb is chronologically young and his career arc is still upwards, which is true. If you think of the word youngster as applying more to his working carer then I could see how that would be different (note, I'm not saying I'm right in my view, just that how we each see the word could make us both correct).

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Was Palmer at AR's level because of Palmer? Or was he at AR's level because of Fitzgerald, Brown and Floyd?

Does it matter? Does Rodgers only play like Rodgers because of Nelson? Palmer played better than Rodgers last year. By no means would I expect that to happen again. However, a QB is always going to be helped by great receivers. Though it should be mentioned that Fitzgerald is a great NAME, he's not nearly as physically dominant as he once was and I'm not sure how many people view Brown and Floyd as sure-fire Pro Bowlers.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Yeah, and he forgot about Cook who we can expect to be split out 1/2 the time, and all the time on obvious passing downs.

He also called Cobb a "youngster", lumping him in with Adams, while overlooking he's going into his 6th season with a Pro Bowl caliber year in 2014. His off year in 2015 accounted for 829 yards and 6 TDs, out of the slot exclusively no less.

This is a case of a guy mumbling for a living. Great work if you can get it.

There are bigger concerns than the WR group, and even among that group everybody's biggest concern should be whether Nelson is a (1) 100% in one year ACL snap back guy or (2) 100% two year ACL guy or (3) a 100% never again ACL guy.

I don't understand the Cook contention. He's a TE. Yes, he'll help catching the ball but you shouldn't include a TE in an analysis of the WR position group. If you want to talk about pass catchers, sure, but if Cook can't improve his drop problems I'm not real sure how helpful he's gonna be. Despite the odd focus on his receiving ability he'll actually make his biggest impact blocking since he's a much better blocker than any of the other TEs.

 

[Packerlover]

The Packers have plenty of talent at the WR position and a QB that can get them the ball accurately. I'm not concerned at all.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Does it matter? Does Rodgers only play like Rodgers because of Nelson? Palmer played better than Rodgers last year. By no means would I expect that to happen again. However, a QB is always going to be helped by great receivers. Though it should be mentioned that Fitzgerald is a great NAME, he's not nearly as physically dominant as he once was and I'm not sure how many people view Brown and Floyd as sure-fire Pro Bowlers.

Of course it matters. It's a team game. One or more teammates, as well as a coaching staff, can have a direct impact on another players game. Yes, Palmer had the best season of his career last year. But, the AZ offense as a whole also had something to do with that. #1 in total yards, #2 in points, #2 in pass yds, #4 in sacks allowed, #8 in rushing. The point of my original post was, Rodgers did not have the supporting cast around him that Palmer had, most importantly, 3 standout WR's like Fitzgerald, Brown and Floyd.

As far as your question, "Does Rodgers only play like Rodgers because of Nelson?" Is actually a good question, especially after last season. But it's also one that is usually answered when you look at the entire career of a player, not just one or two seasons. So. "no", in case you really wondered, I think Rodgers is who he is, with or without Jordy. Palmer has a career 88.1 rating and Rodgers is at 104.1 Of course, in being consistent, you would also want to take into account that players supporting cast during the entire length of his career.

 

[Patriotplayer90]

Does it matter? Does Rodgers only play like Rodgers because of Nelson? Palmer played better than Rodgers last year. By no means would I expect that to happen again. However, a QB is always going to be helped by great receivers. Though it should be mentioned that Fitzgerald is a great NAME, he's not nearly as physically dominant as he once was and I'm not sure how many people view Brown and Floyd as sure-fire Pro Bowlers.

That's a pretty ridiculous statement, considering Jordy has only been an featured part of the offense for 3 full seasons.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

That's a pretty ridiculous statement, considering Jordy has only been an featured part of the offense for 3 full seasons.

My only comment concerning Rodgers and Nelson was actually a question, not a statement.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

This makes perfect sense. The ILB position will be better than it was last year and the defense was plenty good enough last year. When I read team's biggest weakness I think, "what position has the potential to hold the team back the most". ILB, while lacking strong players, isn't a position on a team that really has enough impact to "hurt" a team.

You might want to rethink this taking the NFCCG loss to the Seahawks into consideration. The lack of talent at inside linebacker was directly responsible for 20 of Seattle´s points.

Currently, we have 2 starting WR's and 5 guys who could potentially be starting, sitting on the bench or not make the 53 man roster. That scares me a bit. This isn't 5 guys that we are all saying "man, they are all so good, who do you choose?" These are 5 guys that we all seem to have various opinions on as far as potential, but I doubt any of us would say "he is a lock at #3 or #4" and be confident. We need a sure #3. Who will that be?

But my confidence in our WR group as a whole is mainly based on those things and not the group of guys not named Jordy or Randall.

I´m absolutely convinced Adams will end up being third on the depth chart and start opposite Nelson. There are question marks about every receiver not being named Nelson or Cobb but as adambr has pointed out not a lot of teams have three solid players at the position.

And Bleacher Report has the Packers as the #2 best WR corps in the league for this upcoming year. *shrug*

The author most likely didn´t watch the Packers play a lot during last season as he mentions the team´s receiving corps being an above average group even without Nelson.

While our #1 and #2 are good, I don't think, they are a top 5 tandem, especially if you factor in who is throwing to them.

In 2014 Nelson and Cobb combined to make 189 receptions for 2,806 yards and 25 TDs. The only tandem putting up better stats were the Broncos Demaryius Thomas and Emmanuel Sanders (215 catches for 3,023 yards and 20 TDs). Taking a look at those numbers I disagree with your statement of them not being a top 5 tandem in the league.

 

[tynimiller]

In 2014 Nelson and Cobb combined to make 189 receptions for 2,806 yards and 25 TDs. The only tandem putting up better stats were the Broncos Demaryius Thomas and Emmanuel Sanders (215 catches for 3,023 yards and 20 TDs). Taking a look at those numbers I disagree with your statement of them not being a top 5 tandem in the league.

Far too many folks forget this year, simply due to last year. Let's see what was different about 2014...well for one both stayed reasonably healthy which we hope for this year again. Also Lacy ran great...which from all signs he could this year again being slimmer. That year they were really the only two threats on the team for DBs to truly worry about too....this year throw Cook into the mix and things get a touch dicier.

Now I don't think they'll go for 189-2800-25 like 2014...but I do foresee around 160-2300-20 out of the tandem should they both be healthy.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

You might want to rethink this taking the NFCCG loss to the Seahawks into consideration. The lack of talent at inside linebacker was directly responsible for 20 of Seattle´s points.

No, I don't believe I need to rethink that. The game against Seattle was two years ago and a couple bad plays in one game don't outweigh the season long issues WR gave the team last year.

Seriously, the defense was FINE last year. Was it elite? No, but it was plenty good enough to win a title. So how can anyone say ILB held the team back last year and not the receivers?

Also, defense was about the last thing I'd blame for that loss to Seattle. Issues at ILB never should have been allowed to be a factor in that game because the Packers should have been up big.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

No, I don't believe I need to rethink that. The game against Seattle was two years ago and a couple bad plays in one game don't outweigh the season long issues WR gave the team last year.

Seriously, the defense was FINE last year. Was it elite? No, but it was plenty good enough to win a title. So how can anyone say ILB held the team back last year and not the receivers?

I agree that the lack of production at the wide receiver position held the team back last season but it´s not true that a lack of talent at inside linebacker potentially doesn´t have enough impact to "hurt" a team (hence me mentioning the NFCCG loss to Seattle).

 

[HardRightEdge]

I don't understand the Cook contention. He's a TE. Yes, he'll help catching the ball but you shouldn't include a TE in an analysis of the WR position group. If you want to talk about pass catchers, sure, but if Cook can't improve his drop problems I'm not real sure how helpful he's gonna be. Despite the odd focus on his receiving ability he'll actually make his biggest impact blocking since he's a much better blocker than any of the other TEs.

I don't really care what the depth chart says. If a TE lines up in the slot or as a wideout 1/2 the time, he's a wide receiver for those snaps. If it lines up like a duck and runs the routes of a duck, then it's a duck.

As for Cook's drops and blocking ability, I think both are based primarily on PFF stats that have entered the echo chamber, along with one wide open end zone drop as the #1 link in a google search on "Jared Cook drops".

PFF scolded him for 8 drops in 2015. However, Sporting Charts charged him with 4, Fox Sports shows 4. It reminds me of the Finley debate, and Finley is the dynamic that the Packers want to recreate. Whether he catches 87% or 95% of catchable balls, he'll need to be accounted for. Rodgers is a guy you could cover with a LB, and a slow one at that.

I'll go a step further. In 2014, Faster Eddie was developing into a receiving threat that needed to be accounted for. In 2015, with Fat Eddie, not so much. There's nowhere to go but up on that count.

In the absence of other information, I share your default to Cook's favorable PFF blocking grade. But it's worth noting that with less than elite players, PFF often shoots them to the top of their grades one year and to the bottom the next. I'll reserve judgment until he actually shows what he can do in this offense with these players next to him.

Getting back to the original point, by the mere fact we're having this discussion is evidence of the fact that writer was mailing it in and presumably getting paid to do so.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

In 2014 Nelson and Cobb combined to make 189 receptions for 2,806 yards and 25 TDs. The only tandem putting up better stats were the Broncos Demaryius Thomas and Emmanuel Sanders (215 catches for 3,023 yards and 20 TDs). Taking a look at those numbers I disagree with your statement of them not being a top 5 tandem in the league.

Hard to argue against statistics So in 2014, statistically, Nelson and Cobb were the 2nd best WR duo in the NFL. But I was talking about the upcoming 2016 season and more importantly, trying to evaluate their abilities beyond what having one of the best Passing QB's in the league provides them with. That is the subjective part of the evaluation that makes it harder for me to agree that Nelson and Cobb are currently a top 5 WR tandem in the NFL.