Packers Off-season Mini-Camp/Training Camp Discussion Thread

[Norm]

55 minutes ago, packfanfb said:

I mean he's just a fan like every other single person in this forum. He just happens to be a guy who has taken a negative view on TT and Capers the last 5 years. That's not a popular opinion around here so it makes him "uninformed." 

 

And I mean even if Graham replaces his touches, isn't that just side stepping, more or less. I'm not saying he won't improve us. But Jordy and him is better, I know that's an obvious statement but somehow I feel like people are almost denying it.

[CWood21]

1 hour ago, packfanfb said:

I mean he's just a fan like every other single person in this forum. He just happens to be a guy who has taken a negative view on TT and Capers the last 5 years. That's not a popular opinion around here so it makes him "uninformed." 

There's a HUGE difference between being "uninformed" and being negative.  And quite frankly, it's hard to take anyone's "analysis" seriously when they refer to players with petty nicknames.  His tweet about going with "Geronislow Allison" as our #3 WR reeks of unprofessionalism.  If you want to come off looking like a professional, act like one.  It's hard to take someone seriously when they're acting like a 12 year old with these stupid nicknames.

[CWood21]

1 hour ago, packfanfb said:

That's the idea, but like others have said, I'm skeptical our offense is going to really change at all. Still MM running the show and Rodgers throwing the ball. That's why the "we replaced Jordy with Graham" makes no sense to me. Graham replaced Bennett.  We haven't repaced Jordy. Those are the straight facts without the spin.

Why does everyone want to overhaul an offense's base principles that have had so much success over the years?  Aside from injuries, our offense has been consistently among the best in the league, but because it isn't "creative" enough we need to change things.  It's mind boggling.  I'm not opposed to adding some wrinkles to the offense, but the notion we need to gut the system is laughable.

[packfanfb]

8 minutes ago, NormSizedMidget said:

And I mean even if Graham replaces his touches, isn't that just side stepping, more or less. I'm not saying he won't improve us. But Jordy and him is better, I know that's an obvious statement but somehow I feel like people are almost denying it.

I don't think it's just about touches. Graham is an entirely different player than Jordy. One is a TE and one is a WR. We can try to morph the two and call Graham "basically a WR" but I don't see it. He's our replacement for Martellus Bennett. 

[Norm]

6 minutes ago, packfanfb said:

I don't think it's just about touches. Graham is an entirely different player than Jordy. One is a TE and one is a WR. We can try to morph the two and call Graham "basically a WR" but I don't see it. He's our replacement for Martellus Bennett. 

I land somewhere in the middle in this. Only so many balls to go around so logically if you think he's going to help more, sure I get it. Just think Jordy around too was feasible and affordable and would be an asset. Even with who else is currently in house. 

But yeah when we signed Bennett there wasn't an idea that we could lose Jordy or Cobb because those touches were replaced, that kind of thing.

[Ham Sammich]

12 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

Why does everyone want to overhaul an offense's base principles that have had so much success over the years?  Aside from injuries, our offense has been consistently among the best in the league, but because it isn't "creative" enough we need to change things.  It's mind boggling.  I'm not opposed to adding some wrinkles to the offense, but the notion we need to gut the system is laughable.

Right? Since 2008, the Packers have been outside of the top 10 in Offense twice. Last year (Rodgers collarbone) and 2015 (which I'll give you, McCarthy should have done more to overcome Nelson's injury). Other than that, he has 6 top 5 finishes in offense and averages 7th since Rodgers has taken over. 

Their offense works. It's hard to sustain unquestionable production for a decade, but they've gotten about as close as anyone. 

[Packerraymond]

8 minutes ago, Ham Sammich said:

Right? Since 2008, the Packers have been outside of the top 10 in Offense twice. Last year (Rodgers collarbone) and 2015 (which I'll give you, McCarthy should have done more to overcome Nelson's injury). Other than that, he has 6 top 5 finishes in offense and averages 7th since Rodgers has taken over. 

Their offense works. It's hard to sustain unquestionable production for a decade, but they've gotten about as close as anyone. 

Just think of where we could've been with more Janis sweeps.

[Ham Sammich]

8 minutes ago, Ham Sammich said:

Right? Since 2008, the Packers have been outside of the top 10 in Offense twice. Last year (Rodgers collarbone) and 2015 (which I'll give you, McCarthy should have done more to overcome Nelson's injury). Other than that, he has 6 top 5 finishes in offense and averages 7th since Rodgers has taken over. 

Their offense works. It's hard to sustain unquestionable production for a decade, but they've gotten about as close as anyone. 

Since 2008, the Packers have scored 4,284 points. 3rd behind New Orleans (4,505) and New England (4,701).

[Ham Sammich]

4 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

Just think of where we could've been with more Janis sweeps.

It's disappointing the coaching staff was never quite as passionate about the Jeff Sweep as I was. 

[Packerraymond]

Just now, Ham Sammich said:

It's disappointing the coaching staff was never quite as passionate about the Jeff Sweep as I was. 

Only play in our playbook that will retire at a 100% TD rate.

[CWood21]

49 minutes ago, packfanfb said:

I don't think it's just about touches. Graham is an entirely different player than Jordy. One is a TE and one is a WR. We can try to morph the two and call Graham "basically a WR" but I don't see it. He's our replacement for Martellus Bennett. 

It is about touches.  There's only so many touches to go around.  If Cobb gets X, Adams gets Y, and Jordy/Graham gets Z, there's only a finite number of touches remaining.  So you just paid Jimmy Graham $10M/year, but you're going to decrease his touches?  Sounds like an awful business model.  You've got Jordy Nelson/Randall Cobb making $10M/year, but you want to take touches away from them?  Another awful business model.  Or how about taking away touches from the guy you just handed a huge extension to?  No matter which way you slice it, there aren't enough touches to justify paying 3 WRs and a TE $10M+ each.  None.  Do I think Jordy Nelson would have outproduced Geronimo Allison?  Absolutely.  At $12M or whatever of a difference?  Hell no.

You're getting way too caught up in positions.  It's about touches.  You can throw out Geronimo Allison against opposing teams' 3rd corner, and with the amount of attention that Graham/Adams/Cobb are going to command, he'll produce enough to have good enough value to justify the release of Nelson.

[Joe]

Anyone catch that bit about how Witten thought Dez was going to sign with us? Hypothetically, how does this affect our offense, now that it's post draft and we discussed the possibility pre-draft.

[CWood21]

1 minute ago, Joe said:

Anyone catch that bit about how Witten thought Dez was going to sign with us? Hypothetically, how does this affect our offense, now that it's post draft and we discussed the possibility pre-draft.

Until he signs on the dotted line, this is pure speculation.  Like everyone else on here, we're all capable of speculation.  Obviously, on paper he upgrades our WR position.

[Joe]

4 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

Until he signs on the dotted line, this is pure speculation.  Like everyone else on here, we're all capable of speculation.  Obviously, on paper he upgrades our WR position.

Of course. Just thinking more or less how he would fit in specifically. I'm thinking a James Jones kind of role. I don't like the move, but I certainly contend that Dez is the physical kind of receiver that can fit that James Jones mold. 

Also, I agree about the whole "touches" thing as well as your opinion on Allison. He's worth keeping around and he's very inexpensive for what we get out of him IMHO.

[packfanfb]

1 hour ago, CWood21 said:

Why does everyone want to overhaul an offense's base principles that have had so much success over the years?  Aside from injuries, our offense has been consistently among the best in the league, but because it isn't "creative" enough we need to change things.  It's mind boggling.  I'm not opposed to adding some wrinkles to the offense, but the notion we need to gut the system is laughable.

This is my point. The argument for why we don't need another outside WR and can get by with Allison and a Day 3 rookie has been (1) our offense is going to change schematically and (2) we are now going to target our TEs and RBs way more than usual. I don't see either as reality.