Jump to content
HighCalebR

Packers sign Devin Funchess

Recommended Posts

You do realize that this defense lead a 13-3 team last year.    An NFL team without a dominating QB.

No matter how lucky you are, you don't get to 13-3 in the NFL with a poor defense.  Especially if that team doesn't have an exceptional quarterback. 

It isn't the defense we wish we had, but the constant crapping on a winning defense is curious

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Packer_ESP said:

but the constant crapping is curious

Well it certainly is a huge part of this boards' heavy traffic. Nice work though, thx for the Cut & Paste template for 2020

Now we can re-use it for offense, defense, OL, DL, LB, RB, WR, DB in addition to QB and coaching.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

who would you rather have had: Funchess or Sanders

For the money Sanders got?  Honestly Funchess.  I like Sanders, but I wouldn't be thrilled paying $8 million a year for the next two years to a 33 year old, 5'11 190 lb receiver.  Personally feel that when Sanders hits the wall, he's going to hit it hard and it's probably not far out.  Funchess gives you the potential for a big hit if he plays up to his talent level with a more consistent QB, and even at his regular level of play he's cheap depth for what he can provide.  Plus, if he really does hit and you want to sign him longterm he's only 26 and still has another contract in his prime in him.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

who would you rather have had: Funchess or Sanders

Not to sound like a homer, but I would rather take the gamble on Funchess.

Funchess is 25 with a lot of snaps under his belt .

Sanders is 33 and is on the decline . He’s probably not the same since his torn Achilles . 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

who would you rather have had: Funchess or Sanders

I have a tough time with Sanders if GB wanted him on a 3 year deal.  Only way I see that working out is to spread out the signing bonus.

I think Sanders is a better player right now and would help us more than Funchess.

But given the contracts signed?  Huge nod to Funchess.

But if things were more equal in contract?  Sanders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, incognito_man said:

who would you rather have had: Funchess or Sanders

sanders

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, hitnhope said:

You do realize that Rodgers QB'd a 13-3 team last year.    An NFL team without a dominating defense.

No matter how lucky you are, you don't get to 13-3 in the NFL with poor QB play.  Especially if that team doesn't have an exceptional defense. 

He isn't the player he was 5 years ago, but the constant crapping on a winning QB is curious.

It's not that Rodgers is BAD, he's just not AARON F***IN RODGERS anymore. The aggregate QB stat that I created had him around 11th in the league, which seems about right. At this point, he's more of an above average QB than an awesome QB. It's possible GB could push him higher with an improved WR corps, but it seems unlikely that we'll see that in 2020 given that they haven't made huge upgrades the group unless a rookie WR has a huge season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I largely agree.  However there are a lot of teams with defenses better than the Packers that weren't able to get to 13-3.    Reading this board, and the constant criticism would lead one to believe many think he now sucks.

Like everyone on this board my hope is that with some added talent around him, and another year in the system we get the player back from earlier in his career.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, incognito_man said:

who would you rather have had: Funchess or Sanders

Funchess, when considering cost.  I have never been a fan of Sanders. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
45 minutes ago, hitnhope said:

I largely agree.  However there are a lot of teams with defenses better than the Packers that weren't able to get to 13-3.    Reading this board, and the constant criticism would lead one to believe many think he now sucks.

Like everyone on this board my hope is that with some added talent around him, and another year in the system we get the player back from earlier in his career.

Nobody thinks that and nobody has said that. Literally all the negativity towards Rodgers is that he isn't playing to his ability or his pay which IMO are fair arguments.

I can't possibly believe there is a single poster here who honestly believes Rodgers played his best ball or outplayed his contract last year and yet when someone points out those things (which I again believe is a universally held opinion) it's being unfairly negative. I don't get it.🤷

Edited by wgbeethree

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Rodgers does suck though

hopefully Funchess can Make Rodgers Great Again

MRGA! MRGA! MRGA!

Edited by incognito_man

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, pacman5252 said:

You can tell everyone is bored when a Devin Funchess thread gets 37 pages

Didn't the Trevor Davis trade thread have an insane number of pages last year even lol. Raiders fans were laughing pretty hard about it iirc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×