Jump to content

2021 GB Roster & Free Agents


Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, CWood21 said:

Do we really need to relive sophomore year of Davante Adams?  I mean, is that really the ship you want to sink on?

Smh. We can't compare every WR we draft to Adams. You know better. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm an eternal optimist, so I'm still somewhat hopeful EQ will emerge as a useful roster guy, this year and beyond.  He's never combined entering a season fully healthy, having a full camp, and knowing the system well, and could be max motivated to try to establish an identify as a legit NFL player.  So I'm still hopeful he can end up emerging as a useful rotation system depth guy, with good blocking and decent receiver/ST function as a 4th-WR type guy.  I'm happy to have him in camp and be an option. 

The note that Funchess, EQ, and MVS are all expiring was helpful reminder.  I'd like to be able to have *at least* one of them back for 2022 as 4th guy or higher, and at a decent price.  If we chop EQ now, but MVS has a good enough year to out-cost what Gute can pay, you might be left with only Funchess extendable from among the three.  So if it works, it would be nice if all three could stay in the organization for the year.   Obviously *IF* you clicked on somebody in the draft, *IF* EQ was the only EQ-MVS-Funch who stayed, he'd still only need to be serving as a 4th guy.  

Either way for EQ, though, I think it's always going to be hard for him to get many touches.  The feet just don't have the quickness.  I always think when guys get lots of snaps and a fair number of targets, it's a lot easier to relax in catching the ball and to reduce your drop rate.  But I think for a guy who's lucky to get 1-3 targets in a game, it's harder to settle in and to build confidence.  So might be more difficult to ever become the good-hands guy I thought he might become when he was originally drafted.  

I wonder what PS rules will be this year, and whether EQ might be a guy who could be parked there?  Will the allowance for veterans be retained?  

 

Edited by craig
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, craig said:

I'm an eternal optimist, so I'm still somewhat hopeful EQ will emerge as a useful roster guy, this year and beyond.  He's never combined entering a season fully healthy, having a full camp, and knowing the system well, and could be max motivated to try to establish an identify as a legit NFL player.  So I'm still hopeful he can end up emerging as a useful rotation system depth guy, with good blocking and decent receiver/ST function as a 4th-WR type guy.  I'm happy to have him in camp and be an option. 

The note that Funchess, EQ, and MVS are all expiring was helpful reminder.  I'd like to be able to have *at least* one of them back for 2022 as 4th guy or higher, and at a decent price.  If we chop EQ now, but MVS has a good enough year to out-cost what Gute can pay, you might be left with only Funchess extendable from among the three.  So if it works, it would be nice if all three could stay in the organization for the year.   Obviously *IF* you clicked on somebody in the draft, *IF* EQ was the only EQ-MVS-Funch who stayed, he'd still only need to be serving as a 4th guy.  

Either way for EQ, though, I think it's always going to be hard for him to get many touches.  The feet just don't have the quickness.  I always think when guys get lots of snaps and a fair number of targets, it's a lot easier to relax in catching the ball and to reduce your drop rate.  But I think for a guy who's lucky to get 1-3 targets in a game, it's harder to settle in and to build confidence.  So might be more difficult to ever become the good-hands guy I thought he might become when he was originally drafted.  

I wonder what PS rules will be this year, and whether EQ might be a guy who could be parked there?  Will the allowance for veterans be retained?  

 

Biggest thing is that all of these guys have different skill set somehow.  Hell, even the grouping of Funchess/Lazard/EQ couldn't be more different A to B to C, despite them all being roughly the same size and frame.  Way I see em:

  • Funchess is a big body that can't run but has the feet to run a lot of routes you wouldn't expect from a guy his size.  Doesn't drop his weight real well and anything over the top is out, but he'll body coverage in the short/mid range and he wins contested balls with some regularity.  Can block you out of the picture but frequently doesn't.
  • Lazard is almost the polar opposite; bit heavy on the feet and doesn't come off the line with a lot of burst but if you let him open it up he's gone.  Finds the ball in the air like he's Desean Jackson and will absolutely run through coverage if they try to play him physical.  Can block you out of the picture and will beat himself up after the game for hours if he doesn't.
  • EQ is the best of both worlds physically.  Quicker off the line than Lazard and can drop his hips despite his size, but can win deep with the right play call unlike Funchess.  He adjusts to the ball really well, natural hands catcher, but still hasn't gotten enough reps to actually let it play.  By far the most blue chip of the three but he's never healthy and he needs a lot of chemistry work with 12.  Can block you out of the picture and almost got ejected for killing that poor Miami DB on a block in 2018.  

MVS is obviously the rarest piece in the WR room, and I'll be pretty broken up if the Packers let him leave.  Man wins over the top in the NFL like it's small school college ball, and you keep anyone who can do that and catch >50% of the balls you throw him.  After that though it's really more about what you want from the position; all three guys give you something a little different and should offer value in 2021.  If I had to guess at 2022, my money's on Lazard/MVS/Adams getting extensions and Funchess/EQ walking.  Lazard has more value to the Packers than he does any other team as he's more or less custom built to play in MLF's system, so it's likely they can sign him for actual value.  Funchess probably takes another 2/16 type prove it deal somewhere else in 2022, and EQ I think probably just doesn't get the reps to ever really warrant a long look.  

I will say that if I had to put my money on one depth guy to blow up totally out of nowhere, it would be EQ.  He knows the offense, the body is ready, it's a contract year, and there's plenty of teams in the NFL he'd be the most physically gifted WR in the room.  An injury or two to the top of the WR depth chart and good health through camp and he could easily end up getting 40-50 snaps a game, and I think/hope he could take real advantage of it.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Arthur Penske said:

Don’t care for this much.

 

 

Now this one actually pisses me off and makes me question every bit of football knowledge Gute claims to possess (hyperbole). Who the hell would let Will Redmond onto their team, UNLESS he not allowed to play a single down on defense, then I could live with it. 

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

Don’t care for this much.

 

 

i'm not mad at it. probably for the min and he's a solid ST guy and seems like one of our better locker room guys too. bring him to camp and make a young guy beat him for a spot. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, FinneasGage said:

i'm not mad at it. probably for the min and he's a solid ST guy and seems like one of our better locker room guys too. bring him to camp and make a young guy beat him for a spot. 

exactly. Our STs unit was baaad

We should be happy to bring plus-STs guys on the roster. We need to improve on that part of the team more than offense or defense honestly.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, packfanfb said:

Can't believe in one off-season Gutey managed to resign our best offensive player (Jones), best defensive player (King) and best ST player (Redmond). Kudos. 

You got one right anyway.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

We’re better off trading Rodgers right now instead of next year, cap implications considered.  Change my mind, but first consider:

1. No QB has ever won a Super Bowl accounting for 12.8% of the cap.  Aaron’s this year is going to be 20%.

2. Extra year on Love’s rookie contract as a starter makes him one year closer to winning one on his rookie contract.

3. If Love sucks, we know about it now instead of two or three years from now, allowing us to use some of the Rodgers capital to address QB.

4. We don’t have the draft capital nor the cap to improve enough this year to compete for a Super Bowl.

5. Aaron’s value drops with each year he ages.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

We’re better off trading Rodgers right now instead of next year, cap implications considered.  Change my mind, but first consider:

1. No QB has ever won a Super Bowl accounting for 12.8% of the cap.  Aaron’s this year is going to be 20%.

2. Extra year on Love’s rookie contract as a starter makes him one year closer to winning one on his rookie contract.

3. If Love sucks, we know about it now instead of two or three years from now, allowing us to use some of the Rodgers capital to address QB.

4. We don’t have the draft capital nor the cap to improve enough this year to compete for a Super Bowl.

5. Aaron’s value drops with each year he ages.

 

Again ?

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, cannondale said:

Again ?

We’re trading Rodgers.  That’s a foregone conclusion.  His words, Murphy’s words...

It’s the most obvious thing in the world.

The only question is when.  If you can’t see that you’re in denial.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...