Jump to content

Random Packer News & Notes


Leader

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

I love that you love that about Love

I love that you have an enemy to point to towards Love’s success even though I was never as hard on him as you or any of the other gang likes to think.

I can be the @skibrett15 of Love. Even though I was never unrealistically hard on him, and I served a very important role.

Because if Love had finished the season under 60% and under 6.5 YPA, he was not the guy, and he wouldn’t have been in spite of all the promising throws.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, ThatJerkDave said:

I don't know what you guys think, but Jahmyr Gibbs is legit.  He is averaging 5.2 ypc with 5 TDs and has over 500 yards while splitting time.  He is also Detroit's 5th leading receiver.  Add to that, he has the speed to draw extra attention of the defense opening things up for other players.

And Jack Campbell has been in the very least, solid. I don't see a glaring miss between the Campbell and LaPorta picks that they will be regretting for years.

I bet they are pretty content with their return on their draft.

Right.  The early DET picks were not flops by any stretch.  Especially when you consider that the RD2 pick they received by passing on Carter was used on LaPorta.  So DET passed on Carter and instead selected Gibbs and LaPorta.  To describe that as malpractice seems... odd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, {Family Ghost} said:

Those picks were kind of panned a bit and called reaches, but they look like hits now.  Detroit really needs a bad draft.

I also kind of look at Campbell like I look at AJ Hawk. Was it a little early to take that player?  Probably.  But we got 10 years of solid at worst LB play.  

 

Lions had 4 top 50 picks that are all contributing to a first place team as rookies.  

For comparison, the Packers have 3 top 50 picks on a third place team with one guy on IR (who was a contributor), one contributor, and LVN.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, ThatJerkDave said:

I also kind of look at Campbell like I look at AJ Hawk. Was it a little early to take that player?  Probably.  But we got 10 years of solid at worst LB play.  

Lions had 4 top 50 picks that are all contributing to a first place team as rookies.  

For comparison, the Packers have 3 top 50 picks on a third place team with one guy on IR (who was a contributor), one contributor, and LVN.

Absolutely nothing wrong with the Campbell pick at #18 for DET.  Each of the 4 guys they took in RD1/RD2 are already core players, two on each side of the ball.  If that's malpractice, I don't think that word means what I think it means.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, MacReady said:

I love that you have an enemy to point to towards Love’s success even though I was never as hard on him as you or any of the other gang likes to think.

I can be the @skibrett15 of Love. Even though I was never unrealistically hard on him, and I served a very important role.

Because if Love had finished the season under 60% and under 6.5 YPA, he was not the guy, and he wouldn’t have been in spite of all the promising throws.

It's still not that simple. 

Context matters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, incognito_man said:

It's still not that simple. 

Context matters.

Knowing what you know now about our offensive players at the skill positions, can you honestly sit there and tell me that if Love had finished the season below 60% and below 6.5 YPA you wouldn’t have been concerned?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, MacReady said:

Knowing what you know now about our offensive players at the skill positions, can you honestly sit there and tell me that if Love had finished the season below 60% and below 6.5 YPA you wouldn’t have been concerned?

it depends what it looked like

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, MacReady said:

Knowing what you know now about our offensive players at the skill positions, can you honestly sit there and tell me that if Love had finished the season below 60% and below 6.5 YPA you wouldn’t have been concerned?

Concerned?  Yes.  Concerned about Love specifically?  Maybe.  The offensive players at the skill positions played a large role in why both of those stats were as low as they were.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, MacReady said:

Knowing what you know now about our offensive players at the skill positions, can you honestly sit there and tell me that if Love had finished the season below 60% and below 6.5 YPA you wouldn’t have been concerned?

Yes. 

Because they could get injured, have gotten injured and/or our OL could have continued to play like they did first game vs DET

Like I keep saying, context matters.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, MacReady said:

I love that you have an enemy to point to towards Love’s success even though I was never as hard on him as you or any of the other gang likes to think.

I can be the @skibrett15 of Love. Even though I was never unrealistically hard on him, and I served a very important role.

Because if Love had finished the season under 60% and under 6.5 YPA, he was not the guy, and he wouldn’t have been in spite of all the promising throws.

I'm interested in the 'very important role' you served? In what context was this role important? Do you have some connection with the Packers other than this forum? 

Surely you don't believe your opinions on Love on a Packers fan forum served some sort of importance in Love's development. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can't scout from a statlines, especially with some arbitrary line in the sand. The whole notion is just incredibly dumb. It's possible to play well and have bad stats as well as play poorly and have good stats. For the latter look at Goff on Thanksgiving.

29/44 65.9% 7.5 YPA 2 TD 0 INT 103.6 rating

Looks great from a box score right? But anyone who watched the game knows he was under pressure all day, extremely rattled, and didn't start hitting anything with any consistency until the game was well out of hand. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Old Guy said:

I'm interested in the 'very important role' you served? In what context was this role important? Do you have some connection with the Packers other than this forum? 

Surely you don't believe your opinions on Love on a Packers fan forum served some sort of importance in Love's development. 

 

He brings Love good vibes, which in turn makes Love have good football games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, {Family Ghost} said:

Those picks were kind of panned a bit and called reaches, but they look like hits now.  Detroit really needs a bad draft.

People will get angry about reaches and excited about guys who fall to their team but, with rare exceptions, nobody remembers that stuff after their rookie year, then they're just either good or bad

  • Like 1
Link to comment
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...