MacReady Posted January 1, 2020 Share Posted January 1, 2020 Just now, Mazrimiv said: I do appreciate the sheer lunacy of someone saying GB is in better shape at WR than most teams. Good stuff. You know what? **** it, I have time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mazrimiv Posted January 1, 2020 Share Posted January 1, 2020 I just realized that the same person who wants to replace Rodgers with a more cost effective QB also believes the GB WR group is better than most teams. This is amazing. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Golfman Posted January 1, 2020 Share Posted January 1, 2020 2 minutes ago, Outpost31 said: Typical of you to avoid the entire post. You just named three teams while confirming you have zero perspective outside the division. What if I told you that Lazard was rated higher than both Ammendola and Marvin Jones? And Anthony Miller? You'd just say, "Lol you're dumb." Because you have nothing to offer other than popular opinion when that opinion is wrong. I'd say, as usual you are full of ****! I don't care about ratings, Marvin Jones is a better receiver and so is Gabriel who was #2 before injuries. Love Lazard's upside, he's just not there yet. Don't think for a second I'm going to jump when you tell me to 'go look something up!' It ain't happening! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mazrimiv Posted January 1, 2020 Share Posted January 1, 2020 4 minutes ago, Outpost31 said: You know what? **** it, I have time. Too much, apparently. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Golfman Posted January 1, 2020 Share Posted January 1, 2020 (edited) 5 minutes ago, Outpost31 said: You know what? **** it, I have time. While you're at it check on if those teams have a decent TE too, then get back to me! Also, if Mitch Trubisky is your QB, evaluating a WR might be an issue don't you think? Edited January 1, 2020 by Golfman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasquatch Posted January 1, 2020 Share Posted January 1, 2020 Rodgers is not playing up to his potential, AND, our receiving corps could use more weapons. Both. Convince me otherwise. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacReady Posted January 1, 2020 Share Posted January 1, 2020 Just now, Mazrimiv said: Too much, apparently. You're the worst kind of human being. You're the worst kind of fan. You can get shown all evidence to the contrary of your opinion and still act superior and right because you watched a highlight. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacReady Posted January 1, 2020 Share Posted January 1, 2020 Just now, Sasquatch said: Rodgers is not playing up to his potential, AND, our receiving corps could use more weapons. Both. Convince me otherwise. That's not the argument though. These people are acting like we're seriously crippled comparatively at WR when that is simply not the case. Yeah, we could use better receivers. So could the rest of the league. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squire12 Posted January 1, 2020 Share Posted January 1, 2020 14 minutes ago, Golfman said: Was not referring to you, but rather a few of the others arguing how terrible Rodgers is and he's got enough weapons. How do you know I am not a millennial? Rodgers has not played well as the statistics show, he is playing at a level outside the top 10. At $30M, there are not a lot of resources left to surround Rodgers with the weapons that some seem to be clamoring for 14 minutes ago, Golfman said: They are too young to remember the 70's and 80's when we really had QB issues. How do you know these posters are too young? The blanket statement that if someone is suggesting that Rodgers is playing poorly, or responsible for some of the offenses inept numbers they automatically are too young to remember the 70's and 80's is foolish. ------------------------ Lynn Dickey was a pretty solid QB in that era. The issues with those teams in that era was not exclusive to the QB position. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Golfman Posted January 1, 2020 Share Posted January 1, 2020 2 minutes ago, Sasquatch said: Rodgers is not playing up to his potential, AND, our receiving corps could use more weapons. Both. Convince me otherwise. Don't have to because you are correct. Lazard is making strides but he's not there yet. We've gotten little to nothing out of our TE's. MVS has been struggling big time. Kumerow is a a good blocker and serviceable in certain packages. You could see some big strides by Sternberger, Lazard and St. Brown next year. Maybe MVS too, but I don't think we should count on that. I'd like another weapon and have been advocating for going big with Amari Cooper if he hits the market. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squire12 Posted January 1, 2020 Share Posted January 1, 2020 6 minutes ago, Sasquatch said: Rodgers is not playing up to his potential, AND, our receiving corps could use more weapons. Both. Convince me otherwise. How dare you not take 1 of the polarizing views on the subject? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Golfman Posted January 1, 2020 Share Posted January 1, 2020 (edited) 2 minutes ago, squire12 said: How do you know I am not a millennial? Rodgers has not played well as the statistics show, he is playing at a level outside the top 10. At $30M, there are not a lot of resources left to surround Rodgers with the weapons that some seem to be clamoring for How do you know these posters are too young? The blanket statement that if someone is suggesting that Rodgers is playing poorly, or responsible for some of the offenses inept numbers they automatically are too young to remember the 70's and 80's is foolish. ------------------------ Lynn Dickey was a pretty solid QB in that era. The issues with those teams in that era was not exclusive to the QB position. Because the two I'm referring to have stated it, several times. By the way, that was never the argument, but don't bother to read the rest of the posts, just jump in the middle and make assumptions! Edited January 1, 2020 by Golfman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacReady Posted January 1, 2020 Share Posted January 1, 2020 @Mazrimiv. Because Davante Adams and Lazard are worse than ****ing 40 year old Fitzgerald and Kirk, Brown and Snead, right? I'm only up to the Ravens so far, too. Sit there and tell me Adams and Lazard aren't better than Fitgerald and Kirk, Brown and Snead. I dare you. Cardinals Fitzgerald - 70.3 Kirk - 62.5 Byrd - 64.4 Cooper - 70.3 Average - 67 Ravens Brown - 70.8 Snead - 61 Roberts - 63.5 Boykin - 60.9 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Golfman Posted January 1, 2020 Share Posted January 1, 2020 Just now, Outpost31 said: @Mazrimiv. Because Davante Adams and Lazard are worse than ****ing 40 year old Fitzgerald and Kirk, Brown and Snead, right? I'm only up to the Ravens so far, too. Sit there and tell me Adams and Lazard aren't better than Fitgerald and Kirk, Brown and Snead. I dare you. Cardinals Fitzgerald - 70.3 Kirk - 62.5 Byrd - 64.4 Cooper - 70.3 Average - 67 Ravens Brown - 70.8 Snead - 61 Roberts - 63.5 Boykin - 60.9 I see what you did here moving the goal post once again. We were discussing if Lazard was as good as most of the league's #2 WRs. Now you throw Adams into the mix to 'make your point'! Lazard is not as good as either of these two #2's and by the way, the Ravens have two stud TE's who get the ball a lot and are very effective in the passing game. We can do this all day long, and you are still going to be hard pressed to find the conclusion you jumped to supported by facts. This does not negate Rodgers has not played well this year either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacReady Posted January 1, 2020 Share Posted January 1, 2020 Just now, Golfman said: I see what you did here moving the goal post once again. We were discussing if Lazard was as good as most of the league's #2 WRs. Now you throw Adams into the mix to 'make your point'! Lazard is not as good as either of these two #2's and by the way, the Ravens have two stud TE's who get the ball a lot and are very effective in the passing game. No, I'm not moving the goal posts. This is what he said: Quote I do appreciate the sheer lunacy of someone saying GB is in better shape at WR than most teams. Good stuff. Not me. Quote We can do this all day long, and you are still going to be hard pressed to find the conclusion you jumped to supported by facts. This does not negate Rodgers has not played well this year either. And it's still proving you wrong. Lazard IS better than most #2s in the league. Are you ready to concede that or do you want me to tag you in my post when I provide everything? And you're probably referring to Hayden Hurst. What if I told you Jimmy Graham has more receptions and yards per reception than their first round TE? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.