Random Packer News & Notes

[FinneasGage]

25 minutes ago, Pizza In A Cup said:

 

imma look into this fellow real quick

but this means edgar is the RB coach i presume? 

[{Family Ghost}]

I read somewhere today that edgar Bennett would not be returning.  He was disappointed in his removal as OC and will be looking at other opportunities.  

[FinneasGage]

1 minute ago, {Family Ghost} said:

I read somewhere today that edgar Bennett would not be returning.  He was disappointed in his removal as OC and will be looking at other opportunities.  

ah yeah

 

[CWood21]

1 hour ago, {Family Ghost} said:

I read somewhere today that edgar Bennett would not be returning.  He was disappointed in his removal as OC and will be looking at other opportunities.  

Not totally surprised.  Kinda hard to be demoted and take it well.

[CWood21]

2 hours ago, Pizza In A Cup said:

 

...he's the TE coach for Indianapolis...

[Packerraymond]

5 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

...he's the TE coach for Indianapolis...

Lots of experience as a WRs coach, was QB coach in San Fran during Mac's time there as OC. Makes sense, has connections to Mac.

[CWood21]

3 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

Lots of experience as a WRs coach, was QB coach in San Fran during Mac's time there as OC. Makes sense, has connections to Mac.

Yeah I saw that.  Explains why they hired him.

[CWood21]

10 hours ago, Leader said:

"I'd absolutely take a WR with strong route running skills and reliable hands over a receiver who runs really fast."

You just described Geronimo Allison to a "T" - and I like Allison - all except he cant get separation. Nelson...Cobb.....great hands. No denying that - but Jordy's speed days are behind him and Cobb was always more quick than fast.

Nobody I know of is looking for another Bullet Bob Hayes - whom I considered a track star in football gear. Not an NFL WR.

"Those "complete" receivers that everyone is clamoring for are generally the types of players that the Packers aren't in play for.  Instead, they're looking more in the "discount department" for the WR."

Well.....a personal take....if we have to draft 1,2, or 3 more CBs...with our first, second and/or third round draft picks before we FINALLY plug up the holes back there - while - hanging the best active QB in the game today out to dry w/o drafting him a true weapon.......thats no way to run a railroad IMO. The NFLs a passing league. The college games become more of a passing league. Cant we PLEASE draft someone who's not on "discount" for AR?

You want to know who KICKS *** drafting WRs? The Pittsburgh Steelers. WRs and LBs.

Geronimo Allison was a WR prospect at the time who ran a 4.67 40 yard dash.  OF course he wasn't going to beat anyone in a foot race, especially any half capable defensive back.   It'd be like me taking my argument and using Troy Williamson, Darrius Heyward-Bey and Ted Ginn Jr. as examples of my argument.  All three of them were sub-4.4 40 WR who amounted to very little in the NFL.  That's not what I'm arguing.  Jordy Nelson ran a 4.51 40, but his speed plays up because of his great route running.  Greg Jennings ran a 4.42 40 and played even faster due to his great route running.  I'm not advocating taking a 4.6+ WR simply because he's a great route runner.  I just find the notion that we need a sub-4.4 WR to be ridiculous.

As we've discussed, those "complete" WRs usually aren't available when the Packers pick and the very few chances it happens the Packers often go in a different direction.  So at that point, you get into the discussion about which part of their game are you willing to take a bit of red on?  Are you willing to give up a little speed, route-running abilities, hands, etc.? 

[Leader]

6 hours ago, CWood21 said:

Geronimo Allison was a WR prospect at the time who ran a 4.67 40 yard dash.  OF course he wasn't going to beat anyone in a foot race, especially any half capable defensive back.   It'd be like me taking my argument and using Troy Williamson, Darrius Heyward-Bey and Ted Ginn Jr. as examples of my argument.  All three of them were sub-4.4 40 WR who amounted to very little in the NFL.  That's not what I'm arguing.  Jordy Nelson ran a 4.51 40, but his speed plays up because of his great route running.  Greg Jennings ran a 4.42 40 and played even faster due to his great route running.  I'm not advocating taking a 4.6+ WR simply because he's a great route runner.  I just find the notion that we need a sub-4.4 WR to be ridiculous.

As we've discussed, those "complete" WRs usually aren't available when the Packers pick and the very few chances it happens the Packers often go in a different direction.  So at that point, you get into the discussion about which part of their game are you willing to take a bit of red on?  Are you willing to give up a little speed, route-running abilities, hands, etc.? 

Well first, I'm not "arguing" any of this stuff. Without question it takes all kinds to make for a good WR corp and a robust offensive attack/scheme and what the GBPs have been lacking - and not simply an observation of mine but of numerous "pundits" / journalists etc is a dominant, big, fast guy. Its really not more complex than that. I fully appreciate that success had relegate the team to lower rung draft selections and I consider the GBPs a well run organization - which I value as a fan - but I'd counter that the occasional risk taking to jump up and snag perceived top talent - that surely wont fall to you - might be the more  prudent course. If your talent evaluations are sharp - it gives you four uncontested years of production. 

I like Allison. Have always wanted him on the team. Why? Because he's proven to be a good route runner with good hands. My only decision point was his rookie season when by appearances it was coming down to Davis or Allison in the final cut - and I wanted Davis - simply because I hoped his speed would enhance the overall WR attack and the perception Allison would have difficulty getting separation. . As it turns out Allison's WR progress has eclipsed Davis - fine with me - and I still hold out hope BOTH will improve. 

We're at a crossroads (or soon approaching one) in the WRs group. We've now got 3 guys pulling down serious coinage. Before Davante was extended the GBPs were second in the league in % of CAP space dedicated to the WR position at 27+%. Not a crime against nature given the guy chucking the ball and the depth required - it would seem money well spent/considered - but we'll need to rework those numbers either this or next off season.

I'm BIG on talent evaluation - across the board in all sports - and think the best organizations are able to maintain a "razor sharpness" in recognizing and developing talent. I've not been dissing our WRs - far from it - but I think inclusion of a truly dominant talent would make things explosive on that side of the ball. Last draft I was hoping the team would draft Mixon. Not because I liked the guy - but he was identified by multiple parties as *top tier talent* that could (and did) slide to us that I felt could seriously upgrade the RB position - not as a road grader (although he's far from tiny) - but as someone that could take the ball all the way and would make our overall offense something tough to defend. We didnt. Oh well. But sometimes you have to take your shot. 

Edited January 6, 2018 by Leader

[squire12]

9 hours ago, {Family Ghost} said:

Maybe be can bring TY Hilton or Donte Moncrief with him. 

Moncrief I would really like in GB

[Chili]

9 hours ago, Pizza In A Cup said:

 

A guy with a varied background coaching QB, WR and TE. Was even coordinator for a season but was rubbish at it. Obvious MM connection. Both worked together at New Orleans for a couple of years when MM was coordinator and he was an assistant, then at 49ers for 1 year he was the QB coach when MM was the coordinator. He spent 5 years as a WR coach at Baltimore and winning the superbowl in 2012. Seems to have a good track record developing receivers such as Anquan Boldin, Sammy Watkins, T.Y. Hilton, Torrey Smith, Santana Moss, Donte Stallworth.

A good level of experience to add to our coaching staff.

For some bizarre reason I seem stuck on the idea of Byron Leftwich being our new coordinator or QB coach. I think its always good to add someone who might be MM replacement one day.

[AlexGreen#20]

3 hours ago, Chili said:

For some bizarre reason I seem stuck on the idea of Byron Leftwich being our new coordinator or QB coach. I think its always good to add someone who might be MM replacement one day.

You see "Future NFL HC" when you see Bryon Leftwich?

[CWood21]

3 hours ago, Leader said:

Well first, I'm not "arguing" any of this stuff. Without question it takes all kinds to make for a good WR corp and a robust offensive attack/scheme and what the GBPs have been lacking - and not simply an observation of mine but of numerous "pundits" / journalists etc is a dominant, big, fast guy. Its really not more complex than that. I fully appreciate that success had relegate the team to lower rung draft selections and I consider the GBPs a well run organization - which I value as a fan - but I'd counter that the occasional risk taking to jump up and snag perceived top talent - that surely wont fall to you - might be the more  prudent course. If your talent evaluations are sharp - it gives you four uncontested years of production. 

There's a HUGE difference between making a calculated risk, and making a bad gamble.  And most of the time you don't realize it until it's too late.  Do you think the Vikings went into the draft and selected Troy Williamson knowing that he had questionable hands?  It's probably far more likely that they felt they could get his hands better to the point where drops wouldn't be as big an issue.  To me, you're advocating for the Martavis Bryant drops, not the Troy Williams/DHB gambles.  But those don't happen a ton.  I mean, the last time that we had a WR that you could make an argument was "clear" BPA was back in 2010 when the Packers opted for Bryan Bulaga over Dez Bryant.  I don't mind the need for speed, but it seems like we're taking things to the complete opposite end of the spectrum. 

[Leader]

1 minute ago, CWood21 said:

There's a HUGE difference between making a calculated risk, and making a bad gamble.  And most of the time you don't realize it until it's too late.  Do you think the Vikings went into the draft and selected Troy Williamson knowing that he had questionable hands?  It's probably far more likely that they felt they could get his hands better to the point where drops wouldn't be as big an issue.  To me, you're advocating for the Martavis Bryant drops, not the Troy Williams/DHB gambles.  But those don't happen a ton.  I mean, the last time that we had a WR that you could make an argument was "clear" BPA was back in 2010 when the Packers opted for Bryan Bulaga over Dez Bryant.  I don't mind the need for speed, but it seems like we're taking things to the complete opposite end of the spectrum. 

I think you're overthinking my thoughts 

[CWood21]

9 minutes ago, Leader said:

I think you're overthinking my thoughts 

Probably so.  But what calculated risks did the Packers miss out on in recent years?  I know you cited Joe Mixon as one of those gambles, and all things considered I'd still take Kevin King over Mixon every day of the week and twice on Sunday's.