NFL News & Notes

[Packerraymond]

11 hours ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

1. When did we start judging moves on their intentions? I get we're all pulling for the new guy, but consistency is key here.

2. We have no guarantee at all that Savage can actually play. We may very well have moved on from Randall for Michael Huff

3. Getting bodies in free agency doesn't cancel out a bad trade. The trade could have been made for a different piece that would have added value if you're a hard believer in the needed to get treated camp.

We have no idea if Randall could play safety in Pettine's defense (though it's clear he really didn't push to retain him which is a pretty telling sign). I don't think those personalities were meshing.

We also have no idea if there was any market for Randall whatsoever. I'm sure most of the league knew there was tension in the locker room and with the coaching staff. Was it worth looking at bringing in a guy who had played probably 12 games of good football, missed probably 12 games of football and the rest had played some really below average football? Randall wasn't worth much when he left.

I think having an actual QB room might have helped this trade out tremendously. We'll never know, but I'm glad the staff chose drafting Savage over paying Randall. You can bring up the what ifs all you want, pretty damn confident we've upgraded there. 

[vegas492]

16 hours ago, Green19 said:

It’s also taking a gamble on a high rated QB prospect. The fact is GB isn’t going to get many bites at those types... and hasn’t historically.

They thought they were buying low on a prospect that had the POTENTIAL.

He couldn’t put it together... happens. It’s not a bad trade. They had their report on Kizer they thought he could be something... in two offseasons he didn’t get it done. 

Regarding Kizer....I don't know how anyone watching football couldn't see he was clearly a project while in college.  I think he was even benched for a spell his last year at Notre Dame.  Looked it up, yes he was.  After throwing back to back interceptions when playing Stanford.

Then there was the whole "Cam Newton's body with Tom Brady's mind" comment.  Ungh.

Then there was the 0-16 season that saw him look lost at QB.  Which isn't really a knock against him, he wasn't ready.  But the decision making skills just weren't showing up.  Look at how he cost the Browns a win against the Packers that season.

It was a bad trade because Kizer was a project to begin with and in one year in the NFL, he showed almost no improvement in any part of his game since college.

 

[Leader]

NFL players with most riding on 2019 (NFL . Com)

1) Leonard Fournette, RB, Jacksonville Jaguars
2) Jadeveon Clowney, DE, Seattle Seahawks
3) Marcus Mariota, QB, Tennessee Titans
4) Antonio Brown, WR, Oakland Raiders
5) Andy Dalton, QB, Cincinnati Bengals
6) Eddy Pineiro, K, Chicago Bears
7) Jameis Winston, QB, Tampa Bay Buccaneers
8) LeSean McCoy, RB, Kansas City Chiefs
9) Jimmy Graham, TE, Green Bay Packers
Remember Jimmy Graham? Amazing to think back to what we all projected for him when he signed in Green Bay last offseason. Safe to say it wasn't 55 catches for 636 yards and just two touchdowns. I still haven't lost hope in the five-time Pro Bowler. And Packers fans can still dream about the former hoops player out rebounding diminutive defensive backs for scores. But Graham, set to turn 33 midway through this season, isn't getting younger. The Packers are desperate to return to the playoffs following consecutive seasons devoid of January football. If Jimmy Graham is Jimmy Graham again, the entire complexion of Green Bay's offense changes.

[MacReady]

What we all projected for Graham?  I was the only one here saying he wouldn’t have an impact in his first season and everyone thought I was crazy and now I’m the only one thinking he’ll have a good second year with Rodgers.

[vegas492]

8 minutes ago, Leader said:

NFL players with most riding on 2019 (NFL . Com)

9) Jimmy Graham, TE, Green Bay Packers
Remember Jimmy Graham? Amazing to think back to what we all projected for him when he signed in Green Bay last offseason. Safe to say it wasn't 55 catches for 636 yards and just two touchdowns. I still haven't lost hope in the five-time Pro Bowler. And Packers fans can still dream about the former hoops player out rebounding diminutive defensive backs for scores. But Graham, set to turn 33 midway through this season, isn't getting younger. The Packers are desperate to return to the playoffs following consecutive seasons devoid of January football. If Jimmy Graham is Jimmy Graham again, the entire complexion of Green Bay's offense changes.

What exactly is Jimmy Graham?  I'm not sure I know...

If I look at his career stats, minus year one (rookie) and minus his injury shortened year, here is the average Jimmy Graham year...

76 catches, 925 yards.  9 TD's. 

If I look at his last 3 seasons.... (eliminating that injury shortened season)

59 catches, 693 yards.  6 TD's.

I'd take the average of the last 3 seasons and would be drooling over his career production.

Thinking, though that 65 catches for 750 yards and 7 TD's is a nice year to shoot for.

[vegas492]

6 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

What we all projected for Graham?  I was the only one here saying he wouldn’t have an impact in his first season and everyone thought I was crazy and now I’m the only one thinking he’ll have a good second year with Rodgers.

His first year in Seattle was forgettable, too.  But that was his injury year.

He bounced back nicely there in his second year...and was recovering from the knee injury.

Guessing we get a nice bounce from him.

[ThatJerkDave]

I thought Jimmy Graham would have had like 300 yards and 10 TDs.

[Gopackgonerd]

1 hour ago, Outpost31 said:

What we all projected for Graham?  I was the only one here saying he wouldn’t have an impact in his first season and everyone thought I was crazy and now I’m the only one thinking he’ll have a good second year with Rodgers.

I'm guessing he will have more touchdowns (duh) I'll say 6. Not sure he will have a lot of receiving yards. But more than last year if healthy.

[festiveonion]

1 hour ago, Outpost31 said:

What we all projected for Graham?  I was the only one here saying he wouldn’t have an impact in his first season and everyone thought I was crazy and now I’m the only one thinking he’ll have a good second year with Rodgers.

What's 'good' to you?

He's not going to eclipse 1000 yards but 8 TD is a good season and I think that's totally possible. 

Is that enough for people to quit questioning the contract? Meh. Different discussion.

[MacReady]

Just now, festiveonion said:

What's 'good' to you?

He's not going to eclipse 1000 yards but 8 TD is a good season and I think that's totally possible. 

Is that enough for people to quit questioning the contract? Meh. Different discussion.

I never really questioned the contract.  Remember, I was the one who spent all offseason defending Graham's season.  He was better than people around here act like he was.  I'm just saying for people who expected Graham to have a strong season in his first season with Rodgers when Rodgers has been historically hesitant to connect with new tight ends weren't thinking clearly.  People gotta remember who Rodgers is.  He cares more about trust and precision in routes than ability. 

There were times (and I've proven this with literal visual evidence) where Rodgers flat out refused to throw to open, kinda open and wide open Jimmy Graham. 

Graham's best production came in games when we were behind and Rodgers HAD to trust him to give us a chance to win.  See the Niners game.  Rodgers gave him some semi-contested chances and Graham thrived. 

People also have to remember that Richard Rodgers - RICHARD RODGERS - had more targets in a season at tight end than any other tight end Rodgers has ever played with. 

[festiveonion]

1 minute ago, Outpost31 said:

I never really questioned the contract.  Remember, I was the one who spent all offseason defending Graham's season.  He was better than people around here act like he was.  I'm just saying for people who expected Graham to have a strong season in his first season with Rodgers when Rodgers has been historically hesitant to connect with new tight ends weren't thinking clearly.  People gotta remember who Rodgers is.  He cares more about trust and precision in routes than ability. 

There were times (and I've proven this with literal visual evidence) where Rodgers flat out refused to throw to open, kinda open and wide open Jimmy Graham. 

Graham's best production came in games when we were behind and Rodgers HAD to trust him to give us a chance to win.  See the Niners game.  Rodgers gave him some semi-contested chances and Graham thrived. 

People also have to remember that Richard Rodgers - RICHARD RODGERS - had more targets in a season at tight end than any other tight end Rodgers has ever played with. 

For sure. Wasn't putting you in that camp at all. Wasn't even necessarily saying that I agree with people questioning the contract. 
Just differentiating which point I was covering to save my ***... which is you can still be a good player or have a good season but not necessarily have covered your value. 

 

Think the Jimmy discussion would be different if he stayed healthy.. and that if it equated to say 5 TD instead of 2, people wouldn't have harped on the decision to bring Jimmy as much. But... He did get injured. And he didn't catch 5 TDs. And regardless, I think if he stayed healthy there's some merit to what you say about the overhyped first season. 

Now, the point we both definitely agree on is that Jimmy is going into this season with no expectations and that he's going to do well. Personally, I can see 6-8 TDs in this offense. 

But if he throws out the same numbers as last season with 2 more touchdowns do you personally think that's a good season for him? Or you think he's going to surpass that?
What do you think constitutes a good second season with Rodgers?

[Dubz41]

2 hours ago, Outpost31 said:

What we all projected for Graham?  I was the only one here saying he wouldn’t have an impact in his first season and everyone thought I was crazy and now I’m the only one thinking he’ll have a good second year with Rodgers.

First bolded- No, you weren't the ONLY one.

Second bolded- Yes, we think you're crazy (though I enjoy your impassioned posts)

Third bolded- No, you aren't the ONLY one.

You were the most zealous defender of Graham's contract, but you were having fun with the detractors (admit it).  His statistics were better than people wanted to admit and with MLF's emphasis on the TE position..... He should have even better statistics this year.  He apparently earned a lot of cred with his teammates last year playing through his injuries.  @vegas492 pointed out a good goal of 65-750-7, if our offense gels sooner than later he should get a little north of that number. As long as Big Bob Tonyan doesn't steal too many targets!

[MacReady]

7 minutes ago, Dubz41 said:

First bolded- No, you weren't the ONLY one.

Second bolded- Yes, we think you're crazy (though I enjoy your impassioned posts)

Third bolded- No, you aren't the ONLY one.

You were the most zealous defender of Graham's contract, but you were having fun with the detractors (admit it).  His statistics were better than people wanted to admit and with MLF's emphasis on the TE position..... He should have even better statistics this year.  He apparently earned a lot of cred with his teammates last year playing through his injuries.  @vegas492 pointed out a good goal of 65-750-7, if our offense gels sooner than later he should get a little north of that number. As long as Big Bob Tonyan doesn't steal too many targets!

I live and die by hyperbole.  I was literally the only one.  Deal with it.

[Kepler]

3 hours ago, Outpost31 said:

What we all projected for Graham?  I was the only one here saying he wouldn’t have an impact in his first season and everyone thought I was crazy and now I’m the only one thinking he’ll have a good second year with Rodgers.

Not so. I also think he'll do well this season.

[Howler]

An anonymous AFC scout said the following. Let's hope he's wrong... Is this guy just mouthing off or does he actually know our personnel?

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2851960-mike-freemans-10-point-stance-nfl-insiders-takes-on-every-team-before-kickoff

Quote

Packers: I've heard nothing but good things coming out of there. The issue won't be Aaron Rodgers [and if he can get along with head coach Matt LaFleur]. Rodgers will be Rodgers. The issue with the Packers is that defense. It's still not good. They will have to rely on Rodgers as they always do.

 

Edited September 5, 2019 by Howler