Join Our Green Bay Packers Interactive Community!

We have been providing fans with the best source of Packers information since 2006!
Your participation is greatly anticipated!
Login or Register.
5 Pages«<345
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline PackFanWithTwins  
#41 Posted : Sunday, January 25, 2009 2:39:52 AM(UTC)
PackFanWithTwins

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

Joined: 9/26/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 13
Applause Received: 398

Originally Posted by: " Go to Quoted Post
I don't think we'll have a legitimate #1 receiver until Aaron Rodgers shows that he favors some receivers over others.

Right now, it doesn't look like it'll happen soon. If you look at the numbers he put up, he did an outstanding job spreading the ball around. The only thing I would've liked to see was more opportunities for D. Lee.

I judge #1 receivers by how much the opposing defense has to plan against him. Only a few receivers have that distinction--that belongs to Terrell Owens and Randy Moss and more recently... Larry Fitzgerald. You can throw Andre Johnson into the mix too, it's just that he plays for a horrible team.

Only one smaller receiver has that dynamic spunk to him--that's Steve Smith. You can say what you want about his attitude and say he's overrated--but look at the Panthers game we should've won this season. Aside from the fact that our defense and special teams choked big time, you just KNEW it was going to be Smith making the play. Had Smith not been on the field--we win.

In terms of potential, Greg Jennings probably won't be looked at as a "Dynamic #1", but he's definitely considered elite. Coming out of college, he drew comparisons to Marvin Harrison. Marvin Harrison is about the same size as Jennings and Driver, and Harrison is probably going to be going to the Hall of Fame one day because of his attitude and his consistency.

Jennings has to stay consistent, and he'll be a "Mr. Reliable" type of receiver.

He has the potential to be better than Marvin Harrison too. I can't think of any receiver who has his breakaway capabilities. Even early on in Harrison's career, he wasn't the same playmaker Jennings currently is. Harrison just breaks ankles with his route running.

Back to the payday--fair value for him is somewhere upwards of 35-40 million dollars. Something similar to what Lee Evans is paid, as someone stated.


Do we really want Rodgers to start throwing to any single WR more. I don't think so. It has been said that Sharpe leaving was the best thing for Favre because he learned to throw to other WRs and he was praised for spreading the ball around after that.

Rodgers has been spreading the ball around from day 1. I would prefer having 4 WR with 900 yards that 1 or 2 with 1000-1200. I hope he keeps spreading it around. that makes the life of defenses more difficult.
The world needs ditch diggers to Danny!!!
UserPostedImage
Offline blueleopard  
#42 Posted : Sunday, January 25, 2009 5:13:17 AM(UTC)
blueleopard

Rank: 4th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 8/22/2008(UTC)

Applause Received: 72

The post was made with the intention of saying that with the way Rodgers is playing, he doesn't need an all-pro WR because it's all within the system and how smart everyone on the team is.

Then I go on to talk about what Jennings is bound for, whether he remains a Packer or not.
Danreb Victorio A Believer of Greg Jennings
Offline Nonstopdrivel  
#43 Posted : Sunday, January 25, 2009 7:17:16 AM(UTC)
Nonstopdrivel

Rank: Hall of Famer

United States
Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)
Location: Germany

Applause Given: 364
Applause Received: 263

Originally Posted by: " Go to Quoted Post
I would prefer having 4 WR with 900 yards that 1 or 2 with 1000-1200. I hope he keeps spreading it around. that makes the life of defenses more difficult.


I agree with this wholeheartedly. For one thing, having multiple lower-yardage WRs keeps them cheaper. ;) More importantly, though, fewer tackles puts less wear and tear on them, increasing their longevity. No. 1 receivers who are fortunate enough to last tend to catch the eyes of teams desperate for deep-threat talent, who are willing to drop a fortune on them. There, they get ridden like donkeys.

Randy Moss was an exception to this trend, because he virtually disappeared in Oakland. Then again, last season may have been an anomaly borne of a fantastic confluence of factors. After all, his statistics came crashing back down to earth this year. He was solid, but hardly spectacular: 1,008 yards for 11 TDs vs. 1,493 yards for 23 TDs in 2007. Maybe Ted Thompson's decision to pass on Moss wasn't so terrible after all. (Yes, yes, I know the almighty Brady was out this year, but if anything, you'd think the fledgling first-year starter would have been even more dependent on his marquee receiver.)

I don't want to see Greg Jennings leave any more than the next guy, but if he was bait for a monster offensive lineman who would protect our QB from having to run for his life every play, I'd pull the trigger in a heartbeat. Even with lesser receivers, I can see Rodgers throwing for more yards and more TDs if he were given more time to plant his feet.
UserPostedImage
Offline DakotaT  
#44 Posted : Sunday, January 25, 2009 12:33:02 PM(UTC)
DakotaT

Rank: Super Bowl MVP

Joined: 8/18/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 665
Applause Received: 1,369

Originally Posted by: " Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: " Go to Quoted Post
I would prefer having 4 WR with 900 yards that 1 or 2 with 1000-1200. I hope he keeps spreading it around. that makes the life of defenses more difficult.


I agree with this wholeheartedly. For one thing, having multiple lower-yardage WRs keeps them cheaper. ;) More importantly, though, fewer tackles puts less wear and tear on them, increasing their longevity. No. 1 receivers who are fortunate enough to last tend to catch the eyes of teams desperate for deep-threat talent, who are willing to drop a fortune on them. There, they get ridden like donkeys.

Randy Moss was an exception to this trend, because he virtually disappeared in Oakland. Then again, last season may have been an anomaly borne of a fantastic confluence of factors. After all, his statistics came crashing back down to earth this year. He was solid, but hardly spectacular: 1,008 yards for 11 TDs vs. 1,493 yards for 23 TDs in 2007. Maybe Ted Thompson's decision to pass on Moss wasn't so terrible after all. (Yes, yes, I know the almighty Brady was out this year, but if anything, you'd think the fledgling first-year starter would have been even more dependent on his marquee receiver.)

I don't want to see Greg Jennings leave any more than the next guy, but if he was bait for a monster offensive lineman who would protect our QB from having to run for his life every play, I'd pull the trigger in a heartbeat. Even with lesser receivers, I can see Rodgers throwing for more yards and more TDs if he were given more time to plant his feet.


Boy you took that a lot farther than I was willing to. Would it be safe to say that we will be drafting another receiver, probably as high as the third round?
UserPostedImage
Offline Nonstopdrivel  
#45 Posted : Sunday, January 25, 2009 2:51:13 PM(UTC)
Nonstopdrivel

Rank: Hall of Famer

United States
Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)
Location: Germany

Applause Given: 364
Applause Received: 263

If history is any indication, I would say yes.
UserPostedImage
Offline blueleopard  
#46 Posted : Sunday, January 25, 2009 6:41:49 PM(UTC)
blueleopard

Rank: 4th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 8/22/2008(UTC)

Applause Received: 72

Originally Posted by: " Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: " Go to Quoted Post

Randy Moss was an exception to this trend, because he virtually disappeared in Oakland. Then again, last season may have been an anomaly borne of a fantastic confluence of factors. After all, his statistics came crashing back down to earth this year. He was solid, but hardly spectacular: 1,008 yards for 11 TDs vs. 1,493 yards for 23 TDs in 2007. Maybe Ted Thompson's decision to pass on Moss wasn't so terrible after all. (Yes, yes, I know the almighty Brady was out this year, but if anything, you'd think the fledgling first-year starter would have been even more dependent on his marquee receiver.)


A certain first-year starter who wasn't a rookie and wasn't named Aaron Rodgers had a rather excellent season.

That player is Matt Cassel. That player wouldn't have half the stats he put up if it weren't for Randy Moss.

If you need proof, just look at Daunte Culpepper.
Danreb Victorio A Believer of Greg Jennings
Offline Nonstopdrivel  
#47 Posted : Sunday, January 25, 2009 7:47:29 PM(UTC)
Nonstopdrivel

Rank: Hall of Famer

United States
Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)
Location: Germany

Applause Given: 364
Applause Received: 263

Matt Cassel did indeed have an excellent year. Randy Moss's contributions represented 27% of Cassel's passing yards and 52% of his TD passes. Jennings represented 32% of Rodgers' passing yards and 32% of his TD passes.

I'm not sure what point you were trying to make though. It sounded like you were trying to disagree with me, yet you basically restated my point in different words.
UserPostedImage
Offline Dulak  
#48 Posted : Sunday, January 25, 2009 10:14:45 PM(UTC)
Dulak

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

Joined: 1/19/2009(UTC)
Location: London, UK (from kenosha)

Applause Given: 159
Applause Received: 103

IMO Jennings is a Very gifted receiver and has ALOT of heart. And brings inspiration to the team.

Also IMO GB needs to pay what he is worth. He is one of the key players in are O. I would probably say the 2nd most valuable player on O besides our QB.

Stats or no stats I am impressed everytime I see the ball thrown towards jennings - usually gives it 100%.
Offline Zero2Cool  
#49 Posted : Sunday, January 25, 2009 10:53:08 PM(UTC)
Zero2Cool

Rank: Legend

Yahoo! Fantasy Football - Gold: 2009FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Silver: 2010Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Silver: 2011ESPN NCAA March Madness - Bronze: 2010Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Bronze: 2013

United States
Joined: 10/13/2006(UTC)
Location: Green Bay, WI

Applause Given: 1,966
Applause Received: 2,223

Originally Posted by: " Go to Quoted Post
A certain first-year starter who wasn't a rookie and wasn't named Aaron Rodgers had a rather excellent season.

That player is Matt Cassel. That player wouldn't have half the stats he put up if it weren't for Randy Moss.

If you need proof, just look at Daunte Culpepper.
I'm not even sure what this thread is about anymore, but what did Randy Moss do for the Oakland Raiders QB's? ;)
"I do not think there is any thrill that can go through the human heart like that felt by the inventor as he sees some creation of the brain unfolding to success... such emotions make a man forget food, sleep, friends, love, everything." - Nikola Tesla

UserPostedImage
Rss Feed 
Users browsing this topic
Guest
5 Pages«<345
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Notification

Icon
Error

Tweeter

Recent Topics
2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / yooperfan

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / yooperfan

3h / Green Bay Packers Talk / yooperfan

7h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

7h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

9h / Green Bay Packers Talk / sschind

9h / Green Bay Packers Talk / porky88

9h / Green Bay Packers Talk / sschind

18h / Green Bay Packers Talk / packman82

20h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

22-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / macbob

21-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

21-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

20-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / Since69

20-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / TheKanataThrilla