D.Adam or Boykin

[PackerFanLV]

I think Adam has more upside then boykin plus i tired of seeing boykin dropping passes. Adam looks clearly better. What you guys and gals think? Discuss

 

[yooperpackfan]

Adams and Boykin both look lost out there at this point in time, but I think Adams has a bigger upside.
Being as the offense is stuck in neutral right now I think Adams would pay bigger dividends by getting the bulk of the work over Boykin.

 

[GoPGo]

Adams and Boykin both look lost out there at this point in time, but I think Adams has a bigger upside.
Being as the offense is stuck in neutral right now I think Adams would pay bigger dividends by getting the bulk of the work over Boykin.

I think they need to start thinking about getting both rookies into the mix more if Boykin doesn't get his act together and fast.

 

[JBlood]

Adams is a star in waiting. Boykin made the team because he NEVER dropped the ball in practice; so I think he can make plays as well. But whomever plays is secondary to the offensive line taking over control of the LOS--game after game after game.

 

[TJV]

Adams because he catches the ball. He may make rookie mistakes in route running - IMO those mistakes are mostly due to not reading what the defense is doing, but if Boykin reads the D perfectly, runs the route perfectly and then drops the ball... BTW, if the WRs continue to have trouble getting open (with the exception of Nelson), I agree it's time to get Janis on the field. His deep speed could loosen up coverage for others. Even if they have to simplify things for him - for example less reading of the D after the route starts - I think he could help. His TD in preseason on a crossing route also used his speed to good advantage.

 

[GoPGo]

Adams because he catches the ball. He may make rookie mistakes in route running - IMO those mistakes are mostly due to not reading what the defense is doing, but if Boykin reads the D perfectly, runs the route perfectly and then drops the ball... BTW, if the WRs continue to have trouble getting open (with the exception of Nelson), I agree it's time to get Janis on the field. His deep speed could loosen up coverage for others. Even if they have to simplify things for him - for example less reading of the D after the route starts - I think he could help. His TD in preseason on a crossing route also used his speed to good advantage.

Any time you have a big guy with field-stretching speed, his mere presence on the field can force the defense to react. I wouldn't expect Janis to have more than 4-8 snaps in the early going, but he can add a wrinkle in certain situations and work himself into a significant role by December, but he needs PT. Obviously he hasn't done it in a real game, but at some point, the Packers need to see what they have in him. I'd also like to see him back fielding punts instead of Cobb.

 

[rodell330]

Janis should already be plAying . Anyways...Boykin is a poor mans Keyshawn Johnson. Put Janis out there and let him and Jordy beat you deep a couple times and I guarantee you Cobb will destroy coverages underneath. He's not getting the ball enough because mm has no imagination. Being creative to him is a double move or that stupid toss sweep play that never works.

 

[TJV]

Janis should already be plAying . Anyways...Boykin is a poor mans Keyshawn Johnson. Put Janis out there and let him and Jordy beat you deep a couple times and I guarantee you Cobb will destroy coverages underneath. He's not getting the ball enough because mm has no imagination. Being creative to him is a double move or that stupid toss sweep play that never works.

That's a great theory about Cobb but be careful about your guarantees - Cobb was struggling to get separation from a guy the Lions picked up in the week before the game. As Silverstein wrote, Cobb dropped one of the few perfectly thrown balls on their second drive. Also, the coverage was concentrated on Nelson and Cobb still couldn't shake loose. He wasn't alone but he was part of the problem yesterday.

 

[brandon2348]

I would much rather see Adams right now. Way more upside and play making ability IMO. Jordan Matthews is paying big dividends in Philly. Boykin played nicely last year when guys got hurt but I never bought into this thing he was going to parlay that to the next level.

I think it's time you roll with Adams and get him involved.

 

[realcaliforniacheese]

Adams because he catches the ball. He may make rookie mistakes in route running - IMO those mistakes are mostly due to not reading what the defense is doing, but if Boykin reads the D perfectly, runs the route perfectly and then drops the ball... BTW, if the WRs continue to have trouble getting open (with the exception of Nelson), I agree it's time to get Janis on the field. His deep speed could loosen up coverage for others. Even if they have to simplify things for him - for example less reading of the D after the route starts - I think he could help. His TD in preseason on a crossing route also used his speed to good advantage.

whats going to start getting receivers open is when we start running successfully. Hard to get open when you have 7 guys in coverage and a constant all out pass rush on Rodgers.

 

[rodell330]

That's a great theory about Cobb but be careful about your guarantees - Cobb was struggling to get separation from a guy the Lions picked up in the week before the game. As Silverstein wrote, Cobb dropped one of the few perfectly thrown balls on their second drive. Also, the coverage was concentrated on Nelson and Cobb still couldn't shake loose. He wasn't alone but he was part of the problem yesterday.

you can put Jordy in the slot and have Janis and Adams on the outside with Cobb running out of the backfield vs backers on crossing routes our wheel routes. I'll take that matchup everytime. Mm should pay close attention to how Harvin is being used in the backfield for Seattle. Screens, sweeps, passing plays and even carrying the ball. Harvin is bigger and a little more explosive than Cobb but Cobb can be a weapon like Harvin if used CORRECTLY. You want the offense to get off to a fast start and score points stop with the corny play calls then and put your best players in position to make plays which MM doesn't do. Would it be a crime to see Harris and Starks more if Lacy is having a hard time gaining yards? How about some short passes so that Rodgers can get into a rythem? And not the ones Rodgers checks to at the line that his Wrs don't always pay attention to. Since Rodgers seems to be always running for his life how about more bootlegs? Those comeback routes work well for he and Joedy and he's the best qb outside the pocket throwing the ball.

I may not coach in the NFL but I know football l..and I know that only scoring 7 points against a bunch of backups is just embarrassing and getting out coached. I'm telling you if Mm wasn't a head coach he wouldn't have a job in the NFL with his play calling. Rodgers greatness has covered up for him but even the ppl who back MM are getting fed up with him.

 

[TJV]

I may not coach in the NFL but I know football l..and I know that only scoring 7 points against a bunch of backups is just embarrassing and getting out coached. I'm telling you if Mm wasn't a head coach he wouldn't have a job in the NFL with his play calling. Rodgers greatness has covered up for him but even the ppl who back MM are getting fed up with him.

That was an embarrassing game for the offense but step back and look at McCarthy's entire record of leading a play-calling the offense. Of course he'd have a job in the league if he weren't the Packers HC. But that will be a moot point once he signs his contract extension.

 

[rodell330]

That was an embarrassing game for the offense but step back and look at McCarthy's entire record of leading a play-calling the offense. Of course he'd have a job in the league if he weren't the Packers HC. But that will be a moot point once he signs his contract extension.

Contract extension?? I'm sure a lot of ppl would agree he doesn't deserve an extension and rightfully so...especially if the Packers miss the playoffs which is looking like a real possibility. The SB win was a long time ago.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Contract extension?? I'm sure a lot of ppl would agree he doesn't deserve an extension and rightfully so...especially if the Packers miss the playoffs which is looking like a real possibility. The SB win was a long time ago.

The only way McCarthy doesn´t get a contract extension is if there´s a insurmountable rift with Rodgers.

 

[rodell330]

The only way McCarthy doesn´t get a contract extension is if there´s a insurmountable rift with Rodgers.

Lucky me

 

[brandon2348]

The only way McCarthy doesn´t get a contract extension is if there´s a insurmountable rift with Rodgers.

That or the team misses the playoffs and has a disaster season.

 

[TJV]

That or the team misses the playoffs and has a disaster season.

Many may not like it but my guess is McCarthy would get an extension even after (or during) a below .500 season. Because Thompson will look at McCarthy's entire tenure: In 8 complete seasons his teams have an 82-45-1 record, a 64% winning percentage in the regular season. His teams have won 4 division championships. His teams have made the playoffs in 6 of those 8 seasons. His teams have won 6 playoff games and lost 5. I know the caveats involved with those stats and I understand the disappointment not only in how this season has started (and it’s more than just the record, it’s the miserable play by both the offense and defense for long stretches) but how the last three seasons have ended. But each of those seasons ended in the playoffs. And while just making the playoffs is not enough, we can all agree there is a zero chance of winning a championship if the team doesn’t make it into the playoffs. And McCarthy’s teams have done that 75% of the time.

 

[PackManDan]

I would much rather see Adams right now. He's a big receiver, he will make rookie mistakes. Most of those can be excusable, but I think his ceiling is much higher than Boykin's.

 

[brandon2348]

Many may not like it but my guess is McCarthy would get an extension even after (or during) a below .500 season. Because Thompson will look at McCarthy's entire tenure: In 8 complete seasons his teams have an 82-45-1 record, a 64% winning percentage in the regular season. His teams have won 4 division championships. His teams have made the playoffs in 6 of those 8 seasons. His teams have won 6 playoff games and lost 5. I know the caveats involved with those stats and I understand the disappointment not only in how this season has started (and it’s more than just the record, it’s the miserable play by both the offense and defense for long stretches) but how the last three seasons have ended. But each of those seasons ended in the playoffs. And while just making the playoffs is not enough, we can all agree there is a zero chance of winning a championship if the team doesn’t make it into the playoffs. And McCarthy’s teams have done that 75% of the time.

I would tend to agree but you kind of got to ask yourself why he hasn't gotten the extension yet? There was talk of McCarthy getting an extension prior to the season starting. Maybe playoff appearances are not enough any longer? Maybe the heat has been turned up a little. Jim Harbaugh seems to be in a similar situation in San Francisco where they postponed any extension talks until after the 2014 season.

I think McCarthy is a solid coach overall although IMO he has become somewhat predictable. One could argue his case for an extension but if this season goes south and you got Aaron Rodgers and all the other pieces this team has things could change real quick IMO.

Standards are different in Green Bay. Whether that's fair or not, that is just the way it is.

 

[brandon2348]

Your 64% winning percentage in the regular season doesn't include the hypothetical sub-.500 season. So if we add a 7-9 season in, MM's win % drops from 64% to 61.5%. Also, lets consider that MM's only NFC Championship is in 2010. If take out the Super Bowl run (not saying the Super Bowl is meaningless, but just to see what the record is for the other seasons), the playoff record shoots down to 2-4. That will also mean that his team will have made the playoffs 6/9 seasons instead of 6/8 seasons, going for 75% of making the playoffs to 67%. If you want to look at his entire body of work after a hypothetical sub-.500 season, you have to add in the hypothetical season. When you do, the stats are much less impressive.

There is more to this than will MM get an extension or won't he. There is also a question of how long an extension will be and for how much. If we go sub-.500, I would expect a short extension.

I know it's week 3 right now but the offense is ranked 28th. When is the last time you have seen the offense ranked 28th? With Aaron Rodgers and ROY running back with basically the same offensive line plus Bulaga I would say no extension if there is a losing season and bottom 10 offense.

I could see an extension of "GOOD BYE"

Like I have posted I hope it gets turned around but this is pathetic. I don't dislike McCarthy but I think maybe he needs to change things up a bit.

 

[TJV]

If take out the Super Bowl run (not saying the Super Bowl is meaningless, but just to see what the record is for the other seasons), the playoff record shoots down to 2-4.

Actually that would shoot it down to 2-5 but that makes no sense IMO anyway. If you are going to arbitrarily ignore 4 of his playoff wins, why not arbitrarily ignore a corresponding 4 playoff losses? The result is an equally meaningless 2-1. It's one thing to project the current season's outcome, but IMO it's meaningless to arbitrarily ignore part of his record. There's no need to: With regard to the past, why not stick with the facts? It's a fact how long ago the Super Bowl season was, if that's your point, but ignoring it looks agenda driven. And just imagine any GM ignoring the Super Bowl run that appears on his resume too.

For others: Don't get me wrong, I presented what I predict will be Thompson (and Murphy's) point of view regarding McCarthy's extension.

 

[brandon2348]

Actually that would shoot it down to 2-5 but that makes no sense IMO anyway. If you are going to arbitrarily ignore 4 of his playoff wins, why not arbitrarily ignore a corresponding 4 playoff losses? The result is an equally meaningless 2-1. It's one thing to project the current season's outcome, but IMO it's meaningless to arbitrarily ignore part of his record. There's no need to: With regard to the past, why not stick with the facts? It's a fact how long ago the Super Bowl season was, if that's your point, but ignoring it looks agenda driven. And just imagine any GM ignoring the Super Bowl run that appears on his resume too.

For others: Don't get me wrong, I presented what I predict will be Thompson (and Murphy's) point of view regarding McCarthy's extension.

Yeah so there is obviously a huge importance for McCarthy on this season. The Super Bowl will be 5 years old come winter and is losing it's freshness. Especially if the season goes up in smoke with all this talent on offense. It is way to early to predict this season either way but this might be McCarthy's most important.

 

[Chicocheese]

Here is my vote:

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

I think Adams is bigger, stronger body and could be VERY useful in short yardage and goal-line situations if running isn't a viable option.

 

[TJV]

It is way to early to predict this season either way but this might be McCarthy's most important.

With regard to his ongoing employment, I don't think so.

 

[brandon2348]

With regard to his ongoing employment, I don't think so.

So if this team goes like 6-10 and is in the bottom 10 on offense you think McCarthy's job wont be on the line?

If that were to happen and it wasn't due to massive injuries I think he has to go. He will have lost confidence with the players and mostly everyone else.

How in the heck does he hit the re-set button after that?