Driver vs Nelson

[Boy Scout]

Of course Jennings is going to start, and of course Driver will start opp of Jennings. Driver talent pool is simply deeper than Jordy. Not calling out Nelson, who has done well as of yet, but Driver is just more talented.

 

[GBPack2010]

Donald has more clutch catches in key situations than Jordy but I guess it really doesn't matter who's in as "starter" as they're both lethal in their own respective way. Aside from Jennings, I think any of the WR we have can be alternated to keep em fresh so as long as they contribute heftily I don't care who's the starter across from Greg.

 

[DevilDon]

When you quote me like that, yes, it does.

But taken into full context...






I never wanted to come off as arrogant, but I lose my temper when called ignorant, specially when I'm fully aware of what I'm saying.

The first thing I said was that the definition of starter doesn't apply here. Then DevilDon starts arguing that I don't know what I'm talking about, because the definition of starter is the 2 wrs that most play. Which was wrong. Then I procede to show what is, in fact, the definition of starter.

So, if you want to argue of the practical usage of starter, I'm good for it, because that's a matter of personal opinion. IMHO the starter depends on each formation, not who plays the most. But I understand if others don't feel this way.

But don't come and say that what you think is the official definition, because it's not. It's not up to debate what is the official, de jure definition.

But the de facto definition is very fluid and up to debate.

Two separate things that DevilDon mixed up and called me for it. Which was what starter the whole thing.

Look RS, your point was to say that the WR who was in on the first play of the game was the "starting" WR and that's patently untrue. What surprises me is the depth that you will go to and argue against common knowledge. Driver and Jennings are our starting WRs.
You can use whatever stat you want but think about high school ball. If you were the first guy on the field you were a starter. But it's not true in the NFL with multiple formations and so on.
I'm not trying to be a bug up your butt but please. To suggest the Packers don't have starting receivers is ignorant of the fact that everybody in the NFL recognizes Driver and Jennings as "starters"
No matter which way you slice it, Greg Jennings is a bonafide 1st receiver. Driver may or may not be considered a 2nd but he's played it forever. Sorry if this hurts, but everybody who watches NFL football has those two guys as "starters".

 

[AllouezPackerFan]

I don't like saying it because I love Driver so much.....but I think Jordy should be the number two receiver at the beginning of the season, not that it matters too much because we go with three wides so often. I agree with previous posters that Cobb will be contributing more than anyone thinks. I'm also looking to Jermichael lining up in the slots again, just looking at the 6'0" nickle back thats lined up against him and licking his chops.

 

[PackersRS]

Look RS, your point was to say that the WR who was in on the first play of the game was the "starting" WR and that's patently untrue. What surprises me is the depth that you will go to and argue against common knowledge. Driver and Jennings are our starting WRs.
You can use whatever stat you want but think about high school ball. If you were the first guy on the field you were a starter. But it's not true in the NFL with multiple formations and so on.
I'm not trying to be a bug up your butt but please. To suggest the Packers don't have starting receivers is ignorant of the fact that everybody in the NFL recognizes Driver and Jennings as "starters"
No matter which way you slice it, Greg Jennings is a bonafide 1st receiver. Driver may or may not be considered a 2nd but he's played it forever. Sorry if this hurts, but everybody who watches NFL football has those two guys as "starters".

I give up.

If the official depth chart isn't enough to show what is or isn't, but what "everybody" that "watches" thinks is the right thing, I give up.

If the fact that Nelson was listed as an official starter in SB XLV isn't enough, I give up.

 

[AllouezPackerFan]

I agree with you PackersRS. We have so many different looks, especially in the first quarter, at WR. Who was our starting running back last year? Tough to say when its done by committy.

 

[PackersRS]

I agree with you PackersRS. We have so many different looks, especially in the first quarter, at WR. Who was our starting running back last year? Tough to say when its done by committy.

THANK YOU!

SOMEONE actually read and understood my point.