Lazard Situation...

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
6,486
Reaction score
1,752
I'd agree if we knew what the facial gestures meant. Since we don't know what the sideline conversations were, or if Rodgers was admonishing guys, or saying; "My fault!," we don't know.

I'm not going to put words in his mouth or anyone else's. That's just playing into a fool's hand.

To be honest, this whole attack against him, or attacks like it, are just plain ignorance, and do nothing to advance conversations.
Yeah there was a shot of him on the sidelines yesterday where he was gesturing with his arms and visibly pissed off. But at what? Even the announcers were smart enough not to guess.

Like any media, TV has the ability to misrepresent or show something out of context - or not really explain anything at all.
 

McKnowledge

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 29, 2015
Messages
1,306
Reaction score
270
That's a good assessment. With Adams around, it was never necessary for Lazard to develop beyond what he is. He has all the attributes GB likes in a WR, and he can block. He's arguably has the right size and skill set to play TE, or at least run a few TE-type routes for gains downfield between the hash marks.
One of the things that baffles my mind with many coaching staffs is this corporate way of developing young players.

Efficiency and "mastering your role"is great, no doubt about it, but it can lead to complications.

One thing I have a great respect for older coaches and veteran coaching staffs is the culture of developing players to learn all facets of their positions.

For example, the best WRs are well versed at their position and undestand the nuances of the position as they progress in their careers.

Its okay to be a big chunk playmaking WR (Chase or Jefferson), but its equally important to understand blocking, clear routes, and route running in general that elevates elite to greatness (Davante Adams & Cooper Kupp).

This agenda of developing players strictly for a certain role and not fully immersing these young players in all things involving their position is starting to become a detriment; not only for the players' market, but the league, and the game of football itself.

If all you can do is run go routes and nothing else, what happens when you lose your speed?
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
6,486
Reaction score
1,752
One of the things that baffles my mind with many coaching staffs is this corporate way of developing young players.

Efficiency and "mastering your role"is great, no doubt about it, but it can lead to complications.

One thing I have a great respect for older coaches and veteran coaching staffs is the culture of developing players to learn all facets of their positions.

For example, the best WRs are well versed at their position and undestand the nuances of the position as they progress in their careers.

Its okay to be a big chunk playmaking WR (Chase or Jefferson), but its equally important to understand blocking, clear routes, and route running in general that elevates elite to greatness (Davante Adams & Cooper Kupp).

This agenda of developing players strictly for a certain role and not fully immersing these young players in all things involving their position is starting to become a detriment; not only for the players' market, but the league, and the game of football itself.

If all you can do is run go routes and nothing else, what happens when you lose your speed?
I agree, although Chase and Jefferson have shown they can run almost any route. I don't think they've learned to block yet.

But I agree that just relying on a fast player out of college to remain fast is narrow-minded. We all slow down!

Lazard has actually become a good blocker. Now I'm hoping he can step up and handle more targets and more route variety.

And that was the problem with MVS. He was fast and only good for low probability long passes. I'm afraid that's what Watson could become. Learn the route tree. Learn how to come back to a QB in trouble. That makes for a complete WR like Adams and Krupp.
 

Sunshinepacker

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 29, 2013
Messages
5,766
Reaction score
896
Just pointing out how ridiculous it is that a team with legit Super Bowl aspirations is relying on Allen Lazard as a key piece of the receiving corps. I like Lazard, he'd be a terrific #3 receiver for most elite offenses. Instead, the Packers are relying on him to be the #1 receiver on the team. I think the Packers will win a weak division but the team is really going to need some historically uncommon development from the rookie receivers to have a chance at winning a Super Bowl.
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
6,486
Reaction score
1,752
Just pointing out how ridiculous it is that a team with legit Super Bowl aspirations is relying on Allen Lazard as a key piece of the receiving corps. I like Lazard, he'd be a terrific #3 receiver for most elite offenses. Instead, the Packers are relying on him to be the #1 receiver on the team. I think the Packers will win a weak division but the team is really going to need some historically uncommon development from the rookie receivers to have a chance at winning a Super Bowl.
After yesterday's ***-kicking, your comments describe the situation well. It comes from too many years ignoring the WR position in the draft and FA.

I was watching the game last night. The Bucs have Mike Evans, Chris Godwin and Julio Jones. Evans and Godwin are legit #1 WRs. Julio Jones is the #3 receiver. What a great problem to have.....
 

ARPackFan

Knock it off with them negative waves
Joined
Sep 29, 2013
Messages
725
Reaction score
262
Location
Arkansas
After yesterday's ***-kicking, your comments describe the situation well. It comes from too many years ignoring the WR position in the draft and FA.

I was watching the game last night. The Bucs have Mike Evans, Chris Godwin and Julio Jones. Evans and Godwin are legit #1 WRs. Julio Jones is the #3 receiver. What a great problem to have.....

Include TE as another position being ignored. Tonyan and Lewis are just average and Deguara is a fullback masquerading as a TE.
 

PackAttack12

R-E-L-A-X
Joined
Sep 16, 2016
Messages
6,499
Reaction score
2,157
I'd agree if we knew what the facial gestures meant. Since we don't know what the sideline conversations were, or if Rodgers was admonishing guys, or saying; "My fault!," we don't know.

I'm not going to put words in his mouth or anyone else's. That's just playing into a fool's hand.

To be honest, this whole attack against him, or attacks like it, are just plain ignorance, and do nothing to advance conversations.
Very well said.
 

McKnowledge

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 29, 2015
Messages
1,306
Reaction score
270
After yesterday's ***-kicking, your comments describe the situation well. It comes from too many years ignoring the WR position in the draft and FA.

I was watching the game last night. The Bucs have Mike Evans, Chris Godwin and Julio Jones. Evans and Godwin are legit #1 WRs. Julio Jones is the #3 receiver. What a great problem to have.....
As we sit in this room, this thread, there is an elephant sittong in the corner.

Noteworthy free agent WRs typically do not come to GB.

They know who the QB is...

They understand they will instantly be the WR1 with massive target share...

They understand the other teams in their division have virtually no other elite corners...

Something is not adding up...
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
The O line was awful yesterday. That's concerning for a lot of reasons. The goal line call was the last play they should have run and that's on MLF. More important, they have to keep Rodgers healthy. It's amazing he wasn't hurt yesterday or with some of the very hard hits he took, one to the head.

That's why I think it's hilarious when experts mention there's no reason to rush back Bakhtiari and Jenkins when in the meantime the current line isn't able to protect the franchise quarterback.

As we sit in this room, this thread, there is an elephant sittong in the corner.

Noteworthy free agent WRs typically do not come to GB.

They know who the QB is...

They understand they will instantly be the WR1 with massive target share...

They understand the other teams in their division have virtually no other elite corners...

Something is not adding up...

I don't believe the Packers have actually pursued any noteworthy free agent receivers in the past.
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
6,486
Reaction score
1,752
Include TE as another position being ignored. Tonyan and Lewis are just average and Deguara is a fullback masquerading as a TE.
Yep, 100% correct. They made terrible moves in FA - Graham and Bennett - and the one good move they made - Jared Cook by TT - they let walk for $3 mil/year after all he did was produce and help win a playoff game against Dallas.

They've spent virtually all top draft picks on D, and yet the D sucked on Sunday. They're paying a high price for ignoring WR/TE for so long. As far as the D - with three very talented corners, why play zone? Why not man? Even more bothersome is they didn't fix it during the game.
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
6,486
Reaction score
1,752
That's why I think it's hilarious when experts mention there's no reason to rush back Bakhtiari and Jenkins when in the meantime the current line isn't able to protect the franchise quarterback.



I don't believe the Packers have actually pursued any noteworthy free agent receivers in the past.
Oh wow, the O line was as bad as I've seen it. 4 sacks and the Packers are lucky Rodgers didn't have his season ended. Can't get Bakhtiari and Jenkins back soon enough. And Bakhtiari has had 20 months to recover. So he plays or he doesn't. C'mon Packers. Better get healthy against the Bears, and now even that game is not a gimme. The season changes quickly for a lot of teams in the first week. I'm still stunned the Hags beat the Broncos.
 
OP
OP
tynimiller

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
14,064
Reaction score
4,960
Yep, 100% correct. They made terrible moves in FA - Graham and Bennett - and the one good move they made - Jared Cook by TT - they let walk for $3 mil/year after all he did was produce and help win a playoff game against Dallas.

They've spent virtually all top draft picks on D, and yet the D sucked on Sunday. They're paying a high price for ignoring WR/TE for so long. As far as the D - with three very talented corners, why play zone? Why not man? Even more bothersome is they didn't fix it during the game.

Since Gute took over...our Day 1 and Day 2 draft picks have been very split with 8 being defense and 9 being offense. Over just MLF time, as some think HC influences picks to some degree...we've went 9 offense and 5 defense.

If top picks only means first round yes, we have leaned defense...which would make sense given offensive efficiency and putting up points hasn't really been a massive issue for GB over the recent years with Aaron and Davante and others in house.
 

gopkrs

Cheesehead
Joined
May 12, 2014
Messages
5,390
Reaction score
1,283
Yeah there was a shot of him on the sidelines yesterday where he was gesturing with his arms and visibly pissed off. But at what? Even the announcers were smart enough not to guess.

Like any media, TV has the ability to misrepresent or show something out of context - or not really explain anything at all.
I think that was after the Z play when Z hit him late on the ground and it should have been roughing the passer.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
Yep, 100% correct. They made terrible moves in FA - Graham and Bennett - and the one good move they made - Jared Cook by TT - they let walk for $3 mil/year after all he did was produce and help win a playoff game against Dallas.

Just for the record, Cook signed a two-year, $10.6 million deal with the Raiders after the Packers after the Packers decided it was a smart move to sign Bennett instead of him.

As far as the D - with three very talented corners, why play zone? Why not man? Even more bothersome is they didn't fix it during the game.

I have absolutely no idea why Barry decided playing zone coverage was a decent idea. In addition it took him way too long to realize it didn't work as well.
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
6,486
Reaction score
1,752
Just for the record, Cook signed a two-year, $10.6 million deal with the Raiders after the Packers after the Packers decided it was a smart move to sign Bennett instead of him.



I have absolutely no idea why Barry decided playing zone coverage was a decent idea. In addition it took him way too long to realize it didn't work as well.
Thanks for the update on Cook. I forgot he went to the Raiders before the Saints and that he was paid that much. It may have been that the Packers were offering him $3 mil/year. Well losing him and then adding Bennett were both mistakes by, I think, TT.

And I don't recall Barry ever coming out of zone. I was sure they would have Alexander on Jefferson all day in man with a safety over the top. I gotta believe that would have limited Jefferson's yards. He IS an elite receiver. But when you refuse to cover a guy, he's gonna put up 158 yards in a half. It is a total mystery to me why Barry used zone with one of the best CBs in the league healthy and ready.
 

mradtke66

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
1,621
Reaction score
525
Location
Madison, WI
Thanks for the update on Cook. I forgot he went to the Raiders before the Saints and that he was paid that much. It may have been that the Packers were offering him $3 mil/year. Well losing him and then adding Bennett were both mistakes by, I think, TT.

We offered Cook more than he got from the Raiders. His agent thought he was worth more than our offer, so we signed Bennett for roughly what we offered Cook.
 
OP
OP
tynimiller

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
14,064
Reaction score
4,960
We offered Cook more than he got from the Raiders. His agent thought he was worth more than our offer, so we signed Bennett for roughly what we offered Cook.

Correct, folks however only want to remember it how they desire with Cook. Oh what might had been had he just taken our offer.
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2014
Messages
14,333
Reaction score
5,715
I have absolutely no idea why Barry decided playing zone coverage was a decent idea. In addition it took him way too long to realize it didn't work as well.
Amen and Amen.

I’m guessing but zone seems to work better in a cohesive unit.
I wouldn’t think an opening game of the season is the time to try that? but again I’m no expert here maybe it’s the perfect time idk
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
6,486
Reaction score
1,752
We offered Cook more than he got from the Raiders. His agent thought he was worth more than our offer, so we signed Bennett for roughly what we offered Cook.
Thanks. So it seems Cook just wanted out of GB and it wasn't about the money. I don't remember what GB gave Bennett. I think it was $6 mil/year for 3 years, all guaranteed. I recall they were chasing him to get money back after he quit.
 

PackerDNA

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 8, 2014
Messages
6,443
Reaction score
1,504
Oh wow, the O line was as bad as I've seen it. 4 sacks and the Packers are lucky Rodgers didn't have his season ended. Can't get Bakhtiari and Jenkins back soon enough. And Bakhtiari has had 20 months to recover. So he plays or he doesn't. C'mon Packers. Better get healthy against the Bears, and now even that game is not a gimme. The season changes quickly for a lot of teams in the first week. I'm still stunned the Hags beat the Broncos.
Not sure if it's been mentioned yet, but Bak,Lazard and Jenkins all practiced today.
 

Jayzee1981

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 7, 2019
Messages
530
Reaction score
216
Question just occurred to me and I know it may not be part of the thread topic, but did anyone really expect anything different out of this offense out of the gate? Cuz I sure didn’t. It’s in its infant stage with these kids. I found it funny actually when Watson dropped that friggin pass. It’s like, well that was supposed to happen lol! What DID concern me was our defense getting handled how they did with all this hoopla surrounding it. I assume they’ll get in a groove but I was very disappointed out the gate.
 
OP
OP
tynimiller

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
14,064
Reaction score
4,960
Thanks. So it seems Cook just wanted out of GB and it wasn't about the money. I don't remember what GB gave Bennett. I think it was $6 mil/year for 3 years, all guaranteed. I recall they were chasing him to get money back after he quit.

Negative as he said we offered him more than he ended up taking later, but at the time his agent felt he could get more.

GB didn’t sit around waiting and signed Bennett….as options dried up Cook took less than he could have had from GB originally.
 

Members online

No members online now.
Top