Lazard Situation...

[Pokerbrat2000]

Yet you only criticize Rodgers because of it. Lazard didn't even show up for minicamp but I haven't seen anyone criticizing him.

I did mention Lazard a few times and Lazard isn't under contract until he signs the tender or works out a new deal. I don't think he is doing the Packers any favors by taking that stand, but his missing mandatory practices would fall under "not under contract".

As far as Rodgers, if you don't understand why he is being criticized more than say Sammy Watkins missing a few OTA's (not sure if it was 1 or2?), then you aren't following my line of thinking. Watkins missing those OTA's isn't good for him or the Packers, but since he isn't guaranteed money or a spot on the roster, it effects him the most. Rodgers on the other hand, I won't belabor the points already made, but by far that is the guy that the Packers need the most, whether its on the field, in the locker room or the sidelines.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Once again, you took another shot at Rodgers for not showing up for OTAs because in your opinion the Packers won't be able to have enough data on their receiving corps to make a thorough evaluation of their receiving corps because of it.

Not sure why you are so sensitive when it comes to talking about Rodgers in any sort of negative light. The fact is, he wasn't at OTA's, thus no interaction with new receivers during those 6 days. Thus, less information for coaches to go off of in regards to how Rodgers and the new receivers interact . Why is that so hard to understand? Nobody has said or implied that after those 6 OTA's nothing more is needed and all roster decisions can now be made, far from it. They hold the OTA's for players and coaches to interact, learn and add information to the coaches and GM's data banks.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

As a side note, I agree the interaction between a QB and WR is beneficial but there's enough time for that to happen during training camp before the start of the season.

This was kind of funny. You agree that the interaction is beneficial and state that there is enough time during training camp for this to happen, yet June 15th is next week. So is more time (OTA's) for this interaction not beneficial or even a detriment in your opinion? Me and other teams are anxiously waiting for your opinion.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I did mention Lazard a few times and Lazard isn't under contract until he signs the tender or works out a new deal.

While Rodgers is under contract OTA practices are voluntary. Therefore you should apply the same standard as you do on Lazard.

As far as Rodgers, if you don't understand why he is being criticized more than say Sammy Watkins missing a few OTA's (not sure if it was 1 or2?), then you aren't following my line of thinking. Watkins missing those OTA's isn't good for him or the Packers, but since he isn't guaranteed money or a spot on the roster, it effects him the most.

Watkins (and the Packers) would have definitely benefitted more from him showing up for OTAs as he doesn't even know the offense and missed the first couple installments of it than anybody would have gained by Rodgers participating.

As a side note, listen to MLF's press conferencenthe other day, Watkins will make the roster.

Not sure why you are so sensitive when it comes to talking about Rodgers in any sort of negative light.

I'm absolutely fine with constructive criticsm of Rodgers but as I mentioned yesterday there are fans who go to great lengths to talk negatively about him, something I don't agree with.

The fact is, he wasn't at OTA's, thus no interaction with new receivers during those 6 days. Thus, less information for coaches to go off of in regards to how Rodgers and the new receivers interact . Why is that so hard to understand? Nobody has said or implied that after those 6 OTA's nothing more is needed and all roster decisions can now be made, far from it. They hold the OTA's for players and coaches to interact, learn and add information to the coaches and GM's data banks.

This was kind of funny. You agree that the interaction is beneficial and state that there is enough time during training camp for this to happen, yet June 15th is next week. So is more time (OTA's) for this interaction not beneficial or even a detriment in your opinion? Me and other teams are anxiously waiting for your opinion.

Let me exaggerate here for a moment.

Rodgers could have spent 24 hours, seven days a week with his entire receiving corps since Watkins was signed or the rookies got drafted, not talking about anything else than the Packers offense, and the front office would still not have enough data to fairly evaluate the group before June 15th to make a decision on Lazard.

You seem to understand that it takes more time to evaluate Love, despite him already having played in preseason and regular season games, yet believe that six OTA practices would have been good enough to fairly analyze the talent level of an entire position group??? That doesn't make any sense.

Lastly, I agree that I would have preferred Rodgers showing up for OTAs. But you completely overestimate how much the team would have benefitted from it. In addition I guarantee it won't make or break the outcome of the upcoming season.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Let me exaggerate here for a moment.

Rodgers could have spent 24 hours, seven days a week with his entire receiving corps since Watkins was signed or the rookies got drafted, not talking about anything else than the Packers offense, and the front office would still not have enough data to fairly evaluate the group before June 15th to make a decision on Lazard.

The problem is, you are exaggerating my initial point. I never said that by Rodgers showing up for OTA's, that the Packers would have all the data they need to make a fully informed decision about the WR's. I merely said that they would have more than they do at present. Just like I never said that I was fine with Lazard doing what he is doing or that I was happy about Watkins missing the first couple of OTA's, yet you took both subjects and took them to the extreme end of something I wasn't even close to saying or implying.

Again, you seem very sensitive about any criticism laid at the feet of Rodgers. If I say that him being at OTA's would help the team and his teammates, you take that as major criticism of Rodgers decision to not be there with his teammates, as well as now you are giving me an absolute guarantee that in no way would that change things?

In addition I guarantee it won't make or break the outcome of the upcoming season.

Despite your guarantee, I am sticking to my opinion. One play can make or break the outcome of a playoff game and I believe additional practice time with their QB could benefit his teammates and potentially allow one of them the ability to make that game changing play.

 

[OldSchool101]

I had to laugh at his agents statement;

“Allen’s total focus is on having the best possible season he can have as a player & helping the Packers win the Lombardi Trophy. Everything he is doing is to further those objectives.” Right out of the Aaron Rodgers playbook.

I call Bulls hit. How does not showing up for OTA's and now mandatory practices support that statement? If Lazard wants to increase his market value, he would be smart to sign the one year tender, play on a team where the WR room is weak enough, that he is guaranteed a starting job, with one of the best QB's in the league.

Sure, Lazard can block, but as a WR, he's at best a #3 and on many teams, parked on the bench.

This is where I’m at also.
With all the past controversy? Let’s try showing up and proving your worth on the field. Maybe for a change and to set an example, T that concept up with thanking your employer for their confidence in you and going out and returning the favor by being humble and balling out.

 

[OldSchool101]

The rules also say he didn’t have to go OTAs but you seem to be willing to vilify him for that.

He’s not under contract. He doesn’t need to get out of bed, technically.

I’m with you above, he’s trying to use this situation to get more $$. He’s obviously not fully confident in his ability to perform.

He’s got the $4M reasons to show up, unless he’s not confident in his ability or he’s listening to poor advice (counsel). The best way to get a big deal? is to bet on your talent and beat out this group. I personally think he’s got an incredible once in a lifetime opportunity.

 

[El Guapo]

He may know that he's maxed out his potential, and therefore is looking for the payday today.

 

[Pkrjones]

He may know that he's maxed out his potential, and therefore is looking for the payday today.

If Lazard knows that, then I'm guessing the coaching staff & Gute know it as well and won't be offering a long-term higher priced deal. . Hard work and determination have gotten Lazard to this level, but maybe he's maxed-out his talent.

 

[OldSchool101]

I like Sammy Watkins attitude. There is something about a great athlete being humble that makes you want to root for him. I have no issue with Lazard and I wish he would just come back and ball out. As much fun as Winning this season... will be watching who is our WR riser. Whats kinda crazy is that there is enough WR Receiving pie left for 2-3 hungry guys to absolutely stuff themselves. That doesn't happen very often

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Whats kinda crazy is that there is enough WR Receiving pie left for 2-3 hungry guys to absolutely stuff themselves. That doesn't happen very often

I thinks some of the new WR deals we have seen this year have given some guys way too big of money eyes. Greed and self centeredness has found its way into the NFL and most teams are seeing it.

 

[OldSchool101]

I thinks some of the new WR deals we have seen this year have given some guys way too big of money eyes. Greed and self centeredness has found its way into the NFL and most teams are seeing it.

I’m not sure how teams can keep this pace of salary inflation. Even with tv deals. We can’t double salaries every 5 -6 years. It’s not sustainable.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I never said that by Rodgers showing up for OTA's, that the Packers would have all the data they need to make a fully informed decision about the WR's.

What's the point of bringing it up in the first place then???

One play can make or break the outcome of a playoff game and I believe additional practice time with their QB could benefit his teammates and potentially allow one of them the ability to make that game changing play.

I'm absolutely convinced plays like that don't get drawn up in OTAs.

He’s not under contract. He doesn’t need to get out of bed, technically.

It's strange you're fine with that approach but not with someone else not showing up for voluntary practices.

I like Sammy Watkins attitude. There is something about a great athlete being humble that makes you want to root for him. I have no issue with Lazard and I wish he would just come back and ball out.

Watkins didn't show up for some OTA practices as well. I wonder why no one has an issue with his attitude because of it.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

What's the point of bringing it up in the first place then???

Why wouldn't I bring up the fact of Rodgers being absent from 6 (and counting) days that he had the opportunity to interact with his teammates and they with him? You see those interactions as serving no or very little purpose. I happen to disagree with you. I accept your opinion and keep stating that, but you want to keep trying to convince me and others that we are wrong. Sorry Cap, isn't happening, for me. You thinks we are unfairly picking on Rodgers, I disagree with that as well.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I'm absolutely convinced plays like that don't get drawn up in OTAs

Lol. You actually think I was referring to a specific play being drawn up to win a game, in an unknown situation? To be clear, I was talking about the level of progression and chemistry that Rodgers may or may not get to with each of his receivers. This level being influenced by how much they have worked and interacted with each other over time in practices, film room and games.

 

[OldSchool101]

It's strange you're fine with that approach but not with someone else not showing up for voluntary practices.

Lazard isn't officially on the team, big difference between a contract employee with the highest salary and depth WR not under contract. As far as Lazard? I'm pretty sure they wouldn't let him just show up and practice in camp without a contract, I could be wrong though.. is that traditional or normal? To work out with the team, but without a contract? It sounds really odd to me that you expect me to be ok with that

 

[tynimiller]

Lazard posted on Insta him arriving in GB and Robert Tonyan picking him up….News coming soon I’d bet

 

[tynimiller]

I am not going to project what I think this news will be value wise, but I do think we hear that Lazard isn't going anywhere for more than just this year. I think with Cobb aging, Lewis as well, Adams and MVS gone...GB and Aaron don't want to see every single target he has built a report with over the last three seasons gone after this year if Aaron is back in 2023. There are also far worse WRs to have in house for a Love regime should AR retire and that start next year.

What I will say is many forget the stretch Lazard ended the 2021 season with, and is precisely why you hear Aaron speak about Lazard with such clear optimism as to who or what he might be able to be.

Lazard missed 3 weeks and got injuered in another...while also playing banged up some in the middle there.

That all said, he put up nearly 60% of his 2021 yards in the final 6 weeks of the season. He put up 5 of his 8 TDs in the final 6 weeks. He averaged 13.1 yards per catch in that 6 week period...in that same stretch Adams put up 10.1 yards per catch and 574 yards vs Lazard's 303.

Yes, this is a small six week sample size.
Yes, this illustrates Lazard has the ability to produce as a solid WR2.
Yes, this is a small six week sample size.

Is his ceiling a clear WR1 across the NFL putting up 1,200 yards and 10 TD type level....no one can say for sure. Has he proven if he stays healthy he can produce 800-950 yard and double digit TD type production - yes, and that is what GB/MLF/AR will expect from him to do - because he has proven it is possible. The question is however, can he do it when Adams is gobbling up some coverage rolls and such.

 

[tynimiller]

Tender has been signed.

Packers' Allen Lazard: Signs second-round tender

Packers' Allen Lazard: Signs second-round tender

www.cbssports.com

 

[OldSchool101]

Tender has been signed.

Packers' Allen Lazard: Signs second-round tender

Packers' Allen Lazard: Signs second-round tender

www.cbssports.com

Smart man. Now he just needs needs to go out and ball and get himself a nice payday.

 

[tynimiller]

Smart man. Now he just needs needs to go out and ball and get himself a nice payday.

Honestly he balls out, he is out of GB too most likely....of course that is dependent on numerous factors mainly named Watson and Doubs.

 

[OldSchool101]

Honestly he balls out, he is out of GB too most likely....of course that is dependent on numerous factors mainly named Watson and Doubs.

I suppose there’s no loyalty anymore. At least we might have a first crack at resigning him or extending him or whatnot. I’d love to see him at least crack that 700-800 yards area. Like you said, holding near 13 per. He’s still a very good blocker and it would be nice to retain some continuity for Rodgers if possible.

Glad to hear he’s back. The puzzle is coming together.

 

[kevans74]

This is interesting and good for Allen, I see both sides...

On Lazard's side, he's been a good dude and probably reached his max potential (we will see) and if, heaven forbid, he gets hurt..he's just looking out for himself. If you're Lazard, you also see that MVS, a guy that you/Lazard have arguably OUTPLAYED and OUTPERFORMED just got $10MM/annually

So he may be thinking, shoot why can't I come close to that? lol. I feel that

On the Packers FO side, you have to be 100% real here and see it as a business and potential. While Lazard is a good dude and hasn't complained, he is NOT going to confuse anyone with Watson or Watkins. Watson and Watkins are just more talented and, presumed if they can get the playbook, "better". This isn't a shot at Lazard, but just the reality of playing in the NFL. These are world class athletes and talents, and Sammy Watkins and Watson are just more talented to be 100% honest. So if you're going to pay someone, you probably would rather pay these guys. You can't really pay for loyalty or tenure these days, and it's really not a smart business decision to do that...

Ultimately, it's all relative though, it does come down to PRODUCTION. If Lazard puts up 80/1000/10+ this year, then he has earned himself a nice payday.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I am not going to project what I think this news will be value wise, but I do think we hear that Lazard isn't going anywhere for more than just this year.

Just the 1 year, but who knows, maybe they will work out an extension before the year is up. My guess is that the Packers like what they have in the 3-4 young guys and want to wait to see how guys like Lazard and Watkins play this season before committing too much money to them.

Poor Allen, he missed out on some fun team bonding at OTA's! I might have to take that back, was that him right at the end of the clip?

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

 

[tynimiller]

Just the 1 year, but who knows, maybe they will work out an extension before the year is up. My guess is that the Packers like what they have in the 3-4 young guys and want to wait to see how guys like Lazard and Watkins play this season before committing too much money to them.

Poor Allen, he missed out on some fun team bonding at OTA's! I might have to take that back, was that him right at the end of the clip?

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

It's a gamble I'm not a fan of. Personally I'd have done all I could to perhaps do a $7M or so a year two year deal to keep him here while Watson and Doubs maturation happens. Honestly you have four years of rookie years with both of them, I see no problem ensuring Lazard is here for half those years or even through those end so the timing of investments to WRs lines up. I prefer overlap if possible but I get it. My hunch is GB didn't want to go much higher than the tender and Lazard probably wanted unreasonably high maybe.