Packers sign Devin Funchess

[Pokerbrat2000]

I think he could end up being a very Fun-Chess piece for Aaron~

 

[HardRightEdge]

Here's a thread on ol' Scrum Diddly Funchess from the best in the biz, Ben Fennell:

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

He brings a physical component to the receiving group that was previously lacking. He ain't Deebo Samuel but he brings some of that to physicality to the party. Then there's the injury history....

 

[gopkrs]

I'm not sure what you mean since the QB is always throwing to a spot

Maybe it is just a different way of looking at the same thing. Eg., this just sticks in my mind. Don't remember who or even what team. But I think it was like 3rd and 3. A RB comes out of the backfield and runs a short 4 yard out to the right. The QB throws the ball about a stride too far. So was the QB throwing to a spot where the back should have been? I mean, the QB is looking right at the guy. Sees where he is. But the play calls for a particular spot. I see it more as leading the receiver based on the speed and situation of the receiver rather than throwing to a spot. For me, leading a receiver on a play is not throwing to a spot but rather judging where the receiver is going to be. Throwing to a spot is more of a decision to just throw the ball to a place based on practice and the plan of that play. Like a fade in the endzone. Or a Unitas to Berry out. You can't just throw to spots all the time. You have to throw to the man. And that man should be allowed (where we disagree) to break off his route and get open if he sees an opening. There is a huge upside in that imho.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Maybe it is just a different way of looking at the same thing. Eg., this just sticks in my mind. Don't remember who or even what team. But I think it was like 3rd and 3. A RB comes out of the backfield and runs a short 4 yard out to the right. The QB throws the ball about a stride too far. So was the QB throwing to a spot where the back should have been? I mean, the QB is looking right at the guy. Sees where he is. But the play calls for a particular spot. I see it more as leading the receiver based on the speed and situation of the receiver rather than throwing to a spot. For me, leading a receiver on a play is not throwing to a spot but rather judging where the receiver is going to be. Throwing to a spot is more of a decision to just throw the ball to a place based on practice and the plan of that play. Like a fade in the endzone. Or a Unitas to Berry out. You can't just throw to spots all the time. You have to throw to the man. And that man should be allowed (where we disagree) to break off his route and get open if he sees an opening. There is a huge upside in that imho.

I don't get it. Rare is the throw that the receiver is not moving, maybe the occasional short zone sit down. Nearly all throws are leading throws to a moving receiver so they are throws to a leading spot. Even a "throw the receiver open" toss, where the committment to throw is just before or at the break, is a leading throw to a spot.

No quarterback is perfect. In your example, that 4 yard pass overthrow could be either the QBs fault or the receiver's fault. Hard to judge without looking at actual cases. Either way, the QB is throwing to a spot. He may miss it, he may misperceive where it should be, he might be throwing off balance under duress, or sidearm to fit it around a D-Lineman, or he may be trying to squeeze into a less than optimal passing lane but the only one he's got.

Rodgers has demonstrated some evidently dismal touch over some stretches on screens and short checkdowns, more prominantly when he was still proclaimed the GOAT. It just goes to show, some flaws are not perceived until you fall out of love. Sh*t happens. That play you seem to remember may have been a Rodgers throw. There have been several over the years.

But this stuff is not relative. If you shrug your shoulders and say, "that could be the QBs fault or the reciever's, so who can tell and what's the point?", that would be a mistake.

The point would be to see what a QB does regularly and sucessfully with one receiver vs. the others where he does not. That should tell you something about the receivers.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Maybe it is just a different way of looking at the same thing. Eg., this just sticks in my mind. Don't remember who or even what team. But I think it was like 3rd and 3. A RB comes out of the backfield and runs a short 4 yard out to the right. The QB throws the ball about a stride too far. So was the QB throwing to a spot where the back should have been? I mean, the QB is looking right at the guy. Sees where he is. But the play calls for a particular spot. I see it more as leading the receiver based on the speed and situation of the receiver rather than throwing to a spot. For me, leading a receiver on a play is not throwing to a spot but rather judging where the receiver is going to be. Throwing to a spot is more of a decision to just throw the ball to a place based on practice and the plan of that play. Like a fade in the endzone. Or a Unitas to Berry out. You can't just throw to spots all the time. You have to throw to the man. And that man should be allowed (where we disagree) to break off his route and get open if he sees an opening. There is a huge upside in that imho.

A simple roll out and screen, while still a timing pass is maybe one that you can say "oh, he led him to much or he threw at his feet, etc." but that is just too simple of an example of what most throws are, to say "you can't just throw to spots all the time".

Much of what we see on Sundays is practiced over and over, away from the TV cameras. So much of what we don't see is the timing of routes that both QB and receiver are practicing and working on. Now as a TV coach, I can watch a play unfold and watch as a pass is thrown a yard in front of a receiver that to me is wide open and streaking across the field. "Damn it, the QB missed a wide open guy!" I scream. Now, I play that film back and watch the WR through his entire route. I see something that I had missed in real time, on his cut, the receiver slipped and slowed down, he never makes it to the spot that he and his QB practiced. The ball made it to the spot, but the receiver didn't.

Now in your mind, is seems like that is the QB's fault for not adjusting? However, when it comes to timing routes, that is the key word "timing". If either the QB or the receiver is late or early to the timed spot, chances are you have an incompletion or even worse, an interception. It is the Receivers job to navigate to the spot, it is the QB's job to navigate his way to a position on the field where he can safely throw to that spot, as well as quickly check to make sure a defender hasn't fully covered the route and if so, move to option 2.

Do receivers break off from their routes when Rodgers runs out of his primary reads and options, of course. Then it comes down to does Rodgers know where he will most likely find one of his guys and how much time does he have left to get rid of the ball. It is his receivers job at that point to try to get somewhere that they think Rodgers might be able to find them. These broken plays or scramble drills is where Aaron has thrived quite often, but only with receivers that he has established chemistry with, because both he and that receiver seem to know what the other is going to do.

Feels like you think this is sandlot football, where Rodgers just drops back and tries to find the guy who is the most wide open. That isn't the case. Guys are running routes and its Rodgers job to know each mans route, where he is suppose to be at any give time and then get that ball to the practiced spot. How do you think they are completing passes that are released before the receiver is even looking back and still running to his spot? Or how Mahomes throws a no look pass?

 

[gopkrs]

Yes, there are timing throws...a lot of them. Especially with the primary option. I think though, that with Adams, it is not always a timing throw. I think Adams gets open and Rodgers throws it to him. Not really to a spot as in a timing throw, but to where Adams gets open because of his quickness. But most importantly I think a receiver should be allowed to break off his route when he sees he can get open and won't be otherwise.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Yes, there are timing throws...a lot of them. Especially with the primary option. I think though, that with Adams, it is not always a timing throw. I think Adams gets open and Rodgers throws it to him. Not really to a spot as in a timing throw, but to where Adams gets open because of his quickness. But most importantly I think a receiver should be allowed to break off his route when he sees he can get open and won't be otherwise.

There again you are relying on established chemistry between QB and receiver. Do you think #12 has that confidence in a rookie that gets jammed at the LOS, that the rookie is going to break his route and go inside, how far inside? I think that was the one of the frustrations for me last year in watching MVS and Allison, seemed like if they got moved off their route, they sort of gave up on the play.

I think Rodgers and Cobb, as well as Jordy were masters at improv. But again, that was from years of playing together and kind of knowing what each guy was going to be doing when a play broke down.

Your last premise of "I think a receiver should be allowed to break off his route when he sees he can get open and won't be otherwise", doesn't make sense. How would you as the QB know that you are breaking off your route, at what point are youbreaking it off and finally, where are you going now? I am picturing this and all I can picture is me on a field, with no defense rushing me and watching you running around and around until I finally say to myself "ok....I think he is going to end up THERE...and throw the ball to that spot".

 

[HardRightEdge]

Yes, there are timing throws...a lot of them. Especially with the primary option. I think though, that with Adams, it is not always a timing throw. I think Adams gets open and Rodgers throws it to him. Not really to a spot as in a timing throw, but to where Adams gets open because of his quickness. But most importantly I think a receiver should be allowed to break off his route when he sees he can get open and won't be otherwise.

I don't know why timing throws are any different. The QB has an expectation of where the receiver is going and the receiver needs to go there and that's the spot the QB is throwing to. That is not a line on a playbook page. The receiver has to read what the defender is doing and get to his spot using one technique on one play and a different one on another. Can he just break clean on the route on an off coverage? Will he drive outside to an inside coverage before breaking it off inside? Will he drive ******* press coverage, arm-off the guy, and drive back to the spot? And that spot will vary within tolerances along with the timing.

The receiver needs to execute the technique as he has learned or been trained that the QB will expect. Ever see a short timing throw mistimed or slightly off target? Or the receiver going to a spot a yard short of the sticks? Mismatches in reading the defense/defender and executing technique are often the cause.

Receivers will ad lib and break off a route. But they have to do it in a way that the QB will expect against a given the defense/defender. There isn't time for surprises. This is all internalized and happens in split seconds. If a receiver breaks off route in an unexpeted way, the QB has to do a mental reset and there isn't the time for that.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

This all goes back to why I get my undies in a bunch when these so called internet analysts take slowed down, birds eye footage and circle all of the so called open receivers that the QB didn't throw to. What he doesn't want to tell you is that receiver A slipped on his route. Receiver B ran the wrong Route, receiver C is actually pretty well out of the play and if the QB tries to force the ball to him, the S can easily come in and get an INT. What he also fails to mention is that the QB isn't looking at all of this from a birds eye view or at 1/16th speed.

 

[HardRightEdge]

This all goes back to why I get my undies in a bunch when these so called internet analysts take slowed down, birds eye footage and circle all of the so called open receivers that the QB didn't throw to. What he doesn't want to tell you is that receiver A slipped on his route. Receiver B ran the wrong Route, receiver C is actually pretty well out of the play and if the QB tries to force the ball to him, the S can easily come in and get an INT. What he also fails to mention is that the QB isn't looking at all of this from a birds eye view or at 1/16th speed.

I go back to the fact that there is a point where a generalized view of the field off the snap, turns pretty quickly to focus on the first object of opportunity. The defense is scanned, a safety is looked off, the the primary target is picked: there's a point where the QB cannot possibly see the whole field and will not see an open receiver out of his field of view. To repeat, it happens in every game with every QB.

I can guarantee you that on that crazy day when Brees completed 29 of 30 passes, with a lot of ***** and dunks since the average completion was 10.6 yards, there was an instance, and maybe more than one, where some guy got a clean break off the line and downfield and Brees "missed him".

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I go back to the fact that there is a point where a generalized view of the field off the snap, turns pretty quickly to focus on the first object of opportunity. The defense is scanned, a safety is looked off, the the primary target is picked: there's a point where the QB cannot possibly see the whole field and will not see an open receiver out of his field of view. To repeat, it happens in every game with every QB.

I can guarantee you that on that crazy day when Brees completed 29 of 30 passes, with a lot of ***** and dunks since the average completion was 10.6 yards, there was an instance, and maybe more than one, where some guy got a clean break off the line and downfield and Brees "missed him".

Right, but this doesn't change the fact that Aaron Rodgers will not throw to open receivers if he doesn't trust them.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

My concern with relying on a rookie to make a substantial impact (and by "substantial" let's say 55 receptions for 650+ yards) is that it's really tough to get that kind of production reliably and receiver is a real weakness on the current roster. Last year's offense was underwhelming and really lacked anything resembling a #2 receiving threat on offense.

The chance for the team to get a decent free agent receiver has passed which is why I'm so hopeful they will draft a receiver in the first round. A physically elite WR is the kind of guy that the Packers could really use to open up the offense and drafting a guy like that after round 1 means that you're drafting a project. There should be a couple of guys at the bottom third of round 1 that could provide an impact in their rookie seasons AND would add the element of deep speed that this offense is currently missing.

Don't get me wrong, I'm concerned about the Packers not being able to draft a wide receiver having an immediate impact as well but with a deep draft class at the position I like their chances this year. The free agent class was underwhelming, therefore I'm fine with Gutekunst not spending a huge amount of money on a veteran. He should have upgraded tight end that way though.

If Gute ends up waiting until the 4th round to grab his first WR and that 4th WR is a former QB/basketball star, with only 1 year of decent college football under his belt, it tells me one of 3 things.

1. Our current WR situation was a lot better than I thought it was.
2. The draft WAS incredibly deep with quality WR's and he is picking one of them in the 5th round or later.
3. Gute is fricking looney and needs his head examined.

If Gutekunst agrees with you about #1 than #3 is automatically proven to be correct as well.

 

[Dantés]

Don't get me wrong, I'm concerned about the Packers not being able to draft a wide receiver having an immediate impact as well but with a deep draft class at the position I like their chances this year. The free agent class was underwhelming, therefore I'm fine with Gutekunst not spending a huge amount of money on a veteran. He should have upgraded tight end that way though.

This ^^^ @Pokerbrat2000 was the sort of thing that I had in mind when I said that I didn't really think many people were taking the course that "just draft a WR and all will be fine, for sure." Just FYI.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

This ^^^ @Pokerbrat2000 was the sort of thing that I had in mind when I said that I didn't really think many people were taking the course that "just draft a WR and all will be fine, for sure." Just FYI.

Oh I get it. Some like yourself and Captain I think had healthy expectations for the offense. Which was to sign a top FA TE, stay out of a weak WR FA market and grab a WR at the top of the draft. I was only "one notch above" that in my desires, I also wanted a mid level FA signing in addition to what you 2 wanted. Gute didn't sign a top TE, but signed Funchess, so none of the 3 of us (and some others got our wish). But I will say, I felt a bit better when Funchess was signed.

All that said, I still stand by my original observation, for those fans banking on a rookie to immediately step in and make a big difference, be careful with your bets. Is it reasonable to expect them to contribute? Sure, but I think it is also reasonable to expect them to struggle somewhat their first season or two.

I don't think many would argue against the fact that the Packers needed a big upgrade at WR and TE over what we saw last season, have they done that yet? No, not IMO. Will adding Funchess, hopeful development of some of the younger guys and adding a high pick rookie be enough to make a difference, I hope so, but I am not betting on it.

 

[Dantés]

Oh I get it. Some like yourself and Captain I think had healthy expectations for the offense. Which was to sign a top FA TE, stay out of a weak WR FA market and grab a WR at the top of the draft. I was only "one notch above" that in my desires, I also wanted a mid level FA signing in addition to what you 2 wanted. Gute didn't sign a top TE, but signed Funchess, so none of the 3 of us (and some others got our wish). But I will say, I felt a bit better when Funchess was signed.

All that said, I still stand by my original observation, for those fans banking on a rookie to immediately step in and make a big difference, be careful with your bets. Is it reasonable to expect them to contribute? Sure, but I think it is also reasonable to expect them to struggle somewhat their first season or two.

I don't think many would argue against the fact that the Packers needed a big upgrade at WR and TE over what we saw last season, have they done that yet? No, not IMO. Will adding Funchess, hopeful development of some of the younger guys and adding a high pick rookie be enough to make a difference, I hope so, but I am not betting on it.

That all seems reasonable to me. I cited Captain's post because he was one of that "camp" you had referred to the other day.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

That all seems reasonable to me. I cited Captain's post because he was one of that "camp" you had referred to the other day.

"that Camp" I was referring to was more in regards to the level of confidence that some have in what a Rookie WR will provide the offense. I have less confidence than you and Captain have in regards to just how much of an immediate impact a rookie WR will have on this offense. However, I do think you both were correct in thinking that a top FA TE might have helped increase the possibility of a rookie having a more productive/impactful season.

The interesting part about production VS impactful. A rookie WR could put up decent stats, lets say 60/800/4, which seems nice and productive for a rookie. But if we aren't getting much out of the TE position or any other WR not named Adams, I don't know just how impactful those stats would be.

 

[Dantés]

"that Camp" I was referring to was more in regards to the level of confidence that some have in what a Rookie WR will provide the offense. I have less confidence than you and Captain have in regards to just how much of an immediate impact a rookie WR will have on this offense. However, I do think you both were correcting in thinking that a top FA TE might have helped increase the possibility of a rookie having a more productive/impactful season.

The interesting part about production VS impactful. A rookie WR could put up decent stats, lets say 60/800/4, which seems nice and productive for a rookie. But if we aren't getting much out of the TE position or any other WR not named Adams, I don't know just how impactful those stats would be.

The production vs. impact issue is why I've tried to talk in terms of roles, not depth chart positions.

People will say you can't count on a rookie WR being a "starter" and maybe they're wrong and maybe they're right. Honestly, I don't care. That label doesn't change anything on the field.

What the Packers needs are certain skill-sets integrated in the offense. Specifically, they need play making ability after the catch and they need consistency moving the chains on 3rd downs. Can they find those things in a rookie? The answer is yes... but you've got to pick the right ones .

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

People will say you can't count on a rookie WR being a "starter" and maybe they're wrong and maybe they're right. Honestly, I don't care. That label doesn't change anything on the field.

Agreed. As a matter of fact, given what our current depth chart looks like at WR, I would be really disappointed if we use a first or second round pick on a WR and by the start of the season he isn't the #2 or #3 WR. However, like we both agree, that has nothing to do with his eventual impact during the season. MVS and Allison were viewed as our #2 and #3 WR's to start 2019, we saw how well that translated into production from the position.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

The production vs. impact issue is why I've tried to talk in terms of roles, not depth chart positions.

People will say you can't count on a rookie WR being a "starter" and maybe they're wrong and maybe they're right. Honestly, I don't care. That label doesn't change anything on the field.

What the Packers needs are certain skill-sets integrated in the offense. Specifically, they need play making ability after the catch and they need consistency moving the chains on 3rd downs. Can they find those things in a rookie? The answer is yes... but you've got to pick the right ones .

I would say that, regarding WR, ideally the Packers would get a WR with elite speed, good route running, and reliable hands. Those are REALLY hard to find after the first 15 or so picks in most drafts. Because of the depth of WR in this draft, you might be able to get one in the mid-20s. If they don't get one of the top 6 or so WRs then the next tier has some good route runners with reliable hands, but that still leaves the team relying on MVS or ESB as their deep threat (not ideal but not terrible).

 

[Dantés]

I would say that, regarding WR, ideally the Packers would get a WR with elite speed, good route running, and reliable hands. Those are REALLY hard to find after the first 15 or so picks in most drafts. Because of the depth of WR in this draft, you might be able to get one in the mid-20s. If they don't get one of the top 6 or so WRs then the next tier has some good route runners with reliable hands, but that still leaves the team relying on MVS or ESB as their deep threat (not ideal but not terrible).

There are really good WR prospects of all shapes and styles pretty deep into this class. If speed is what you wanted after the top tier of WR, you could certainly still find it.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Funchess will wear #11 for the Packers. I think #17 was already taken.

 

[tynimiller]

I would say that, regarding WR, ideally the Packers would get a WR with elite speed, good route running, and reliable hands. Those are REALLY hard to find after the first 15 or so picks in most drafts. Because of the depth of WR in this draft, you might be able to get one in the mid-20s. If they don't get one of the top 6 or so WRs then the next tier has some good route runners with reliable hands, but that still leaves the team relying on MVS or ESB as their deep threat (not ideal but not terrible).

I am a big time fan of this WR class...but even I'd argue there is not a single WR with "elite speed, good route running and reliable hands" in my opinion. However, I've always pictured "elite" speed as sub 4.45 time. The only receivers to do that are:

Ruggs - 4.27 (I would not call his route tree good)
Quez Watkins - 4.35 (I had to put his whole name so you know he isn't a top prospect)
Darnell Mooney - 4.38 (many here won't even know his name)
Denzel Mims - 4.38 (Again like Ruggs I'm not christening his route abilities as good)
Antonio Gibson - 4.39 (Jack of all trades and positions...but big question marks as to what precisely he is and will do)
Devin Duvernay - 4.39 (He is my MVS with slightly better route abilities...but still not good IMO)
Chase Claypool - 4.42 (Big NOTRE DAME fan, this cat DOES NOT play this fast though...his route tree is not as good as his body control against defenders)
Justin Jefferson - 4.43 (His route abilities isn't what got him open, it was who he lined up against and having Burrow that did)
John Hightower - 4.43 (Not the savvy route tree and hands are questions to some)


Jeudy/Coulter/Thomas all ran a 4.45 so right at the cusp....which is why in my opinion the most put together top to bottom as far as measurables is Jeudy.

My WR Tiers this year are that I can recall offhand...I am sure I'm missing someone or could see sliding a 3 and 4 around some, AFTER TIER 1 no reason for order:

Tier 1

Jeudy
(gap)
Lamb

Tier 2
Ruggs
Mims
Aiyuk
Jefferson (LSU)
Reagor
Shenault
Higgins

Tier 3
Pittman
Edwards
Claypool
Hamler
Hill
Peoples-Jones
Jefferson (FLA)
Johnson (MIN)

Tier 4
Davis
Gandy-Golden
Proche
Duvernay
Cleveland
Bowden
Coulter
Johnson (TEX)
Hodgins
Cephus

 

[Sunshinepacker]

There are really good WR prospects of all shapes and styles pretty deep into this class. If speed is what you wanted after the top tier of WR, you could certainly still find it.

Yes, finding one or two traits is doable, finding all three (route-running, hands, speed) is much more difficult.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

I am a big time fan of this WR class...but even I'd argue there is not a single WR with "elite speed, good route running and reliable hands" in my opinion. However, I've always pictured "elite" speed as sub 4.45 time. The only receivers to do that are:

Ruggs - 4.27 (I would not call his route tree good)
Quez Watkins - 4.35 (I had to put his whole name so you know he isn't a top prospect)
Darnell Mooney - 4.38 (many here won't even know his name)
Denzel Mims - 4.38 (Again like Ruggs I'm not christening his route abilities as good)
Antonio Gibson - 4.39 (Jack of all trades and positions...but big question marks as to what precisely he is and will do)
Devin Duvernay - 4.39 (He is my MVS with slightly better route abilities...but still not good IMO)
Chase Claypool - 4.42 (Big NOTRE DAME fan, this cat DOES NOT play this fast though...his route tree is not as good as his body control against defenders)
Justin Jefferson - 4.43 (His route abilities isn't what got him open, it was who he lined up against and having Burrow that did)
John Hightower - 4.43 (Not the savvy route tree and hands are questions to some)


Jeudy/Coulter/Thomas all ran a 4.45 so right at the cusp....which is why in my opinion the most put together top to bottom as far as measurables is Jeudy.

My WR Tiers this year are that I can recall offhand...I am sure I'm missing someone or could see sliding a 3 and 4 around some, AFTER TIER 1 no reason for order:

Tier 1

Jeudy
(gap)
Lamb

Tier 2
Ruggs
Mims
Aiyuk
Jefferson (LSU)
Reagor
Shenault
Higgins

Tier 3
Pittman
Edwards
Claypool
Hamler
Hill
Peoples-Jones
Jefferson (FLA)
Johnson (MIN)

Tier 4
Davis
Gandy-Golden
Proche
Duvernay
Cleveland
Bowden
Coulter
Johnson (TEX)
Hodgins
Cephus

I like your tiers, I would just say that Ruggs is probably in tier by himself between 1 & 2 (call it tier 1.5?) because he's more raw than the top 2 but has a higher ceiling, and I would move Pittman into Tier 2.

I would say Jeudy qualifies as high-end speed and both he and Lamb have VERY elite movement abilities that others in the class lack. Mims and Jefferson (LSU) both show all three though Jefferson isn't very strong against press coverage yet. You say you wouldn't call Mims route running "good", I would suggest you read/watch his performance at the Senior Bowl. Also, Matt Waldman has a pretty good video showing how his route running has improved over his years at Baylor.

https://mattwaldmanrsp.com/2019/11/14/matt-waldmans-rsp-film-room-no-188-wr-denzel-mims-baylor/

 

[tynimiller]

I like your tiers, I would just say that Ruggs is probably in tier by himself between 1 & 2 (call it tier 1.5?) because he's more raw than the top 2 but has a higher ceiling, and I would move Pittman into Tier 2.

I would say Jeudy qualifies as high-end speed and both he and Lamb have VERY elite movement abilities that others in the class lack. Mims and Jefferson (LSU) both show all three though Jefferson isn't very strong against press coverage yet. You say you wouldn't call Mims route running "good", I would suggest you read/watch his performance at the Senior Bowl. Also, Matt Waldman has a pretty good video showing how his route running has improved over his years at Baylor.

https://mattwaldmanrsp.com/2019/11/14/matt-waldmans-rsp-film-room-no-188-wr-denzel-mims-baylor/

I'm critical on route running and its possible the posed question I leaned "good" more towards elite as well. Mims would beat out a lot of Tier 2 guys if not all in route running category arguably, so don't think I don't like him, I do.

Here's the crazy thing even further...in my opinion I bet around 70-80% of the WRs I have listed in Tier1, 2 and 3 will be contributors within their first couple years in the NFL (barring injuries of course and if Covid cancels this year). That is INSANE to think of how strong this group really is. While IMO their is 1 or 2 truly "elite" WRs...there are some bonafide STUDS and rather deep.