1. Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!
    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers.

    You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Sign Up or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!
  2. Announcement is LIVE: Read the Forum Post

Receivers coach likes Driver — maybe better than Walker

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by Zero2Cool, Apr 30, 2006.

  1. DePack

    DePack Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    3,904
    Ratings:
    +1
    Re: Receivers coach likes Driver — maybe better than Walke

    Logical....well thought out....fair.....Are you lost son?
     
  2. SuperRat

    SuperRat Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2005
    Messages:
    617
    Ratings:
    +0
    Look at it this way, has TO made any team he has gone to actually better thus far? Did he make the Ravens better? No he refused to go there when traded. Did he make the Eagles better? No they did the exact same the year before except they got past the NFC Championship his first year there, and that wasn't due to him because he was hurt. Then the next year he most definitely didn't make them better. Whose to say he will actually make the Cowboys better, or any team that could of gotten him?
     
  3. paxvogel

    paxvogel Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2005
    Messages:
    501
    Ratings:
    +0
    Really like your pictures Tromadz, our linebacker corp is going to be incredible.
    My concern about our receiving corp is we have too many guys with the same skills and no real deep threat. I was disappointed we traded out of getting Chad Jackson the WR in round two. He would give us the deep threat we need. Unlikely to find a quality deep threat after June 1, teams keep them. Blackmon will be a CB in my opinion, will only be a WR in emergency situation.
     
  4. SuperRat

    SuperRat Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2005
    Messages:
    617
    Ratings:
    +0
    McCarthy has said that the team is going to a more pure west coast offense. That means he isn't looking for a deep threat over the top receiver. He is looking for good route runners that can catch the ball and get yards on the ground. That is exactly why he took Jennings, known for being a good route runner with a yards after catch average of around 15 yards, over Jackson, who's weakness is route running, with a yards after catch average of around 10 yards.
     
  5. digsthepack

    digsthepack Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    2,486
    Ratings:
    +0
    Signing Chad Jackson as WR in a true WCO is on par with signing Bubba Franks to be a field stretching TE.

    Talented, yes, but the wrong talents for what the will be asked to do on Sunday.

    There is a reason Jackson was available at 35.
     
  6. GakkofNorway

    GakkofNorway Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,249
    Ratings:
    +0
    Alright, some of you guys hasn't got it yet.

    The system the Packers are going to run next season is a cultivated west coast offense. This more or less means a horizontal passing game.

    Let's see what kind of traits a system like this needs:

    - Precise routerunning
    - Physicality
    - Blocking abillity

    Green Bay has a slow turf and harsh weather conditions, when the tundra freezes speed is basicly neutralized and the more physical and strong WRs thrive in these conditions.

    Chad Jacksons strenghts are downfield threat, body control and speed. Perfect for an indoor fast track vertical passing game, which we don't have. He isn't very good at running routes, and this would cause interceptions in our west coast offense passing scheme.

    Greg Jennings is almost as fast as Jackson, but in addition he runs razorsharp routes, he is a good blocker and pretty physical even though he is not exceptionally big.

    Like some guy said, Sherman got obsessed with bringing speed to Green Bay without thinking about the conditions we have at Lambeau, where speed isn't that important. This caused us to start winning dome games, but losing outdoor and home games...
     
  7. krd005

    krd005 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    139
    Ratings:
    +0
    so what you are saying is that if I am fast on good turf I automaticially become slower in bad conditions........for fun I'll say I agree.


    Then

    if I am slower than most on a fast track, don't I become slower on a messy track as well????

    So........

    If you are fast to start with don'y you keep the advantage????
     
  8. krd005

    krd005 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    139
    Ratings:
    +0
    Answer....... YES YOU DO

    As my college coach used to say.........

    YOU CAN'T TEACH SPEED
     
  9. GakkofNorway

    GakkofNorway Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,249
    Ratings:
    +0
    Read this

     
  10. longtimefan

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    16,743
    Ratings:
    +2,983
    I have a example of this...

    In playoffs in high school..We had a guy named Floyd Heard on our team..Floyd was back then ( 1985) the FASTEST guy in Wisconsin..Was breaking track records left and right and later on even was ranked #1 in the world in track..He averaged like 9 yards PER CARRY and over 11 yards per catch.

    Anyways during this game it had rained all day long and the field was nasty and full of mud...No matter what Floyd could not get his feet going, different cleats and shoes never helped...We ended up losing the game..

    I saw Floyd at my high school reunion last year and a bunch of us on the team were talking and Floyd point blank said.."I never been so slow, a bad field takes away the speed that I had"

    Say it was high school I do not care, point is still the same..Field conditions do affect how fast a player is..

    Jennings has better cutting ablity then Jackson, so that might help him on fields that are slow..
     
  11. GakkofNorway

    GakkofNorway Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,249
    Ratings:
    +0
    wonderful longtimefan, you got my points :D
     
  12. krd005

    krd005 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    139
    Ratings:
    +0
    but the slow also get slower........don't they
     
  13. GakkofNorway

    GakkofNorway Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,249
    Ratings:
    +0
    no, they are usually bigger, stronger and more surefooted, which gives them an advantage in hard conditions.
     
  14. krd005

    krd005 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    139
    Ratings:
    +0
    so it affects one guy and not the other??????????? But how can this be? Being stronger has nothing to due with speed.

    If anything the fast guy on offense gains a bogger advantage in crappy weather. They know where to go and when, while a defender has to go on movement and react
     
  15. GakkofNorway

    GakkofNorway Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,249
    Ratings:
    +0
    Again, did you read this?

    .
     
  16. krd005

    krd005 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    139
    Ratings:
    +0
    I believe TO beat us in a playoff game one year at SF. And looking back I would say he made them better

    Phili w/o TO would not have made the SB. He was unstoppable before getting hurt. The next year the team had some problems esp at QB(I think he is the most overrated QB in the NFL)

    Would you want to play in Balt.?

    The Cowbaoys are better with him

    Ignore the fact that people don't like him as a person. I don't like him, but if I want to win I want him on my team. One man can't destroy a whole team. IMPOSSIBLE
     
  17. GakkofNorway

    GakkofNorway Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,249
    Ratings:
    +0
    yet TO did it two times
     
  18. longtimefan

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    16,743
    Ratings:
    +2,983
    That is why I think they took Jennings and not Jackson...Jennings has better cutting ablity, which in turn will let him get down field faster when being pressed..If it was just a straight out fly and no one pressing at the line Jackson might be the better choice, but as we all know that hardly happens..



    I have posted that a few times but seems people have not seen it, or understand it..
     
  19. krd005

    krd005 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    139
    Ratings:
    +0
    Sure I read it.....who wrote it, Vince???? I also think those two were pretty good on good conditions also. So again I say you either have what it takes or you don't to be a stud WO in the NFL
     
  20. SuperRat

    SuperRat Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2005
    Messages:
    617
    Ratings:
    +0
    I wasn't counting San Francisco because it was the team that drafted him and developed him and I was only really thinking of him and his attitude as a superstar receiver, but yes he did make San Francisco better.

    Philly without TO won every playoff game that season up till the Super Bowl without him because he was hurt. He was a big part of the team in the regular season but I say they probably would of made the playoffs without him. It is yet to be seen if the Cowboys are better without him. I agree that one man can't completely destroy a whole team, but one man can mess with the chemistry of a team and create major problems, and TO has shown that he can do this.
     
  21. cheesey

    cheesey Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Ratings:
    +3
    Re: Receivers coach likes Driver — maybe better than Walke

    He CAN be a negative distraction that messes up a team though. You don't think his crap in SF or Philly caused tension in the locker room? Your trying to prepare for a game, and you have "the mouth of the south" yapping away at how great he is, and how everyone else sux..............yes, T.O. has talent, but he's a pain in the butt for sure. New England didn't have any "stars" on the team, but won 3 SB's with a TEAM approach. They watched each other's backs........not STABBED each other in the back.
     
  22. GakkofNorway

    GakkofNorway Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,249
    Ratings:
    +0
    word cheesemaster.
     
  23. krd005

    krd005 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    139
    Ratings:
    +0
    Me myself give me TO and see what happens!

    Better to ask forgiveness then to ask for premission!!!

    TO is a stud. I don't like him but he is a stud.

    TO didn't ruin the teams he was with the team had issues that ruined the team
     
  24. digsthepack

    digsthepack Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    2,486
    Ratings:
    +0
    And Jennings is an accomplished blocker....something not typically found in ACC and SEC WRs.
     
  25. DePack

    DePack Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    3,904
    Ratings:
    +1
    krd where you been? I took it long and hard in the can when I suggested we sign T.O. I'm still a little sore :lol:
     

Share This Page