Wide Receiver Options

Don Barclay

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 20, 2016
Messages
116
Reaction score
66
Adams will be sorely missed, he’s like losing Scottie Pippen, but it’s Michael Jordan that fueled those Championships and as long as Rodgers is standing we’re going to Win more than we lose. Who’s the next Dennis Rodman? Possibly our Defense? Go up and get that ball and get it back to Michael

Pretty sure MJ never won without Pippen, right?
 

PikeBadger

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jan 19, 2013
Messages
4,664
Reaction score
679
You fail to understand that two receivers combining to put up the same numbers as Adams doesn't equal his production.



It's mind-boggling how many fans truly believe Rodgers just has to target whoever is out there playing receiver expecting the production will be on par with past seasons regardless of the talent level of the pass catchers.
Meh, your mind is so easily boggled.

I don't necessarily believe that so called production has to come from one facet of the offense. I'd rather see us run the ball more and operate on shorter drives. I could care less about WR yardage accumulation totals.
 
OP
OP
Dantés

Dantés

Gute Loot
Joined
Jan 21, 2017
Messages
11,102
Reaction score
2,024
The Packers passing offense has been successful without Adams with Rodgers targeting running backs on more than half of his attempts. I guess if the offense needs to rely on that for an entire season teams will be able to figure out a way to contain it.

As a side note, if you expect Rodgers' completion percentage to drop you understand that the passing offense won't be as effective even if he throws for the same amount of yards, don't you???



Rodgers actually over-targeted running backs when Adams wasn't playing. Maybe we should get rid of them as well.

I don't care if the Packers feature a 1,000 yard receiver either but it doesn't make sense to solely look at the total amount of passing yards at all.



It doesn't make sense to solely look at the total amount of passing yards at all.

What if Rodgers throws some pick 6s because he expects his receiver to be in a different spot in games the team loses by seven or less points? What if the offense has to settle for field goals more often in the red zone instead of scoring touchdowns?

As a side note, I'm not sour about Adams being gone at all. I understand the Packers didn't have any other choice and think Gutekunst did a good job of getting as much in return for him as possible. In addition I'm well aware not having to pay Adams made it a lot easier to improve other positions on the roster.

It's naive to not be worried about the pass catchers on the team at this point though.



You know that I normally have a ton of respect for your opinion but that post is utter BS.



Just for the record, the Packers could have made it work to sign all of the players they did even with Adams around for this season. It's true the cap situation would have been way worse than it's now in future years though. In addition they would have been able to draft only one of Walker, Wyatt and Watson.

It's hard to argue with a lot of this.

But I think the main counter-point is this. While you're right that targeting running backs 12-15 times per game isn't a recipe for a success over an entire season, the larger point is that when Adams was out, LaFleur schemed around it effectively. So I can imagine him continuing to do so in creative ways, not limited only to using RB's in the passing game.

However, this will double up the importance of the offensive gameplans being well-conceived and effective. Because the schematic approach becomes all that much more important when you lack differentiating personnel.

My guess is that the passing game will take a step backwards, the running game a step forwards, and the defense will be elite.
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
3,698
Reaction score
558
I am happy for the way things turned out, but I don't think this is necessarily true.

The raw production could be similar without the actual efficiency/effectiveness of the offense being as good.

Then again, the reverse is also possible as well. But I don't think it's as simple as piecing the yardage back together. Adams brought a lot of unique skills to the offense and they need to figure out how to replace them or find ways to be effective without them.
Good point. The Packers put up a lot of passing yards when Lynn ****ey was QB. Those teams sometimes made the playoffs and then exited quickly.

It comes down to 1) winning the North, 2) winning the NFCCG and 3) winning the SB. I'm concerned about the WR/TE group right now. I expect I'll feel differently as TC and the season progress. This is a good team.
It's hard to argue with a lot of this.

But I think the main counter-point is this. While you're right that targeting running backs 12-15 times per game isn't a recipe for a success over an entire season, the larger point is that when Adams was out, LaFleur schemed around it effectively. So I can imagine him continuing to do so in creative ways, not limited only to using RB's in the passing game.

However, this will double up the importance of the offensive gameplans being well-conceived and effective. Because the schematic approach becomes all that much more important when you lack differentiating personnel.

My guess is that the passing game will take a step backwards, the running game a step forwards, and the defense will be elite.
Good summary. Anything else is a guess.
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2014
Messages
8,587
Reaction score
2,189
However, this will double up the importance of the offensive gameplans being well-conceived and effective. Because the schematic approach becomes all that much more important when you lack differentiating personnel.
This. and I could also see a bi-product of not relying on 1 person to produce 36% of the reception yardage. That would be in being far less predictable. Which speaks to that scheme.

That argument isn’t a slight on a great WR. It’s more-so a slight on the game plan execution (or lack of maximum execution against our opponent).

For a Defense. There might be nothing worse than seeing multiples of various players making splash plays. It’s like.. who do you cover? It gets mentally demoralizing.
 
Last edited:

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
3,698
Reaction score
558
This. and I could also see a bi-product of not relying on 1 person to produce 36% of the reception yardage. That would be in being far less predictable.

That argument isn’t a slight on a great WR. It’s more-so a slight on the game plan execution.
Yeah and Adams commanded double and triple coverage. That gives a few of these guys a chance to step up and shine as they'll mostly be facing single coverage in shorter passing situations.
 
OP
OP
Dantés

Dantés

Gute Loot
Joined
Jan 21, 2017
Messages
11,102
Reaction score
2,024
So in 2021, the Packers had...

402 pass completions on 593 pass attempts, 4315 passing yards, and 39 passing touchdowns.

446 rush attempts, 1900 rushing yards, and 13 rushing touchdowns.

Here's one way you could project a 2022 season in which the passing game decreases and the rushing game increases:

Passing:

-A. Rodgers/J. Love: 357/525, 68%, 7.6 YPA, 4015 yards, 32 TD

Rushing:

-A. Dillon: 210 attempts, 4.5 YPA, 945 yards, 10 TD
-A. Jones: 195 attempts, 4.8 YPA, 936 yards, 6 TD
-Misc: 75 attempts, 3.5 YPA, 262 yards, 2 TD
-Total: 480 attempts, 4.46 YPA, 2143 yards, 18 TD

Receiving:

-A. Jones: 65 receptions, 488 yards, 7.5 YPR, 4 TD
-A. Lazard: 50 receptions, 650 yards, 13.0 YPR, 8 TD
-R. Cobb/A. Rodgers: 50 receptions, 500 yards, 10 YPR, 4 TD
-R. Tonyan/T. Davis: 45 receptions, 495 yards, 11.0 YPR, 6 TD
-S. Watkins: 37 receptions, 481 yards, 13 YPR, 3 TD
-C. Watson: 35 receptions, 613 yards, 17.5 YPR, 3 TD
-A. Dillon: 30 receptions, 225 yards, 7.5 YPR, TD
-J. Deguara: 25 receptions, 263 yards, 10.5 YPR, 2 TD
-R. Doubs: 20 receptions, 300 yards, 15 YPR, TD
-Total: 357 receptions, 4015 yards, 11.2 YPR, 32 TD's
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2014
Messages
8,587
Reaction score
2,189
Yeah and Adams commanded double and triple coverage. That gives a few of these guys a chance to step up and shine as they'll mostly be facing single coverage in shorter passing situations.
One thing I’ve noticed is our group of WR from the draft have an elevated YAC component to their game.
Just watch the film of Watson sometime. That guy explodes on near every catch for extra yardage. Don’t dare let him catch a pass running on a slant or he’ll absolutely punish you.

We thought he couldn’t do that against stellar completion and he goes to the Senior Bowl (top level competition) and boom! A 38 yarder. Loved seeing Doubs and Watson working opposite sides and playing well against a really good Defense.
I thought it was kinda a neat prognostication of events to follow. That and the fact that Doubs and Samori Sam :ninja: worked out together this offseason. Cmon.

Plus we’ve got a WR that has experience as a Field General. What’s the chances? :coffee:


 
Last edited:

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
3,698
Reaction score
558
One thing I’ve noticed is our group of WR from the draft have an elevated YAC component to their game.
Just watch the film of Watson sometime. That guy explodes on near every catch for extra yardage. Don’t dare let him catch a pass running on a slant or he’ll absolutely punish you.

We thought he couldn’t do that against stellar completion and he goes to the Senior Bowl (top level competition) and boom! A 38 yarder. Loved seeing Doubs and Watson working opposite sides and playing well against a really good Defense.
I thought it was kinda a neat prognostication of events to follow. That and the fact that Doubs and Samori Sam :ninja: worked out together this offseason. Cmon.

Plus we’ve got a WR that has experience as a Field General. What’s the chances? :coffee:


Good stuff. I think there’s more reason to be encouraged than discouraged with the passing game. The D is better, and I mean top 5, and STs? Well I trust Bisaccia.
 

Poppa San

Love her or leave her. Either way is expensive.
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Messages
11,319
Reaction score
1,550
Location
Brown County Wisconsin
But I think the main counter-point is this. While you're right that targeting running backs 12-15 times per game isn't a recipe for a success over an entire season,
Isn't this the Bill Walsh / Mike Holmgren version of the west coast offense? I recall it working decently for a guy named Joe Montana and another known as Brett "Faver."
 
OP
OP
Dantés

Dantés

Gute Loot
Joined
Jan 21, 2017
Messages
11,102
Reaction score
2,024
Isn't this the Bill Walsh / Mike Holmgren version of the west coast offense? I recall it working decently for a guy named Joe Montana and another known as Brett "Faver."

Using backs a lot in the passing game? Yeah.

Leaning on them that heavily? Probably not.
 

captainWIMM

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Messages
27,376
Reaction score
2,277
To your other point, I do concur as I've expressed before to see the passing attack take some knocks and growing pains early - that said I truly believe Rodgers is ready to prove to the doubters that he is the baddest QB in the league still, and he will drag this team and the WR room to wins if he has to. I have less doubts than some because I truly believe Rodgers is that freaking good - not because I think the WR is anything more than what most do (however I am higher on Lazard than many).

I'm not worried about Rodgers either but even he needs to have some talented pass catchers to make the offense work. Unfortunately I'm not convinced the Packers currently have enough of them on the roster.

I don't necessarily believe that so called production has to come from one facet of the offense. I'd rather see us run the ball more and operate on shorter drives. I could care less about WR yardage accumulation totals.

The Packers will need a combination of wide receivers to make an impact for the offense to be successful this season, especially as they lack talent at tight end as well. Otherwise the running game won't be able to carry to unit.

But I think the main counter-point is this. While you're right that targeting running backs 12-15 times per game isn't a recipe for a success over an entire season, the larger point is that when Adams was out, LaFleur schemed around it effectively. So I can imagine him continuing to do so in creative ways, not limited only to using RB's in the passing game.

While that might be true even MLF needs some pass catchers to step up to make his scheme work. It's a question mark if they have enough talent at WR/TE to rely on them.

Good point. The Packers put up a lot of passing yards when Lynn ****ey was QB. Those teams sometimes made the playoffs and then exited quickly.

For the record, the Packers only made the playoffs once with him at quarterback in the strike shortened 1982 season.

This. and I could also see a bi-product of not relying on 1 person to produce 36% of the reception yardage. That would be in being far less predictable. Which speaks to that scheme.

For a Defense. There might be nothing worse than seeing multiples of various players making splash plays. It’s like.. who do you cover? It gets mentally demoralizing.

I guarantee that opposing defensive coordinators were more worried about how to cover Adams in the past than they will be about a combination of receivers they will face against the Packers moving forward.

Yeah and Adams commanded double and triple coverage. That gives a few of these guys a chance to step up and shine as they'll mostly be facing single coverage in shorter passing situations.

Actually, opponents not having to double or triple cover Adams moving forward will free up defenders to either cover less talented receivers or support their run defense.
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
3,698
Reaction score
558
I'm not worried about Rodgers either but even he needs to have some talented pass catchers to make the offense work. Unfortunately I'm not convinced the Packers currently have enough of them on the roster.



The Packers will need a combination of wide receivers to make an impact for the offense to be successful this season, especially as they lack talent at tight end as well. Otherwise the running game won't be able to carry to unit.



While that might be true even MLF needs some pass catchers to step up to make his scheme work. It's a question mark if they have enough talent at WR/TE to rely on them.



For the record, the Packers only made the playoffs once with him at quarterback in the strike shortened 1982 season.



I guarantee that opposing defensive coordinators were more worried about how to cover Adams in the past than they will be about a combination of receivers they will face against the Packers moving forward.



Actually, opponents not having to double or triple cover Adams moving forward will free up defenders to either cover less talented receivers or support their run defense.
I didn't know that about ****ey, thanks. He did put up a lot of passing yards as I recall. It was a bright spot during a miserable stretch for the team. He reminded me of Ryan Fitzpatrick - a guy who could move the ball but wasn't going to win a SB.

As far as freeing up defenders now that Adams is gone - yeah an opponent can devote a back(s) to the run game and less talented receivers. Good point.

Hopefully someone in that group steps up and starts commanding double coverage. That would be a luxury considering the makeup of the WR group....... I hope somebody steps up, or Rodgers can make lemonade out of lemons. We'll see, and there are other WR moves that could be made ahead of TC, especially now that Alexander has been extended and there's some added cap.
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
3,698
Reaction score
558
Pretty sure MJ never won without Pippen, right?
That's a great example that BB, like FB, is a team sport. Jordan might have won some championships with a less teated player that Pippen, but it's still a team accomplishment.

And that's why I have a hard time recognizing so-called GOATs in team sports. It's better applied to solo sports like tennis or golf. Even MJ wouldn't go so far as to say he was the GOAT. (That didn't stop LeBron from calling himself the GOAT, but he's a jerk. Very talented, but a jerk.) And I don't think Brady has ever referred to himself as the GOAT. Although if ever an argument could be made for a team-sport GOAT, he'd be it.
 

gopkrs

Cheesehead
Joined
May 12, 2014
Messages
3,892
Reaction score
533
The reason Lynn ****ey and The Pack did not go to the super bowl was because their D was absolutely horrible. Not because of the QB.
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
3,698
Reaction score
558
The reason Lynn ****ey and The Pack did not go to the super bowl was because their D was absolutely horrible. Not because of the QB.

i don't recall enough about that team except they had a good offense. So I'll take it the D was terrible in those days.
 

Mondio

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 20, 2014
Messages
13,995
Reaction score
2,184
For the record, the Packers only made the playoffs once with him at quarterback in the strike shortened 1982 season.
My very first Packer game that season against the St. Louis Cardinals at Lambeau Field in the playoffs.
 

Schultz

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 8, 2021
Messages
1,185
Reaction score
530
Yeah and Adams commanded double and triple coverage. That gives a few of these guys a chance to step up and shine as they'll mostly be facing single coverage in shorter passing situations.
These guys were facing single coverage because Adams was being doubled. Without Adams the defense can pick someone else to double or send an extra rusher. No Adams does not help the other receivers, it hurts them.
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
3,698
Reaction score
558
These guys were facing single coverage because Adams was being doubled. Without Adams the defense can pick someone else to double or send an extra rusher. No Adams does not help the other receivers, it hurts them.
Yeah I think I was tired when I made that comment. Who knows?
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2014
Messages
8,587
Reaction score
2,189
I guarantee that opposing defensive coordinators were more worried about how to cover Adams in the past than they will be about a combination of receivers they will face against the Packers moving forward.
Adams is a great Receiver.

I’ll make my own guarantee.

There is ZERO % chance that Adams will produce more than the 7 players we were able to retain because he purposefully hung us out to dry against the wishes of our entire staff.

See you make it a Adams vs our WR group. But you conveniently and repeatedly missed the full picture. You ignored…

Walker
Campbell
Reed
Rasul
Tonyan

That’s a “bonus”group we got from that trade
 
Last edited:

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
3,698
Reaction score
558
Adams is a great Receiver.

I’ll make my own guarantee.

There is ZERO % chance that Adams will produce more than the 7 players we were able to retain because he purposefully hung us out to dry against the wishes of our entire staff.

See you make it a Adams vs our WR group. But you conveniently and repeatedly missed the full picture. You ignored…

Walker
Campbell
Reed
Rasul
Tonyan

That’s a “bonus”group we got from that trade
There actually are two issues here:

1. Did Adams hang GB out to dry by leaving? To the extent that he surprised the FO and the fans, yes, he could have told them his intentions much earlier. Maybe there were good reasons for him to keep it quiet. I don't know. He never said much, which is why I liked him. As a fan, I don't feel betrayed.

2. Did GB end up on the better end of the Adams trade? I think OldSchool answers this. It's an emphatic yes. We got stronger in many areas, notably D, and prevented an exodus of guys like Campbell and Douglas. The WR group suffered, but that's gonna happen when the best receiver in the NFL leaves (and MVS). It could be worse. Gluten added a solid veteran in Watkins, and drafted a promising WR in Watson. I like this team's chances to win a SB this year.
 

Members online

Top