I know, it is an off season fluff piece, but there are some interesting tidbits of info in this:
http://www.packersnews.com/story/spo...t-te/31033845/
Printable View
I know, it is an off season fluff piece, but there are some interesting tidbits of info in this:
http://www.packersnews.com/story/spo...t-te/31033845/
I think that if people weren't so enamoured these days with the tight-end-who-runs-like-a-deer, there would be a lot more love for RR. He's going to be a fine NFL tight end. Just not that downfield playmaker that people fantasize about. But I think there may be enough playmakers for the Pack that this won't matter as much as people think.
After watching Finley drop pass after pass, it will be nice to see a TE who catches the ball when it comes his way. I agree, he doesn't need to be a downfield threat. GB will have plenty of those. If he excels at the things we think of for traditional TEs, he will fill the role GB now lacks.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fritz
*SIGH*Quote:
Originally Posted by Patler
Oh well, I can't argue with you. After all, Scott Wells had fewer drops than Finley! :beat:
What does Scott Wells have to do with it?Quote:
Originally Posted by mraynrand
Point was, and article mentioned (if you even bothered to read it) that R. Rodgers has exceptional hands. A. Rodgers said he might have the best hands on the team. The TE often sees the ball on third down in mid-range yards-to-go situations, and a drop often means a punt. We saw that time and again with Finley. Hopefully we won't with R. Rodgers.
If he can reliably and consistently move the chains and catch passes in the red zone, the offense can get un-stuck against good defensive teams.
I want the return of the Bubba Franks blocks someone poorly/intentionally, falls down, wait for everyone to run by, then stands up, takes two steps into the end zone and catches 11 TD passes during the season. That's all.
Like others have said, don't need an explosive TE in this offense, just one that won't drop the ball and runs his routes effectively. Plus, he can be a great red-zone threat which has been an issue. If he can be even an adequate blocker, we have our TE for the next decade.
Rodgers isn't close to giving the Packers what Finley did, but I'll let Patler beat that issue to death (can't let a Rodgers article go without a rip on Finley). Hopefully, Rodgers improves enough to give us a viable threat at TE. He's slow. He's also not a very good blocker yet. He runs good routes and has good hands. If he can improve as a blocker, he can be useful. It's not hard to find TEs of similar quality.
Of course he doesn't give them what Finley did, and Rodgers never will. No one on their roster has the physical ability that Finley had. Probably not even close. But, isn't it quite possible that he doesn't have to give them what Finley gave them, if he gives them what Finley did not give them?Quote:
Originally Posted by HarveyWallbangers
I disagree that it isn't hard to find the type of TE that Rodgers MIGHT be. No one is raising that type of TE anymore. After the elite pass receiving TEs, most are either small tackles who block very well but are of little use in the passing game, or overgrown receivers who catch well and/or run patterns well but have little interest in blocking. So far, Rodgers is the latter type, but seems willing to become the combination type. He isn't close, yet.
The Packers have had a bunch of TEs over the MM era, and none of them really have had the good hands, good routes, effective blocker traits in combination. The much maligned Bubba Franks had them in the early part of his career, but it seems most chose to remember only the later few years when he seemed to lose both his hands and his notable blocking ability. Since then, Quarless gave a flash of that just before his injury, when he had surpassed Crabtree as their best blocking TE for a part of the season. But, sadly, Quarless' brain seems to get in the way of any further progress.
If they are easy to find, the Packers sure haven't shown it.
Yeah, I read it. You're a fun guy Patler. Yes, I'm tired of the 'Finley drop' meme. Guy didn't even play the last two and half years, so I dropped another tired horse beating on you for your tired horse beating. So go beat another horse. :) P.S. Packers were better off keeping Finley than Wells :razz:Quote:
Originally Posted by Patler
I agree with this take. Especially since the TE position seems to have a wide range of players who fit various systems. Packers have an offensive coach who doesn't have a system that needs a specific TE to work. Just needs a collection of playmakers and he can craft it around them. Rodgers seems to have his own set of skills that Stubby has fit in nicely. God help him if he drops a few passes anywhere near Patler.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fritz
I'm hopeful DickRod can improve on his 1.8 YAC from last year. Just falling down forward would seem worth a yard or two.
To answer the question of the thread, no. However, I do think he'll be a nice option in the red zone.
Actually, it has only been the last one and a half years, not two and a half years that Finley hasn't played, isn't it?Quote:
Originally Posted by mraynrand
I think it was sort of a wash on who would have been better to keep, Wells vs. Finley. Finley only gave them 22 games over the span that Wells gave St Louis 35 games. On a different field, maybe Wells wouldn't have broken his ankle, but even if he had, at least they wouldn't have signed Saturday, so EDS would have replaced Wells, which would have been a plus that year vs Saturday. Finley did have a good season that same year (when he wasn't dropping the ball. :))
Now, how about dropping some of those dead horse beatings on the complaints about Bubba Franks, who hasn't been in GB since before Finley was drafted?
Don't hold your breath waiting for that to improve. I'm not hopeful for much of a change in that category.Quote:
Originally Posted by esoxx
He's never going to be flashy but hopefully he can bring some consistency to the position. RRod still needs work on his blocking but seems to have the size and desire to get better. He looks like TE's used to look in the 90's, before they became overgrown WR's. As long as he can make 10-15 yard receptions and move the chains I'll be happy.
I wrote one and a half. Don't know how two and half got in there. Finley was a greater impact player than Wells, especially his game-changing drops. I don't recall Wells being targeted 11 times and being maligned for four (see below). Plus, before his neck injury, Finley was almost the entire offense of a depleted Packer team against Cleveland in 2013 (ONE and a half years ago!). He looked like a Gronk out there! Funny how when a talented guy is the ONLY major talent, who isn't shut down by aggressive corner play, he gets a lot of touches. Poor Scotty Wells was just a depleted afterthought in St. Louis who would never achieve the honor of posing with the Muskie Queen.Quote:
Originally Posted by Patler
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1...passes-problem
Now, let me tell you about Ed West...there's a guy who could catch a ball!
I agree with Harvey's take... he has good hands, and can be a reliable short target. The threat of other receivers will give Rodgers opportunities - but Rodgers isn't capable of returning the favor.
Should never have been a 3rd round draft pick IMO, but will probably stick with the team for quite a while as he probably won't generate much interest once his rookie contract is up. As such, all you homers will slap Ted on the back for making such a great pick ;)
My favorite Ed West play was when he would play possum, do a flop-a-block, wait for the student body to clear the other way, then get up, stand in the end zone, and wait for the ball to get to him, lol...Quote:
Originally Posted by mraynrand
I agree. I'm still Homerhopeful that RR can approach Chmura level competency, but it's not likely.Quote:
Originally Posted by wist43