PACKERS NEED BY POSTIONS- BLOGS

[Tarlam!]

(....)Just seems like more flexibility for McCarthy's "multiple offense", and we have a smart QB to put them in the best matchup possible at the line.

I like this idea. A lot! Who recently called the offense "Swiss-Army" offense? Now you're talkin', BABY!

[Deputy Nutz]

Finely is the starter so I don't exactly see a need there, maybe some depth with potential, another Quarles. A high ceiling type but might also burn out quickly. As far as running back goes, same thing. Grant is the starter with Starks as the key back up. Starks proved he can handle the load, but most likely will never be a dynamic runner. If Ingram drops to 32, absolutely the Packers should draft him best value on the board, but other than that the Packers need to look at getting another Jackson. A good third down back that picks up blitz schemes and can also return kicks.

[get louder at lambeau]

Not at all the same. JWalk was holding out with 2 full years left on his rookie deal. Its not like he played out his deal, was studly, and TT let him go. Not the case at all. If JFinley plays lights out this season and stays healthy, there is exactly ZERO chance that TT doesn't offer him a blockbuster deal. Only chance at losing him is if Finley is hell bent on testing the market.

I said "that could apply if Finley turns into a diva," bobblehead. I never said they were the same exact guy, in the same exact situation. Obviously they are not. There are a LOT of similarities, however.

Finley is about to start his fourth year. That's the year Walker got all bitchy about his contract. We all hope Finley takes a very different approach to things than dumbass Walker did. So far, Finley has shown that he's not afraid to bitch publicly twice in his short pro career- once about how he was being used in the game, and once about not being in the Super Bowl team pic.

[RashanGary]

I said "that could apply if Finley turns into a diva," bobblehead. I never said they were the same exact guy, in the same exact situation. Obviously they are not. There are a LOT of similarities, however.

Finley is about to start his fourth year. That's the year Walker got all bitchy about his contract. We all hope Finley takes a very different approach to things than dumbass Walker did. So far, Finley has shown that he's not afraid to bitch publicly twice in his short pro career- once about how he was being used in the game, and once about not being in the Super Bowl team pic.

You're making sense. Is it JWalk 2.0? We have no clue yet, but Finley scares ya a little with his personality. The only jersey I own is a Finley. I'm sort of betting on him, but he could turn into a major headache.

[Patler]

Maybe we could have both! Change that three WRs to two WRs, two great TEs who can offer more flexibility in audibling for Rodgers, and that kind of a back. If we had two Finely types, who needs three WRs? The TEs can split wide, run patterns out of their traditional spots or block. Just seems like more flexibility for McCarthy's "multiple offense", and we have a smart QB to put them in the best matchup possible at the line.

MM likes to throw deep, AR throws deep balls very well. I'll take the deep versatility provided by having an extra big WR (like Nelson) over the second TE.

[get louder at lambeau]

MM likes to throw deep, AR throws deep balls very well. I'll take the deep versatility provided by having an extra big WR (like Nelson) over the second TE.

Fair enough. I'd still have two WRs out there to stretch the field deep though, and two TEs who will take what the defense gives, even if it's opening up a hole for that RB you wanted.

[RashanGary]

MM likes to throw deep, AR throws deep balls very well. I'll take the deep versatility provided by having an extra big WR (like Nelson) over the second TE.

Nelson is a heck of a blocker too. I notice it a little bit, but I've heard the coaches talk about it so that's why I say that. The way he played down the stretch (playoffs/SB) I think he'll be a staple of the offense next year and for years to come. When we first drafted him, I gave the Hines Ward comparison. I see it more now. He can be a heck of a possession WR, he's fast enough to get deep and he's tough as nails.

[Bretsky]

http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/119805974.html

[MadScientist]

Not much to talk about with QB's. The loss of the off season hurts Graham Harrell, as he has the biggest need for quarterback school. It would have been nice for MM and TT to really have a good idea if Graham could grow into the role of backup before they watch Flynn fly somewhere else.

[sharpe1027]

Maybe we could have both! Change that three WRs to two WRs, two great TEs who can offer more flexibility in audibling for Rodgers, and that kind of a back. If we had two Finely types, who needs three WRs? The TEs can split wide, run patterns out of their traditional spots or block. Just seems like more flexibility for McCarthy's "multiple offense", and we have a smart QB to put them in the best matchup possible at the line.

No reason to drop the 3-wide package, it would be that much more powerful if teams had to guard against both three WRs and TEs. Each brings different problems for the defense.

[sharpe1027]

So did Finley his rookie year. Especially jump balls in the endzone. But I don't have the impression Quarless dropped a lot. When I think about drops, James Jones, Jordy Nelson, Donald Driver and a couple big ones by Jennings are what comes to mind. I don't doubt that Quarless dropped his share, but this team in general dropped quite a few.

Quarless has combine numbers and had decent stats for a rookie (although his stats might not be that impressive when you consider how many downs he played). To me, however, he still doesn't compare to Finley. I do not see the body awareness and fluidity either in his routes or when catching the ball. I am sure he can improve upon that with another season under his belt, but Finley looked like a WR even when he was making mental mistakes. I am not saying Quarless can't develop into a really good TE and that Finley won't turn out to be TO-2.0, but I don't see Finley-caliber ability in Quarless.

[Tarlam!]

No reason to drop the 3-wide package, it would be that much more powerful if teams had to guard against both three WRs and TEs. Each brings different problems for the defense.

Except there's an empty backfield taking away the play action. Eventually, teams will figure out how to cover 5 receivers...

[sharpe1027]

Except there's an empty backfield taking away the play action. Eventually, teams will figure out how to cover 5 receivers...

Eventually teams will figure out how to cover multiple TEs. I am not advocating going empty on every play...

[Fritz]

The biggest question about Finley - bigger, it seems, than whether he's injury-prone, if there is such a thing - is the character question. Is he going to be a diva who talks his way out of Green Bay? Or will he continue to mature and tone it down and become the best tight end to ever put on a Green Bay uniform?

[Smidgeon]

Quarless has combine numbers and had decent stats for a rookie (although his stats might not be that impressive when you consider how many downs he played). To me, however, he still doesn't compare to Finley. I do not see the body awareness and fluidity either in his routes or when catching the ball. I am sure he can improve upon that with another season under his belt, but Finley looked like a WR even when he was making mental mistakes. I am not saying Quarless can't develop into a really good TE and that Finley won't turn out to be TO-2.0, but I don't see Finley-caliber ability in Quarless.

I'm not saying that Quarless will be Finley. Finley is immensely more talented. I'm just trying to argue against the people who were disappointed by Quarless' season by pointing out that it was relatively successful for a rookie TE.