McCarthy on the WR's

[Guiness]

"More if you factor in goofs like Coston."

Okay, I'm overly optimistic to several people here, but I"m not ready to write off Coston until next training camp. Wahle took two years, and people even griped about him through half his third year (he got moved around, I believe, like Coston). I"m not saying the guy's going to be great, but I'm not ready to write him off.

Ha! I'm still down on Coston because of the description someone posted about his wife

[KYPack]

Re: WR

There is no way in hell that we should have the roster mix that we find ourselves in. 4 TE's. 4 (maybe 5) rookie DB's.

4 WR's, 3 rookies.


You think Brett is gonna trust a kid from El Paso who's never caught a pass in the league?

That Brett Favre is gonna even throw this kid a ball?

I sure won't say that I think a team that is almost half first and second year players is a good thing. However, under the circumstances it doesn't bother me. My reasoning is simple. It may be the best alternative this year.

Other than Wahle and Walker, no veteran who has left is someone I really wish they still had. Rivera and Sharper, maybe. But not at the price. I have tried to analyze the cap situation as of April 2005 every way that I can. The only way to keep Wahle was for him to agree to a very team favorable deal. He had done that once already and wasn't about to do it again. The 2005 cap situation made redoing Walker's contract similarly unreasonable at the time. Threeafter, he was never going to return. Wahle and Walker are gone not by choice but by circumstances. It happens.

All the other departed vets offered nothing but mediocrity. At this point you might as well look at as many new players as you can, to try and build a base for the roster 3 and 4 years from now.

Will Favre throw to Francies? Of course he will. He completed passes and or threw to anyone they stuck out there last year, and he will again this year. He always has and always will.

I share your concerns about the mix of too many young boys. Could it have been avoided?

Sure, find some vets and sign 'em. Other clubs do it, why not us?

I don't have any reservations about the loss of the "big 3" last year. No way could Thompson have avoided it. In fact, I feel many have practiced revisionist history regarding Wahle. It might have been hypothetically possible to sign big Mike, but in reality we'd have to have cut 4-5 guys to keep him. He wanted out anyway. He was sick of Shermie's act and big $ awaited him when he left. He was a smart guy & he was gone.


About "All the other departed vets", I'm gonna start a thread about this, let's get in a good argument when I do. I think there were some "old boys" we shoulda kept, or others we should have acquired. Many of these kids we got now are nothing but waiver fodder.

This also a reason that I'm VERY skeptical about the youth movement we have in place. the 5 rookies we have starting are outstanding and a good base for our re-building. Some of these kids on the roster won't even be in the league in a year. Was Wil Whitticker a basis for our "new wave OLINE". Hell no & many of these kids will be gonzo.

"Will Favre throw to Francies? Of course he will."

I dunno, pal. I dunno. This kid may never run a complete route in order to catch the ball.

Most of my vitriol was reserved for Vince.

He wants to cheerlead, fine.

He wants to call me a chicken, he better buckle his chin strap.

[vince]

Re: WR

[quote="KYPack"]

No matter what Chicken Little says, the sky isn't falling people. This doesn't change the complexity of this team. As Patler (the voice of reason) has said, we're no worse off for this. We're talking about #3 and #4 receivers here, not Jerry Rice in his prime.

What have Fergie and Robinson done this year? One, maybe two nice catches apiece?

Is it possible that the Packers believe that Martin has the potential to be a good one, and want to give him an opportunity to further develop and display his talents on the field? COULD THAT BE THE PLAN?

No, TT and MM must not have a plan, since it doesn't correspond with your conception of what the plan should be.

The doomsdayers will seemingly hate it if we all find that Martin can actually be a productive receiver in this league. And if he sucks, well, then we know he sucks and can move on, thereby improving the team for the future. It's not like he's going to cost us a playoff spot.

Give these kids a chance this year.

vince- this post really stunned me cause your better than this. Making up lame excuses for TT's lack of depth at WR is unbelievable. To say that a 2 TE set with a FB is just as good as a 3 or 4 WR set does'nt make any sense. If this was the case, than every NFL team would go to it. Having 3 and 4 WR sets on 3rd and long is a must. Not only for the passing game, but the obvious benefit of spreading out the D in order to run on 1st or 2nd down. A 2 TE set packs 7 or 8 in the box and you can't run consistently against that.

I understand those of you who defend TT, but good Lord, at least use some common sense!

(snippage.)

Well Vince, glad to see you came out here to Rock N, Roll.

As some have said, you are totally full of it.

You called me Chicken Little.

That's yer first error.

I am El Gallo Grande. (ask Mad)

There is no way in hell that we should have the roster mix that we find ourselves in. 4 TE's. 4 (maybe 5) rookie DB's.

4 WR's, 3 rookies.

But according to Vince, all is well, and anybody who has a problem with that is "doomsdayer".

Yeah, well that's fine. And you are full of it.

Are you trying to tell me that the best option for a roster addition is a kid from the practice squad?

A kid like Chris Francies who caught 44 passes for 774 yards and five TDs in 2005 to earn third-team All-Conference USA honors?

Yeah well, I'm here to tell you you are dead nuts wrong!

You think Brett is gonna trust a kid from El Paso who's never caught a pass in the league?

That Brett Favre is gonna even throw this kid a ball?

I think you are 100% wrong.

As far as your "complexity" comment, what do you mean?. The Pack is running the most basic pass offense in the league. The loss of Robinson hurts us from a personnel standpoint. The loss of a WR can't hurt us from a complexity aspect, we are too basic for that to affect us,

We need players, not plays and the chance that either of these kids can play in the league is remote.

In most cases, you don't know what you are talking about, so I don't know what you are talking about.

Patler and I have argued many times.

He's been right, and I've been wrong.

I've been right and he's been wrong.

You?

You seem like a cheerleader type to me.

OK so I'm full of it. In my opinion, some posters make a big deal out of relatively minor issues.

It's possible that the management team thinks Martin has a lot of potential.

Neither Ferguson nor Robinson had big production on this team and this team isn't going to the playoffs.

I'm not opposed to giving Martin a chance to establish himself. He just might be GOOD. No one out there available is a sure thing anyway. Just because we haven't seen Martin and Francies play doesn't mean they have no talent.

This is the time to give 'em a shot. What's the harm? Francies will likely rarely see the field anyway. I for one look forward to seeing what Martin's really got. If he sucks, THEN I'll be the first one to argue for his replacement.

He hasn't sucked yet...

[KYPack]

OK, pollo pequeno.

We will see what we will see.

[Packnut]

Walker

We had a damn good WR. His name was Javon Walker. He would have accepted the same contract to play here, but with TT, it has to be his way or nothing. The team is not his priority. All you guys who defend TT can shut me up for good by explaining with FACT and COMMON SENSE how the Packers are a better team with Woodson and Manuel and not Walker. Tell me how paying Woodson and Manuel all that cash made us a better team and then tell me the Packers would'nt be a better team with Walker. He's playing for a run first team with a terrible QB and still playing well.

We could have a 3 WR set of Walker, Driver and Jennings and we sure the hell would'nt be 1-4 right now! You guys just don't get it. TT is GETTING PAID GOOD MONEY, yet all I read here is excuses. Let me tell ya guys, he ain't working for free!!!!!!!!!!!!

[packrat]

This team didn't really "get old fast." The playmakers that carried this team are getting older and slowing down at the rate that is to be expected. The problem is that the supporting cast was mediocre and the Gm couldn't find playmakers of equal quality to replace the Favres, Hendersons, Butlers and Greens of the world. So, rather than bringing in and developing young players with potential, he stuck with the Hunts and Chapmans, while trading away multiple draft choices to get a few players of whom only Walker turned out to be the real deal, though Barnett is OK. Those who are complaining that TT is not chasing other teams cast-offs are falling into the same trap. You are never going to be superbowl quality if you tolerate mediocre players. The only way you get to the SuperBowl is to have quality players and you know for sure that other teams castoffs are not quality players. One way to get quality players is the Free Agent who is a playmaker, but because of cap limitations you can't get enough of them, so to get enough quality players you turn to the draft and young free agents who are available because they are unproven. That is going to cost a few games with mistakes and inexperience, but it offers the best chance of getting back to the superbowl.

[KYPack]

Here's Bob McGinn's take on the available WR's

Brewster cannot play.
Francies is a crafty little guy with OK speed.
Cal Russell can fly but is raw.
Scottie Vines just got waived off Detroit's PUP list.
Corey Bradford is another ex-Lion.
Charlie Adams did some good things for Denver last year and is 6-2.
David Boston is out there.
Todd Pinkston, but he has two Achilles problems.
ex No. 1 pick Tyrone Calico is available, too.
(He didn't mention Rogers, wouldn't he be better than Francies?)

[Ballboy]

Patler Wrote: "The reasons TEs are TEs and FBs are FBs have nothing to do with their hands. Being able to catch is a pre-requisit of either position, as Vonta Leach learned. Granted, players at both positions tend to be slower than WRs, but also tend to be bigger and stronger. There are plenty of speedy WRs with not the best of hands.

The key will be adapting the play calling to the talents of the available players, not hoping a TE or FB can "replace" a WR. Donald Lee needs to get back into the mix. David Martin needs to stay healthy, and involved. Those two may be more important to the rest of the season than Ruvell Martin, Francies or Russell."

Patler, your wrong. Being able to catch is NOT a pre-requisit of either position. I can name numerous TE and FB that played a long time in the league for blocking, and NOT the hands....TE & FB are players not big enough to play OL or DL and not fast enough or have hands enough to play WR or RB.

Anyone who thinks that the Packers using Lee or Martin in the slot, who by the way will be defended by a DB or a Safety, will produce for us like a WR would is just silly. If I'm a DB, I'd much rather cover a big slow TE or FB than anything else.

[Sparkey]

Here's Bob McGinn's take on the available WR's

Brewster cannot play.
Francies is a crafty little guy with OK speed.
Cal Russell can fly but is raw.
Scottie Vines just got waived off Detroit's PUP list.
Corey Bradford is another ex-Lion.
Charlie Adams did some good things for Denver last year and is 6-2.
David Boston is out there.
Todd Pinkston, but he has two Achilles problems.
ex No. 1 pick Tyrone Calico is available, too.
(He didn't mention Rogers, wouldn't he be better than Francies?)

Dear Mr McGinn: Francies is 6'1" 193 lbs ....... since when is a 6'1" receiver "little" ?

[Patler]

Being able to catch is NOT a pre-requisit of either position. I can name numerous TE and FB that played a long time in the league for blocking, and NOT the hands....TE & FB are players not big enough to play OL or DL and not fast enough or have hands enough to play WR or RB.

Depends completely on the offense. In MM's offense, the FBs and TEs have to catch the ball. In Sherman's they didn't. That's why Leach was a good fit for Sherman, and a bad fit this year. Henderson was an unexpected luxury in Sherman's offense because of his hands. As the years went on, Sherman used the TEs less and less. In the Holmgren version of the offense, which MM hopes to copy more closely, TEs with hands were needed. Two TEs were used often.

Bigger but slower reeceivers can be used in different ways to take advatage of their size. I expect to see more of a ball control passing game; even more so than the 1st 5 games.

[Zool]

Did anyone else notice that Miami activated Marcus Vick from their PS? He's listed as a WR. They probably thought what I thought. Bring the punk in, get Miami's playbook.

[KYPack]

Did anyone else notice that Miami activated Marcus Vick from their PS? He's listed as a WR. They probably thought what I thought. Bring the punk in, get Miami's playbook.

Good call, Zool.

It's an ancient trick, but still used all over the league.

We shudda done it, but then so many people would've burned all their Packer stuff. JK

[vince]

Re: Walker

All you guys who defend TT can shut me up for good by explaining with FACT and COMMON SENSE how the Packers are a better team with Woodson and Manuel and not Walker. Tell me how paying Woodson and Manuel all that cash made us a better team and then tell me the Packers would'nt be a better team with Walker.

FACT: Javon Walker, after being drafted in 2002 as a first round draft choice, signed a 6-year contract (with the last year voidable by Walker) to play for the Green Bay Packers through the 2007 season, for $7.485 million.

FACT: The definition of a contract is: a binding agreement between two or more persons or parties; especially, one legally enforceable.

FACT: While contracts are occassionally renegotiated, NEITHER PARTY is obligated to change the agreement after the fact. Conversely, both player and team are legally obligated to abide by the terms of the contract that is mutually agreed upon.

FACT: In 2005, Ted Thompson, personifying the team's intentions to be respectful during this situation, yet fulfill their commitments to Javon, said, "During his time as a Green Bay Packer, Javon Walker has been well thought of by everyone here. I like Javon, certainly as a person and as a player. That said, Javon is under contract, which he signed as a 2002 first-round draft choice. That contract is governed by the Collective Bargaining Agreement, which was negotiated between the National Football League and the National Football League Players’ Association, and we expect him to honor it. There have been several highly publicized cases of player discontent in the National Football League. I don’t anticipate us making any concessions in this matter. We will continue to stay the course, and the Green Bay Packers will have no further comment on this topic."

FACT: In both 2005 and 2006, Javon Walker, personifying his intentions to publicly assassinate the character of the team, and indicating his refusal to fulfill already agreed-upon legal obligation, said, "They [The Packers] want players to come up there and play hard and work hard, but when it comes time to be compensated, it's, like, 'We forgot what you've done.' "

FACT: Javon Walker was already being compensated under the legally binding terms he agreed to, and had 2 years (with the last year voidable by Walker) remaining on that agreement.

FACT: NFL contract negotiations are a process designed to arrive at an agreement to compensate a player for FUTURE services not yet agreed upon, not PAST and PRESENT services for which players have already agreed to compensation.

FACT: In 2006, 2 seasons prior to the fulfillment of his agreed-upon contract, Javon Walker said, "I really have no interest in being in a Green Bay Packers uniform or playing for Green Bay again."

FACT: In 2006, 2 years prior to the fulfillment of his agreed-upon contract, Javon Walker said, "If I had to go back there, I'd retire," he said. "I don't have to play."

FACT: In 2006, 2 years prior to the fulfillment of his agreed-upon contract, Javon Walker's animosity for the Green Bay Packers and Brett Favre was so deep that "Walker said he is even willing if necessary to repay the Packers the prorated portion of his signing bonus, which amounts to around $850,000."

FACT: In 2006, 2 years prior to the fulfillment of his agreed-upon contract, Javon Walker's stepfather said "not money, not the passage of time and not the retirement of Brett Favre" could change the wide receiver's aversion for the Packers.

FACT: In 2006, 2 years prior to the fulfillment of his agreed-upon contract, Javon Walker's stepfather said, "They could give him a $15 million signing bonus and he would decline it. I think everybody is thinking it's going to blow over and Javon's going to show up. He's not showing up. I mean, he is absolutely not showing up. Period. At all."

FACT: In 2006, 2 years prior to the fulfillment of his agreed-upon contract, Javon Walker's stepfather said, "He (Walker) has so much animosity regarding Green Bay, it's ridiculous."

COMMON SENSE: Javon Walker didn't want to fulfill his agreement, and didn't want to play for the Packers.

COMMON SENSE: Javon Walker's actions were completely out of line and he overtly attempted to undermine the team's ability to attract future free agents through a public smear campaign in order to get himself out from under his obligations.

COMMON SENSE: Javon Walker's OBVIOUS unwillingness to play for the Packers gave the team no reasonable choice but to get what value they could for him.

COMMON SENSE: Javon Walker's ridiculous public positioning and refusal to abide by the terms he already agreed upon made this situation so bad that not only is his ABSENCE from the team a positive development, regardless of what other players the team has, whether Charles Woodson, Charles Manson, Marquand Manuel or Manuel Noriega, but his PRESENCE on the team would be seriously undermining the unity and development of this young group.

[Scott Campbell]

LOL

Nice work Vince. I'm gonna miss Packnut.

[Oscar]

Great post Vince!