Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

bad stuff about GB WR's, season may hinge on Jennings

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • bad stuff about GB WR's, season may hinge on Jennings

    Jennings battles the odds


    Greg Jennings By: Doug Ritchay
    , dritchay@sbcglobal.net
    Date: May 5, 2006

    Packers depending on rookie to contribute in 2006, but history says it will be a challenge

    When the Green Bay Packers traded wide receiver Javon Walker to Denver it officially left a huge void in the Packers’ passing game – who’s the big-time playmaker?
    Some may say Donald Driver, but the veteran is a quality No. 2 receiver, who in a pinch can be No. 1 (for a short time). However, Driver, who’ll enter 2006 as the Packers’ go-to guy, isn’t Walker (when healthy), Steve Smith, Randy Moss, Tory Holt, Terrell Owens or even Joe Horn.

    With that in mind, what will the Packers’ passing game look like? Nobody knows for sure, but the Packers took a step in trying to make up for Walker’s loss in the second round of the NFL draft by selecting Western Michigan wide receiver Greg Jennings, who some teams rated as the No. 2 receiver in the draft behind Ohio State’s Santonio Holmes.

    Jennings led the nation last season, averaging 8.91 catches per game and was second in yards, 114.45 per game. Impressive numbers, but most point out that came against the likes of Ball State, Miami (Ohio), Central Michigan and others in the Mid-American Conference.

    If these numbers came in the Big Ten or ACC, then we’d be talking about a first-round gem. Instead, Jennings will have to prove he’s a diamond in the rough, capable of helping the Packers this season. Is this realistic?

    Packers history tells us no.

    The last three wide receivers selected in the second round by the Packers were Terrence Murphy (2005), Robert Ferguson (2001) and Derrick Mayes (1996).

    Murphy was released this off-season after sustaining a spinal injury last season, which has at least put his career on hold if not on ice. Prior to that, Murphy was a spot player and caught three passes.

    Ferguson has been an underachiever, who in his rookie season barely played after showing a work ethic comparable to a corpse. He had no catches as a rookie.

    Mayes had great hands (all you had to do was ask him), but he had six catches as a rookie as the Packers won the Super Bowl.

    This doesn’t mean Jennings is destined to have a quiet rookie season, but it shows how difficult it is for a rookie to make an impact as a wide receiver. What Jennings has going for him is the Packers desperately need him to play like he did in college.

    The Packers’ receiving corps outside of Driver is a joke. Rod Gardner is a former No. 1 pick, who has seen two teams (Washington and Carolina) give up on him. Marc Boerigter is a possession receiver, which is a nice was of saying he has no speed. And Ferguson will get hurt. It’s as automatic as Brett Favre starting at quarterback. Jennings has everything in his favor, except that he’s a rookie.

    Assuming Jennings comes along slowly in the passing game, let’s go back to the original question of this column: what will the passing game look like?

    Without a true deep threat, or go-to guy, Favre might be able to get away with throwing passes with the arm strength of a Danny Wuerffel, who couldn’t throw a football through a wet paper sack in his hey day.

    The passing game will likely be one of slants, flat passes to running backs and seam passes to tight ends. The “home-run” ball Favre likes to throw (too much sometimes) might be as ancient as Barry Bonds’ head size dipping below a 9. Receivers will have to gain yards after the catch, which isn’t always easy. Jennings, though, has that skill.

    “I take a lot of pride in my route running and also running after the catch and being a playmaker,” Jennings said. “That was one of the things Brett needed last year, and hopefully I can and will be able to give it to him.”

    If Jennings can’t infuse some spark, this is a concern, because if the Packers can’t force the defense to respect passing plays beyond 20 yards, the defense will gang up on receivers, bump them, having no fear of getting beat deep. Also, the running backs will see a lot of safeties creep up near the line of scrimmage to make plays. Jennings was productive in college, recording three straight 1,000-yard seasons, but being productive in college is one thing, making it happen in the NFL is completely different. All Jennings has to do is look at Gardner as an example.

    Be that as it may, Jennings has a chance maybe no other rookie wide receiver has this season - he has a chance to become a focal point of his team’s passing game. History says he won’t do it, but the Packers need him
    more freedom, less government. Go Sarah!

  • #2
    All that means we're due to finally hit on one of these second round WRs. Let's hope this is the guy.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: bad stuff about GB WR's, season may hinge on Jennings

      Didnt Jennings lead or was in the top of the NCAA in yards per catch?

      Comment


      • #4
        Favre has played with worse and made them look like pro bowlers. I think we will be fine. However, I would like to see GB look for a nice O weapon via trade or the waiver wire. You never know who is going to get cut!

        Comment


        • #5
          Havel said Jennings looked really impressive at day one of the minicamp. The offense will start out pretty basic because it is new for everyone including Ferguson. I think Jennings stands a chance to have a pretty big impact.
          Formerly known as JustinHarrell.

          Comment


          • #6
            I'd just feel better if they added an experienced WR to the group. What if one of them would go down the first game of the season like Walker did last year. I don't want to name any names and jinx a certain player......u know?

            Comment


            • #7
              It has been exciting to hear that Jennings seems to belong on the field already, showing skill and athleticism on his first day.

              This year on offense we will see grind-it-out West Coast with dink and dunk passing, hard-nosed running by Samkon and Ahman, and the occasional long gain. Control the clock, move the sticks, and score 14 points a game.

              Let the new defense give up 13 or less and we win.

              Can you feel the brand new day, baby?
              [QUOTE=George Cumby] ...every draft (Ted) would pick a solid, dependable, smart, athletically limited linebacker...the guy who isn't doing drugs, going to strip bars, knocking around his girlfriend or making any plays of game changing significance.

              Comment


              • #8
                There is plenty of experience on the WR roster. DD, Gardner and Boerigter are all vets that can be "go-to" guys. I predict Fergie will either blossum in training camp, or he will be cut.

                TT will save roster space for the eventuality, because he would rather invest in the future with a rookie than with a bust.

                We also have a TE that can split open the defense in Donald Lee. We are also said to be going short pass West Coast.

                So, for this offense, we have the guys on the roster that we need.

                Now, my last argument: TT SAID JENNINGS WAS THE CREAM OF THE CROP AT THE COMBINE OR SENIOR BOWL (can't remember which one). He said Jennings was the WR he wanted goning into the draft.

                That's good enough for me.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Tarlam!
                  There is plenty of experience on the WR roster. DD, Gardner and Boerigter are all vets that can be "go-to" guys. I predict Fergie will either blossum in training camp, or he will be cut.

                  TT will save roster space for the eventuality, because he would rather invest in the future with a rookie than with a bust.

                  We also have a TE that can split open the defense in Donald Lee. We are also said to be going short pass West Coast.

                  So, for this offense, we have the guys on the roster that we need.

                  Now, my last argument: TT SAID JENNINGS WAS THE CREAM OF THE CROP AT THE COMBINE OR SENIOR BOWL (can't remember which one). He said Jennings was the WR he wanted goning into the draft.

                  That's good enough for me.
                  Tarlem,

                  I really think DD is the only starting caliber WR we have. Gardner was pretty much let go by two teams now; my view is he'll be a fine #3 but that could be optomistic over the long haul. Boerighter is a #4 IMO.

                  Ferguson is a fraud. He reminds me of David Martin. He has ability and teases us with 1-2 plays and everybody jumps on his train and then he turns into potential unrealized once again.
                  TERD Buckley over Troy Vincent, Robert Ferguson over Chris Chambers, Kevn King instead of TJ Watt, and now, RICH GANNON, over JIMMY JIMMY JIMMY LEONARD. Thank you FLOWER

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    B, I agree, but, with a caveat.

                    You're speaking of guys let go cause they failed to blossom - that's where I agree. Now, they will get a chance to blossom - like Harris for example, who was only a backup in Philly. I bet some players come to Lambeau and are transformed. My hope is this is the case with Gardener and Boerigter.

                    I have no hope for Fergie, but without Walker around, maybe he can rise to the occasion.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      The optimistic view of the receivers is:

                      1) Gardner - has all the physical tools. Mental readjustment and good teaching environment could lead to break-out season

                      2) Boerigter - possession receiver in the Keyshawn Johnson Jurevicius mold

                      3) Jennings - a Johnny Morton or better kind of receiver in rookie year

                      4) Driver - solid, solid, solid. Don't get hurt.

                      4) TEs - serviceable only (that's optimistic)

                      5) Wild Card - the running backs catching out of the backfield. We know Henderson and Green can be relied on, but will Green be healthy? Can Samkon catch the ball? We know Najeh can't catch and run. Is the screen play dead in the new offense? Who invented liquid soap and why?
                      "Never, never ever support a punk like mraynrand. Rather be as I am and feel real sympathy for his sickness." - Woodbuck

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by mraynrand
                        The optimistic view of the receivers is:
                        How bout a June 1 cap casualty?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by swede
                          This year on offense we will see grind-it-out West Coast with dink and dunk passing, hard-nosed running by Samkon and Ahman, and the occasional long gain. Control the clock, move the sticks, and score 14 points a game.

                          Let the new defense give up 13 or less and we win.
                          I agree with everything you said except the O is gonna average more like 20 something a game. It will just come on long possessions, which is very good.

                          M3 systems is very QB friendly (it got A Brooks to the ProBowl) with all the short passes and I think the scoring droughts that would come under Sherman will not happen cuz the O will be in a rhythm all game. Something that always seemed to be a problem the last couple of years. This will also help avoid the desperation heaves by Favre. I see nothing but good things happening on O if the WRs can develop fast.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            If the new defense allows 13 points a game, the Packers would win 14 games. A defense that strong also generates great field position and gets you easy points. I don't think that's realistic given the roster and the recent history of scoring in the NFL. It's also unrealistic to think that the Packer offense will only manage 14 points a game.
                            "Never, never ever support a punk like mraynrand. Rather be as I am and feel real sympathy for his sickness." - Woodbuck

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Chicago gave up 13 per game last year. But yeah, I doubt we'll be that good with just the addtion of Hawk, Woodson, Manuel, Pickett and the growth of many of our young players.
                              Formerly known as JustinHarrell.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X