Jordan Matthews Makes Sense for the Packers
The Green Bay Packers have been fairly active in free agency, but before they are done, there is at least one more they need to take. And that is signing a wide receiver.
Not everyone agrees with this assessment. After all, the Packers aren’t in bad shape now. Davante Adams is a true No. 1 receiver. Just having that is huge. Then, you have Randall Cobb, who is just 28 years old and still capable of a 1,000-yard season.
Those are two very good building blocks. On top of that, the Packers have guys like Geronimo Allison, Michael Clark and Trevor Davis. Allison and Clark have shown potential as receivers and have some upside. Allison had 23 receptions last season and has 35 for his career for over 400 yards.
Allison, a second-year player out of Illinois, had six for 101 in the win over the Bengals last season, including a key catch in overtime. He could be a solid outside receiver opposite Adams. Cobb, of course, is best in the slot. Clark can be the third guy outside and Ty Montgomery can play in the slot and some at running back. Maybe even Davis can find a niche as a home-run threat.
That’s all possible, but it’s also a lot of it’s. It would also leave Green Bay very thin at the position. I argued for a veteran receiver recently and many pointed to Cobb and Adams as examples of veterans.
Yes, they are both experienced players. But am thinking about what’s behind them. Allison is entering his third year and he is the seasoned vet after those two. He has promise sure, but 35 receptions isn’t a ton.
What if Adams gets hurt, even for a game or two, then Allison is the top outside receiver, with the roster as it currently stands. That’s not a good situation. Draft a rookie and still, you are left with a learning curve. I’m not saying that’s a bad thing, but with $20 million in cap space, why not add another weapon.
Jordan Matthews visited Green Bay a few days ago, makes a lot of sense. In four seasons, he has 250 receptions for 2,955 yards and 20 touchdowns. He is just 26 years old and could excel with Aaron Rodgers throwing him the football. A lot of guys could, however, Matthews would really flourish in Green Bay. He’s made for the west coast offense.
Matthews could grow into a very strong No. 2 and the Packers wouldn’t have to break the bank for him. He won’t be cheap by any means, probably at least an excess of five million a year. Heck, he might even want a one-year prove it deal. Nothing like playing with a two-time MVP to raise your stock a bit.
Matthews would give the Packers adequate depth and would also give them someone who could make defenses pay for focusing on Adams, Cobb and Jimmy Graham.
Signing him would also lessen the need to take a wide receiver during the first couple days of the draft. With all the holes on defense, waiting until the fourth or fifth round seems sensible.
Wide receiver isn’t a desperate need, but it’s one that should be addressed and if you can find a young guy with some upside, for a reasonable price, well that seems like a shot worth taking.
__________________________
Chris is a sports journalist from Montana and has been blogging about the Packers since 2011. Chris has been a staff writer for CheeseheadTV since 2017 and looks forward to the day when Aaron Rodgers wins his second Super Bowl. Follow him @thepackersguru
Comments (199)
NickPerry
March 25, 2018 at 05:29 am
I'm in total agreement with Chris on this, I think the Packers should sign Matthews before someone else does. Throw out his stats in Buffalo last season, WR RARELY flourish in Buffalo. What he did in Philly was a glimpse of what the Packers would get in Matthews.
The Packers were their most effective when they had a slew of WR to cover. Teams just don't have 3 or 4 CB's to cover a group like Adams, Cobb, Graham, and Matthews for example. In 2010 and 2011 the Packers were impossible to stop because they had more weapons than any defense could cover. Put Adams, Cobb, Matthews AND a TE like Graham on the field WITH a running game AND a player like Montgomery who can kill you from anywhere?....Give me that all day long!
Sign Him...PLEASE!
jeremyjjbrown
March 25, 2018 at 08:18 am
I like the idea too, not only for this year but for next off-season when Cobb is a free agent. Then they can pick who they want to be their 2 slot guys between Cobb, Matthews and Montgomery, and not be forced into overpaying at WR again.
Since'61
March 25, 2018 at 10:00 am
Nick - great post and I agree completely. I have consistently posted that the Packers should give Rodgers as many weapons as possible. If we could sign Matthews for $5-6 mil AAV we should jump allover it. I'd like to see the Packers sign Matthews and an experienced OL for at least depth if not a starter for the right side of our OL. Thanks, Since '61
Bearmeat
March 25, 2018 at 11:59 am
I disagree. Unless the contract is SUPER cheap and they can cut/replace Cobb with it. The Packers don't need another slot player. And make no mistake, that is what Matthews is. They need an outside WR2. Preferably one with wheels. Which Geronimo does not have. The only WR on the roster with wheels right now is Davis. And he sucks.
HankScorpio
March 25, 2018 at 12:47 pm
"Unless the contract is SUPER cheap and they can cut/replace Cobb with it. The Packers don't need another slot player"
You're speaking my language now. It seems to me that Slot WR or Slot CB is code for "not very good". Teams line up their best players outside. Those that can't handle that level of competition become slot players. There may be exceptions to that general rule but it's the truth more often than not, IMO.
Whether or not that theory is accurate in general, we've had ample evidence to see that it is more or less the truth with Cobb. Cobb's cap number is not reflective of that. I don't think they should cut him unless they have an alternate option in hand or really need the cap space.
But he is someone that is very replaceable who is paid like he's irreplaceable. He's averaged about 60 catches for 735 yards during his time in GB. I bet you can get that kind of production with Rodgers for less.
Bearmeat
March 25, 2018 at 06:37 pm
"It seems to me that Slot WR or Slot CB is code for "not very good".
Actually, I think it's actually just a different body type and skill set. Quick twitch athletes who aren't the best HWS prospects but who nonetheless are skilled at their jobs often end up in the middle of the field. Look at Casey Heyward. Yes, Dom was misusing him, but dude played very well in the slot for us for years.
My issues is Cobb's contract and the redundancy Matthews would provide. How many slot guys do you need? Answer: 1 or 2. How many do we have: Answer: Cobb, Monty, Graham (yes he's basically a very large slot WR). We don't need a 4th.
Edit: Man, I ALMOST typed "Jordy" in there. It's gonna be different without him in GB. Sigh. :(
flackcatcher
March 25, 2018 at 09:36 pm
I got questions about Matthews injury history. I suspect other NFL teams have the same question looking at the lack of action on the contract front. The elephant in the room is Rodgers contract. Darn thing sucks the life out of any major action BG might want to take on the FA front. Better to go into the draft, and see how things play out. Odds are, the Packers think they already have their 3 WR on the roster, and a pickup like Matthews is simply too expensive at this point.
Oppy
March 25, 2018 at 06:54 pm
Slot CB's aren't very good?
CB's on the perimeter have the benefit of the second defender- the boundary. Perimeter CB's always know the wr they are covering can only go so far to the outside. Sometimes they are left on an island, however, with no help over the top.
Covering the slot requires a DB who must be able to adjust to a route in any direction at any time. It's a totally different skill set. Granted, the benefit of being inside is there is usually help somewhere if needed.
I personally believe you have the idea of a slot defender not being very good completely wrong. That slot defender has to account for the entire route tree, period. Not to mention, more apt to have to provide run support as well.
HankScorpio
March 25, 2018 at 10:40 pm
I think I wasn't clear enough in expressing the thought. I don't want to get into a War & Peace length explanation so I will try it like this: The majority of time over the last 6-8 yrs in GB, the person playing slot CB and slot WR have been seen as the 3rd CB or 3rd WR. Sometime they were still really good football players. Sometimes they were not so good. It wasn't about their overall play level. It was about their play relative to the 2 others.
I'm not sure that is any more clear. Hopefully it is.
Oppy
March 26, 2018 at 07:07 am
Charles Woodson?
dobber
March 25, 2018 at 01:14 pm
"Unless the contract is SUPER cheap and they can cut/replace Cobb with it."
That is what I suspect would happen...they trade a slightly older player with an out-of-line-with-his-production contract for a younger guy with a track record of production with lesser QBs that they could likely get for 3 or 4 years at a much lower cap number.
....AND make a little room to help accommodate QB1 and any players who get cut around draft time or June 1.
...AND provide some roster continuity beyond the end of Cobb's contract.
It could also be a wash capwise if it provides the leverage to force a restructure of Cobb's contract: they could have both players in 2018 for the money they would've paid Cobb, and they still have Matthews after Cobb walks. I'll be honest, if it means that I don't see #18 taking handoffs or pitches anymore, it wouldn't be the worst thing...
worztik
March 25, 2018 at 01:56 pm
Dob, I think you and others have nailed it! I’m not at all familiar with Mathews but, I like his size and many of you think he’d be a good pick-up long term, as well. I like long term (3-4-5 years) as long as we’re not pushing a hefty signing bonus out until the last year or two of the contract! We covet size in our CBs and we seem to be adopting that mindset with our WRs, too. You can’t teach height as a wise man once said. I think it was you Dob... just sayin’...”
Minniman
March 25, 2018 at 10:33 pm
Trevor Davis' combine 40 time was 4.42 sec
Jordan Matthews combine 40 time was 4.46 sec
I'm not seeing TD's wheels being much faster than JM's - although his 3-cone drill was 6.6 vs 6.9
I might be being picky, but to my mind a true "burner" is a low 4.3x guy.
I'd still like the Packers to kick the tires of trading for Martavis Bryant. A 4.34 40. 1 year left on rookie contract. Steelers have 7 picks in the draft, but no 4th round or 6th round picks - only1,2,3,5,5,7,7.
Sure he's got maturity issues, but the packers would have 12 months to see if this is petulance because of being down the depth chart or a true problem - before they part with the big bucks
John Ramble Kirk
March 25, 2018 at 01:32 pm
From the article: Davante Adams is a true #1 WR?
How in the world can anyone know that? He's never been one. This will be the litmus test as to whether the org was right about him, paying him as if he was a #1 WR. Davante has never had a 1000 yard season. Yes, extremely close and you could claim semantics, but 75 catches max and never a 1000 yard season is not true #1 WR numbers. I'm miffed why this need to oversell Adams exists? He's an unknown in this role he'll be in this season and many act as if he's an established veteran WR1. Tell me all the seasons he's gone into as the WR1? Zero. This is his first but somehow he's a true WR1? Nonsense. Total nonsense. Spin.
WR is a HUGE need because of the fact Adams is a total unknown in a WR1 role. It'd still be a need even if Davante proves to be a true #1, which will be a lot easier for him to be if he has help opposite him.
Matthews only makes sense if Cobb is released. He makes no sense if Cobb stays. Matthews in the slot with a few mil in cap savings is a great play. Throwing Matthews out wide with his inability to separate vertically despite his timed speed is a mistake. A big one.
Will this new regime make the mistake of the old and continue forcing round pegs into square holes? We'll know if we sign Matthews.
CAG123
March 25, 2018 at 02:37 pm
How has Adams not proved he’s a number 1 receiver? You’re talking about yards but look at the TDs he’s put up the last 2 yeas! He was the only WR able to produce with a mediocre QB last year he took over the role and stepped up. He became the number 1 in the Dallas game when he told Rodgers “To run it again”. I’d take a guy that can find the end zone and put points on the board than a guy with huge receiving numbers. Julio Jones one of the best in the league has all the tools and a better QB but found pay dirt what 3 times last year? Jones has 9 TDs in 2 years with 2900 yards and Adams has 22 with 1800. You can have those yards.
John Ramble Kirk
March 25, 2018 at 03:04 pm
You're using TDs and Julio Jones as a case Adams is better?
I want to see you type it... Type you'd rather have Adams than Julio. If you do... I have no words in reply.
Julio Jones is so much better than Adams it's embarrassing to see them compared. It's like comparing Case Keenum to Aaron Rodgers. When Adams goes 136 rec for 1871 you let me know. Julio's career high in TDs is 10 so Adams is better??? Amazed by what I read sometimes.
Davante hasn't proven he's a WR1. Not even close. You are piggybacking off the contract he was given and saying he is. Unproven. Completely. As a #1... The org believes that but they also believed in Hundley.
Finwiz
March 25, 2018 at 03:42 pm
You make too much sense. People aren't going to like you talking disparagingly about any of their Packers.
Fact is, the Packers have made plenty of personnel mistakes the last 6-7 years. I was skeptical about the money they gave Adams, particularly considering the concussion history. One more head-banger and he's on the shelf for a long time. The question is, was the money they gave him, number 1 receiver money, or number 2?
John Ramble Kirk
March 25, 2018 at 04:29 pm
Fin... It's a fun place sometimes.
Davante Adams posts 1 and 3 TDs in his first two seasons for a grand total of 4 TD's, yet, because he's amassed 22 of them over the last two he's now better than Julio Jones. Jordy was on pace for more TD's than Adams last season so we really should've kept him. I mean we're talking more TD's for Jordy so he must be better. TD's are the single stat that defines a WR. My goodness.
Just to revisit this gut busting Julio Adams comp. Julio Jones is mugged all the time because he's a superstar and opposing DC's know it. When he gets in the RZ his space is limited and he's really mugged. Hard to get it to a guy when he commands that attention in tight quarters. Now, let's look at Adams. Who is mugging him? Is he getting doubled and tripled in the RZ? No. Absolutely not. He commands none of that kind of attention. Just watch what happens to him as our WR1 especially if he gets no help opposite him. The excuses are going to be legendary. I do not believe Adams is a great WR. He's a very nice WR but he's no stud. He's not a DC nightmare by any means. A good player in a decent system with an all world QB. I know, I know...he produced with Brett Hundley. Oh, yes, he did. Why do you think that might have been? Was he doubled? Nope. What did he see? Always the CB1...nope. Teams stuffing the box daring the woeful Hundley to beat them connected on some passes to a single covered Adams who wasn't always facing the top CB? Wow. He put up 70 some receptions and not 1000 yards in that scenario? Adams had better numbers with Brett Hundley. So, when the argument goes...Gee, look what Adams did with Hundley...just imagine him with Rodgers. I don't have to. I already saw and know the breakdown in his numbers. He's not a WR1. I just don't even understand sometimes. Get us a real WR or Adams is sunk. He'll be doubled and do diddly. The whines and cries will crescendo.
As for his money...no question they gave him what they felt was WR1 money and are expecting him to be our WR1. I think they've erred greatly. If you think Cobb has been overpaid...you ain't seen nothin' yet.
You brought up one of the most important thing thats is missing in much of this Davante is great, is a WR1, and deserved that money talk. He's one helmet to helmet or helmet to hard ground hit away from quite possibly never playing another down. You just can't go and give that guy WR1 money when he's not proven to be close to that level and then give him no help opposite him. He's set up to fail...and he likely will unless we do something. How can we have our eggs in his basket like that? He's a severe injury risk and that risk careers strong career ending possibilities...but let's give him 14 mil AAV and call him our WR1 and give him no help. Sounds like a great plan. Almost CB-esque.
Kubyskins12
March 26, 2018 at 07:43 am
I think his concussion history and one hard hit from ground away from injury is little overblown he has had two last year but I think his history is not as concerning as say Sam shields. If you look at the two concussions Adams had they were both Dirty Blindside hits with Direct helmet to helmet contact and the first one against Chicago he recovered quickly and was back the next week and the one against Carolina he sat out a week and was back the following week it shows that he didn't have any recurring issues and wasn't having problems coming back from the concussions . Now if you remember Sam Shields concussion history he would barely hit the ground and he would get a concussion and it would take him a couple weeks to get back and each additional concussion didn't even look that bad. He had concussions from hits on the ground or against someone's body that weren't that hard of hits and he was getting concussions and having troubles recovering from them . As long as Adams doesn't get blindside helmet to helmet dirty hits I think he will be fine. I don't care who you are in those situations you're going to get a concussion. And the fact that he recovers quickly from them also shows that in my opinion I don't think it will be a problem in the future. And as far as being the number one receiver I believe he is . He runs great routes has strong hands can for can jump on the building and his moves and ability to gain yards after the catch are some of the best in the league. This will be his prove it here now that Nelson's gone and he will get most of the attention but I believe he'll step up to the plate step his game up even more I'm sure there were people saying the same things about Antonio Brown at this point in his career because he didn't have all the Athletic ability play Julio Jones but he knows how to run routes how to run after the catch has good hands and has the ability to get the endzone. And I'm not saying he's Antonio Brown I'm just saying I am see a lot of the same qualities and I believe that his game will go to the next level in the next couple years and he may be one of the best receivers in the league but that's my opinion and I was it differs from yours.
CAG123
March 25, 2018 at 04:18 pm
Where did I say Adams is better? I’m merely making a comparison about looking beyond YARDS. You were so quick to jump on the defensive you didn’t comprehend anything I said. I said give me TDs over yards and that’s with any receiver. I said Jones has all the tools speed, size, everything yet he found the end zone 3 times. Since when is 22 TDs not better than 9?
John Ramble Kirk
March 25, 2018 at 04:33 pm
You decided to compare the two. That is ridiculous in and of itself. You said give me the TD's and forget the yards...all 1000 of them. That's a really bizarre thing to say in my eyes.
22 TDs is better than 9. I'll take Julio the last two years over Adams thank you. If you wouldn't why are you harping on the TD imbalance?
You really need to think on why Julio has a career high of 10 TDs while Adams put up 12 last season. It has nothing to do with Adams being better in any facet of being a WR. I already posted the reason above this post.
CAG123
March 25, 2018 at 04:20 pm
Also I’m not piggy backing off his contract I’m going with 22 TDs over 2 years AKA PRODUCTION because that’s what players get paid for.
John Ramble Kirk
March 25, 2018 at 04:36 pm
Production? 75 catches as a career high vs. 139. Julio had 64 more catches than Adams highest and the disparity almost rivals Adams best total. Let's see what Adams would do with double and triple coverage.. I promise you it will not be pretty. You won't recognize him anymore and will go silent along with his production.
Adams has put up a whopping 997 yards for a season high being single covered and not seeing full time CB1 treatment. Jones put up 1871 with double and triple teams. Almost a full 900 yards better but you're chirping about TDs?
Yes, players get paid for production. Davante is not a DC nightmare. He's a fine WR but no gamechanger. Never will be. Julio is. The skillsets are insanely incomparable.
CAG123
March 25, 2018 at 05:02 pm
Okay last time I checked it’s all about the score board right? There is actually no reason for Adams to out produce Jones in any category considering that Jones gets so many targets yet he finds himself with only 9 TDs in 2 years while Adams has 22. You point out me focusing on the TDs but back door that with talking about yards? You make no sense. Is Adams better than Jones of course he isn’t but has Adams been more productive where it counts it’s yes without question. To try and disregard that buy solely focusing on numbers Jones put up what 3-4 seasons ago is just silly.
John Ramble Kirk
March 25, 2018 at 05:13 pm
Of course, you're going to ignore context and situation. I've already tried explaining to you Julio's lack of TD's. Have you ever seen an opposing team cover Adams in the RZ like they do Juilo? Think back to the Dallas game. You think that rook Dallas trotted out is going to be singled up on Julio two plays in arow? Nope. Yet, for Adams, because he's nowhere near Julio, he was singled and beat Lewis the rook from Dallas. If you want to ignore context and situation with your posts that's up to you but when you continually stick to the TD track in the debate it shows you're not looking big picture. You're holding tight to the one thing that you believe wins the argument for you. The big picture is it's insane for you to do that while ignoring the big picture that Julio is a superstar that Davante will never be.
CAG123
March 25, 2018 at 05:16 pm
Actually yes they would have considering they only have unproven DBs, rookies, and Orlando Scandrick
John Ramble Kirk
March 25, 2018 at 06:04 pm
Are you srcewing with me?
No. No. No. You seem to have again forgotten the concept of double coverage.
stormin
March 25, 2018 at 07:01 pm
Kirk, you are nothing but a bully and blow hard ! Leave people posting here alone, with every dispute you post, you expose more your animosity toward your fellow posters. Leave.
John Ramble Kirk
March 25, 2018 at 08:10 pm
A bully? Sorry, you feel that way. I'm passionate about what I believe. I don't have a shred of animosity toward anyone I'm engaging in football debates with.
Is it possible that I offend your Packers sensibilities and that's why you posted what you posted? Being a fan doesn't mean your brain goes off and you blindly support everything Packers. I sure don't. If that's what it is, I take back my sorry from above.
Would love you to tell me what it is specifically that is bothering you? That's a pretty general statement. An example of bullying is something i'd really like to read. Blowhard is subjective. I understand why you'd throw that out.
CAG123
March 25, 2018 at 05:13 pm
Also if you think Jones is being triple teamed in that offense then you clearly have no idea what you’re talking about they’re too many ways for that offense to score to commit 3 DBs to one guy. Antonio Brown doesn’t have a problem producing yards and TDs and he’s what 5’11 and you can’t tell me he doesn’t see double teams yet he’s also out produced Jones in TDs.
John Ramble Kirk
March 25, 2018 at 05:21 pm
Again, CONTEXT. Who does Antonio Brown have out there with him? Leveon? Martavis? Juju. Pick your poison. If you think Adams belongs in any convo with Brown, Jones, Aj Green, etc. I don't think we should debate anymore because that isn't what we're doing.
Who draws more coverage on any given play? Julio or Davante? Who needs to be accounted for more on the field? Adams or Julio. These questions are silly rhetorical but you don't see this because Davante has a G on his helmet and a green jersey and you can holler TD's!!!! TD's!!! Nelson Agholor had same amount of TD's as Antonio Brown...I'm confused as to who is better? Who would it be if they're tied in TD catches? Crabtree had same amount of TD's as AJ Green. Surprised Cincy didn't cut AJ because he had same number of TD as Crabtree who was cut.
Davante Adams is not a WR1 and his amount of TD's have nothing to do with that.
CAG123
March 25, 2018 at 05:34 pm
lol So you ignore all the weapons the Falcons have to defend Julio right? Your argument went from him being double and “triple” teamed until I pointed out another receiver that deals with those same issues now you point out weapons as if that Falcons offense isn’t loaded. Man make up your mind this isn’t about whose better it’s about who’s produced more you keep saying that Jones is better that Adams as if I’m saying that he’s not. That’s not the case Jones and Brown are both better than Adams but Adams has produced more than one and is slightly behind the other with Brown having I believe 23 or 24 TDs the past 2 years.
John Ramble Kirk
March 25, 2018 at 06:07 pm
Lol. I can barely hold this one together it's so out there. Mohammed Sanu is the 2. The TE is the great Austin Hooper. Yeah, Atlanta has the same weapons as Pittsburgh does?
The Falcons O is weak at WR. Context.
John Ramble Kirk
March 25, 2018 at 06:56 pm
You're right. Should've included Freeman for Atlanta.
John Ramble Kirk
March 25, 2018 at 08:17 pm
This is from the Monday August 14, 2017 edition of the AJC...
https://www.ajc.com/sports/football/julio-jones-shape-ready/KOMRhHWUzT2R...
***Getting Jones the ball in the red zone is problematic because he attracts so much double-coverage and sometimes triple-coverage from defenses.***
I know what I'm talking about so it makes it hard to have debates with posters who just don't understand. I clearly have no idea what I'm talking about? No. You don't.
John Ramble Kirk
March 25, 2018 at 05:29 pm
Blount had 18 TD's for NE in 2016. LeVeon Bell only had 9. Blount must be better because it's about TD's? NE let Blount go. Why? It's all about TD's, man. That tells you who is the better player and who is worthy of big money.
What kind of money did Blount get for his 18 TD season? 1.25 million for 18 TD's? What? Is the NFL colluding? How could a guy with 18 TD's get only 1.25 million? Meanwhile, the cheap Steelers handed over 12 million to Bell the year after he was out TD'd 18-9 by Blount. Should've cut Bell and saved 11 mil and gone with Blount. Screw the yards! It's about TD's bay bay!
CAG123
March 25, 2018 at 05:42 pm
Aren’t Blount and Crabtree over 30? Don’t they both have a considerable amount of baggage? Your argument is based on what those guys mean to THEIR teams. So you don’t think Adams deserves that respect on HIS team? If a DC isn’t going to treat Adams as a threat then whose fault is that? Not Adams all he can do is play. Once again it’s not about whose better or who would you rather have is some alternate universe.
John Ramble Kirk
March 25, 2018 at 06:18 pm
No. Adams doesn't deserve it. No 1000 yard seasons and a high of 75 receptions. Not worthy of this crazy praise. It's mystifying minus the groupie angle. Cobb dusted anything Davante ever did when he got his money. Let's see how you feel about Adams after the money. I'm betting it will be worse than you felt after Cobb got his.
You are a TD guy. That's what matters. Now, it's age?
Adams is going to have a poor year if he doesn't get help.
Tell me...What do you think will happen if Davante is defended like Julio? Numbers going up or down or staying the same?
Did you know Aaron Rodgers led the NFL in TD passes ONCE in his career. Brees 4 times since 2008. Brees is better! Right? Screw everything else. All about the production!
CAG123
March 25, 2018 at 06:45 pm
The Falcons ran had those same players last year and it worked just fine. I love have you purposely didn’t mention either RB both are used as receiving threats out of the back field but whatever it takes to make your point valid I guess. My point from the start has been production nothing else. You’ve jumped from yards, to supporting cast, to coverages to make excuses as to why Jones hasn’t produced. So what if Adams doesn’t get double teamed is that his fault? When he burns a team for 120 and 2 TDs is the coach going to say “Well we didn’t feel as if Adams deserved the same respect as Jones or Brown so we didn’t double him”! You can’t ding him for bad coaching decisions.
John Ramble Kirk
March 25, 2018 at 07:16 pm
I made zero excuses for Julio not producing. It's you who doesn't understand what production is. If Aaron Jones ran for 250 yards and no TDs and and Kerridge took in two 1 yard plunges you'd say Kerridge had better production.
My excuses as you call them are for Julio's lack of TDs not production.
CAG123
March 25, 2018 at 08:41 pm
Yeah one game over a full season what kind of dumb comparison is that?! I’m done with you man you’ve taken me saying Adams produced better than Jones and made into who’s better than who. Adams has earned his contract and that’s all there is to it. For a player so many wanted cut after his second season to turn it around the way he has he’s earned his money. Saying someone has produced more isn’t the same as saying that player is better so all your silly Blount vs Bell and Rodgers vs Brees comparisons are irrelevant. You’re taking talent and ignoring FACTS. FACTS are Adams has scored 22 TDs in 2 years vs Jones scoring 9 that’s it.
John Ramble Kirk
March 25, 2018 at 09:26 pm
I'm sure you are done with me after I posted the link to the triple teaming of Julio in the RZ that you neglected to respond to. :) I'm a big NFL fan not just the Packers.
Adams didn't produce better than Jones. That is the point. You think he did. He didn't. He simply scored more TD's...that's all.
Tell me all the WR's who never had a 1000 yard season who got 14 mil AAV deals? At least Cobb had a huge season before getting his money. Davante hasn't. He's being paid on projection...dangerous game.
Julio produced more and is better.
Adams would have no TD's if he was covered like Julio but that's the context that you fail to add to your all in TD argument. Julio creates so much space for others to shine. Davante doesn't. It's a team game and Julio would be the guy every single NFL exec would say is better and produced more. Not sure why you've been arguing this for so long? Reminds me of the time I debated a guy on a Packers forum about Quarless being better than Rob Gronkowski. This was pretty similar. Our guys always look better than they are for some reason.
CAG123
March 25, 2018 at 10:13 pm
I’ve already covered that by telling you it’s silly to ding Adams for bad coaching. Your stats mean nothing. Josh Jackson produced more int than Derwin James and Denzel Ward but we both know who’s better. So your repetitive defense of Jones being better than Adams is irrelevant. If Jones makes the team around him better then why has Sanu only scored 9 TDs in that same 2 year span? Remember the same team you said he makes better yet you were clowning his supporting cast were you not? Like I said this isn’t a debate of talent but production. 22 is and will always be greater than 9.
marpag1
March 26, 2018 at 07:28 am
Hehe.... give it up, CAG, ol' boy. Kirk's got 22 posts in this thread already. Nobody wants to see that.
John Ramble Kirk
March 26, 2018 at 07:21 pm
Not even me. I apologize for going down this rabbit hole. I should've just let the out there statements go.
Only 22? I gotta get hot.
Bearmeat
March 25, 2018 at 06:48 pm
Adams is a #1 WR - he's just not an elite WR1. He works in that spot. Probably not as good as Jordy in his prime. I think he's a slightly better version of James Jones. And James was a pretty darn good player.
Adams isn't going to carry an offense by himself - but so few players do at WR!
He is a worthy of his contract.
HankScorpio
March 25, 2018 at 04:16 pm
"From the article: Davante Adams is a true #1 WR?"
Probably not. So what?
Rodgers drives the passing game in GB. I would argue he has put up plenty of big time production without a true #1. Jennings wasn't ever a true #1. Nelson wasn't always one. It can be argued he never was one. Driver was never a true #1. It will be no different now with Adams than it has in several other years with Rodgers making the throws.
Like Brady & Brees, Rodgers can make WRs look better than they are. Sometimes that means there is some overpayment to the WRs in the interest of retaining some continuity. It's up to the GM to balance those vet contracts overpayments vs the cost of constant draft investment vs picking up some FA trash that Rodgers can turn into a productive player.
John Ramble Kirk
March 25, 2018 at 06:20 pm
Hank...Thank you. I really appreciate the level headed reply. Aaron has never had a WR1. Davante is by far his least impressive. Think of the WR's all the past #1's had opposite them or the total stable. This current crop is the worst by far. That should be alarming. It's just not about Davante not being a 1, it's about what surrounds him that will make him look like even less of a 1 than he already is.
Let's not forget Rodgers 1.5 year funk where he looked like anything but a great NFL QB. We may see that from him again this year. What a shame it would be if we finally figured out the D and the O takes a giant 2015 styled step backward. It very well could happen if we don't have the appropriate weaponry for 12.
HankScorpio
March 25, 2018 at 05:29 pm
Everything you say is a valid concern, IMO. But I think is it fair to say that I am a bit less concerned than you about the worst case playing out.
I was of the opinion the Packers need a shaking up on offense. So I'm glad they're doing it. Freshen up the scheme with a coaching staff shake up, diversify from a WR-keyed attack with improved TE & run game and maybe take Rodgers out of his comfort zone to focus him a little better sounds good to me.
Sure, I'd love more talent from FA or the draft. Or both. But there probably isn't a true #1 WR for 2018 to be had anymore. With the best QB in the game, the chances things break well are higher than them breaking poorly. So why worry about something that can't be changed?
John Ramble Kirk
March 25, 2018 at 06:22 pm
That's fair. I can't even quibble.
HankScorpio
March 25, 2018 at 11:19 pm
In that spirit, I think they need to draft WR/TE. But I don't want them chasing after it. Let the board dictate when. After CB, this is the area want them to hit the hardest. And I hope it works out that they get someone on day 2 and 2 more on day 3.
Between 3 new guys, 1 or 2 should be able to contribute--if Gute is the GM I hope he is, anyways.
So I think we have a lot of basic agreement but not quite the same emphasis.
John Ramble Kirk
March 26, 2018 at 07:25 pm
Agreed. My emphasis is a lot more toward Defcon 4 at WR where I consider it co-equal with CB. Seeing AROB was pursued by us as heavily as he was is very comforting to my sensibilities.
14 gonna be really fun this year. I just hope Brian doesn't trade us out of Round 1 like Ted did last year. I look forward to the draft for months and don't want to endure another anticlimactic evening. :)
ScaryGary
March 25, 2018 at 04:44 pm
only if the price is right, u gotta play the game out. don't fall for bears and vikings headlines they r in salary cap purgatory with success
Thegreatreynoldo
March 25, 2018 at 05:34 am
Matthews isn't precisely the WR I had in mind at the start of FA, but the prices generally were crazy. Not clear that he can play boundary, and when he does run a vertical route he gets limited separation from the limited film I just watched for the last 10 minutes. Not a guy who is afraid to push off (OPI). Overall, I wouldn't be opposed to a deal for under $6.5M.
NickPerry
March 25, 2018 at 05:59 am
IIRC he was used quite a bit in the slot in Philly. For whatever it's worth he ran a 4.46 40 at the combine so you'd think he could get more separation than he does. IMO he's be an excellent #2 to Adams AND he's young. I can't see him signing for to much money after last season though $6.5 isn't anything to sneeze at.
marpag1
March 25, 2018 at 08:12 am
Here's the problem I have with Matthews. I didn't go back and look at any tape, but my rather vague recollection is that he's pretty useless on the outside. He does almost everything from the slot, and even then, he's dependable but not terribly explosive.
I can see Matthews as a cheaper REPLACEMENT for Cobb, but if you have Cobb and Matthews, how do we propose to use both of them.... plus Jimmy Graham who also spends time in the slot? Maybe they sign the younger, cheaper Matthews and cut Cobb.
Cubbygold
March 25, 2018 at 08:19 am
Yeah this would be important to figure out. GB isn't a better team with redundant players. Ideally, if GB is adding a wr its one that can play on the edge and force safteys to play deep. I don't know if anyone fitting that role is available, but there certainly will be guys in the draft
Thegreatreynoldo
March 25, 2018 at 09:19 am
Yes, Marpag, I am ambivalent about Jordan Matthews, that is why I looked at a couple of his highlights, which aren't a great way to do it but were readily available. Some posters suggested that he was supposed to play boundary when Buffalo traded Watkins and got him in return, but he never really did. He certainly looks like an NFL quality starting slot receiver. I am dabbling with the notion of him as a replacement for Cobb, but am concerned that the idea means AR loses two of the 3 WRs with whom he has trust. It would leave AR just Adams. He isn't the WR I had in mind but the WRs I liked all signed for $8M or more.
Still ambivalent. Some of those prospects in the draft that many like look like slot guys from my limited research. So many prospects I like that should be available at #45. Some are WRs, but that doesn't mean I would not hate having to use #45 on need depending on the how the draft falls.
dobber
March 25, 2018 at 10:00 am
Whatever the Packers do in this case, they're likely to need to find a legitimate boundary WR either in-house, through the draft, or among those remaining pieces on the market. I would argue it needs to be someone who can beat single coverage with some regularity. If they can find this guy, everything opens up for the rest of the pass-catchers.
Dzehren
March 25, 2018 at 10:29 am
What about J Mathews knee and ankle surgeries performed in December 2017? Maybe this is why He is still available?
marpag1
March 25, 2018 at 12:47 pm
I'm sure that's also why they wanted to bring him in on a VISIT, because they absolutely need to have their own doctors check him out.
GB Jacker
March 25, 2018 at 06:12 am
Would be happy if we signed him. Have heard that the offer we made was very low and that he's likely to covet a small 1 year, 1-3 million deal. Excess of 5 would be too much for a guy with such low production in recent years. Give him a year with A-Rod to make himself some money next off-season. Enticing prospect for both he and GB maybe.
If Allison, Clark or any of the younger guys makes a big jump then we can always move him on and lose nothing.
I'm personally quite high on Allison so hoping he makes a big jump this year.
Thegreatreynoldo
March 25, 2018 at 07:05 am
Jordan Matthews stats. Really, just 2017 as a down yr in Buffalo:
2014: 16 games 67 recs, 872 yds, 13.0 yds/rec 54.5 yds/gm
2015: 16 games 85 recs, 997 yds, 11.7 yds/rec 62.3 yds/gm
2016: 14 games 73 recs, 804 yds, 11.0 yds/rec 57.4 yds/gm
2017: 10 games 25 recs, 282 yds, 11.3 yds/rec 28.2 yds/gm
65.44% career catch rate, usually from so-so QBs. Tyrod Taylor, Sanchez, Bradford and Wentz in 2016 as a rookie, who flashed but wasn't anything like 2017.
GB Jacker
March 25, 2018 at 07:34 am
Better than I remember. Thanks
Sign him up. I still think he will be relatively cheap too
EdsLaces
March 25, 2018 at 08:08 am
I'm with ya on Geronimo. I think he is a poor mans TO. Hope he has time to develop before we send him packing in the years to come.
dobber
March 25, 2018 at 10:02 am
I'm just not a believer in any of the WR beyond Cobb. Allison, Clark, Yancey, Davis...I think they're all utterly replaceable. I'll be glad to be very, very wrong because it makes things much easier for the Packers going forward, but I have a hunch this might be one of those rare times when I'm right.
worztik
March 25, 2018 at 02:13 pm
Dob, I am holding out for Micheal Clark to get some snaps during camp and into the preseason! I love his height and body type (opposite of ME!) and I didn’t see enough of him to the point where he looked comfortable. Especially with #7 throwing to him late on every play! He did have a big drop in the end zone but, I’m a forgiving guy, to a point! Whatever we do, we should sign him to a deal that we’re not locked into should he falter! If he can play as well, or better, than Cobb, we can free up some cash and at least remain status quo... still need a speed outside receiver!!!
carlos
March 25, 2018 at 08:51 am
Sign him. You can’t have enough depth. Cobb usually misses games due to injury. Good veteran depth and injuries has been an issue the last few years.
GB Jacker
March 25, 2018 at 09:44 am
Can't argue with that - Adams has missed time with his issues too. I also think this argument about ''their are bigger holes elsewhere'' whilst a valid point, misses the fact that sometimes the opportunity to make your team better doesn't just mean filling a hole and ignoring bringing in talent at a position of strength. I think that WR room would be pretty strong with Adams, Cobb, Matthews, Graham, Gmo, Clark/Yancey and a rookie. Strong enough.
My guess is that there's another 1/2 FAs on the way before we get to the draft.
GB Jacker
March 25, 2018 at 11:33 am
Haha good point! Upper-half?- they say whoever gets lowest wins on the line of scrimmage so he'll have a head start there
Cubbygold
March 25, 2018 at 11:06 am
Sure that would improve the wr group, but does it improve GBs chance of winning a SB more than using that money to sign breeland? The DB group is weak, and thin. The money allocated to Matthews makes the team better, but only marginally. Bringing in a guy like breeland makes the team meaningfully better.
GB Jacker
March 25, 2018 at 11:38 am
We might get both. FA has been going a while, most of the names left out there are not gonna be making huge money (besides the boy named Suh)
John Ramble Kirk
March 25, 2018 at 02:07 pm
Jordan Matthews career best single season (2015) is better than Davante Adams. Matthews is +10 on receptions in a season 85-75....and had 997 yards which ties for Davante's best of the same 997. The TD's aren't up there but obviously Davante has more. Matthews had back to back 8 TD seasons in Philly. Davante has a career high of 12. Keep this in mind...In Matthews first two seasons, not in Buffalo, he wracked up 16 TD's while Davante put up 4 with Aaron Rodgers. Give Matthews the same QB and let's see who the better player is.
Factor the QB difference Matthews had vs. Adams. The numbers tell me Matthews is every bit the WR Adams is, if not better. I would've preferred Matthews to Adams in that draft. Matthews went 42nd overall...Adams 52nd.
It's very interesting to me to see the lukewarm response to Matthews and the over the top one to Adams. Matthews is every bit the WR Adams is, if not better. If you actually think Adams is a WR1 you should be screaming for the Packers to sign Matthews. It's highway robbery to get a better player for a song while paying Adams that ridiculous contract. Matthews would help balance the Adams overpay.
Before you tell me I'm whatever just analyze the numbers and consider that Jordan Matthews didn't have Aaron Rodgers and Davante did. Who is better? If you honestly believe it's Adams I'd still have a very hard time believing you could make any case that he is by much.
Sign Matthews and release Randall if he's healthy. Wouldn't surprise me to learn one day that we would've drafted Matthews over Adams had we had the chance. Just the kind of guy we like.
Cubbygold
March 25, 2018 at 06:21 am
Because there are finite resources, signing matthews means GB will likely be unable to sign a player in another position. Obviously everyones preference is dependent on their opinion of the current recieving corp.
Id prefer at least one more experienced DB and OL be signed before WR.
EddieLeeIvory
March 25, 2018 at 07:03 am
I agree, mate. McCarthy said the defense has to lead the way.
However, all the better UFA CBs are long gone. There are no great Edge rushers available .... Who's better at this stage of their careers, for the Packers: Matthews, who often gets hurt and he'd fit right in, or Jeremy Maclin, who has had the dreaded ACL injury and isn't as fast as he once was.
Cubbygold
March 25, 2018 at 07:05 am
The DB I'm primarily thinking of is breeland. Would like evans back too.
I'd also be very confident/interested to see yancy, monty and allison get a chance to win a starting job
dobber
March 25, 2018 at 10:07 am
Don't be too down on Maclin. Since his ACL he's had two 1000 yard seasons, one at 15+ ypc, and two other seasons (with Alex Smith throwing to him) where his ypc would have beaten every Packer who caught more than 12 passes in 2017. He does tend to get nicked up, but I think he's still got something in the tank...
RobinsonDavis
March 25, 2018 at 01:11 pm
Maclin's intriguing to me, too, though I have not seen him play recently. Packers really only have $8-10 million left though after accounting for Twill & Draft signings. Traditionally they have kept this amount of money on the side, but many holes are yet to be filled. They must be judicious/smart.
marpag1
March 25, 2018 at 09:30 am
.... unless the thought is actually to sign Matthews so that they can shed Cobb's 10 million salary. Then they'd gain resources, unless they give Matthews crazy stupid money.
Cubbygold
March 25, 2018 at 10:55 am
Absolutely. I'm not against Matthews entirely, I just don't see him as a great addition to the current roster. A replacement for cobb would be interesting though
marpag1
March 25, 2018 at 12:53 pm
That's about where I'm at, too. Production-wise, Cobb and Matthews are virtually the same guy ... 4.5 catches for 50 yards per game with a TD every 2 or 3 games. But Matthews is guaranteed cheaper, he's a little taller, a little bigger, a little faster, a little younger.
Perhaps most of all, Matthews got his production while playing with Foles/Sanchez in 2014, Bradford in 2015, the rookie Wentz in 2016, and Tyrod Taylor in 2017. Meanwhile, Cobb is catching balls from ARod.
And none of this considers the fact that Cobb has only one year left on a massive overpay, while GB would be free to sign Matthews at a reasonable amount for as long (or as little) as they wanted.
ChrisPeterson
March 25, 2018 at 10:32 am
I don't think that's true. They can get him and another corner and still have more than enough for draft picks. Williams is probably a guy they hope can start or play slot. I want another corner, one with starting experience. Then you will have a good mix of young and vets. Want sake at WR. I think GB can get by with what it has. But one Injury makes a big difference.
Cubbygold
March 25, 2018 at 10:57 am
So i think GB is going to have about 12M in cap space. If they sign Matthews Id expect that to drop to 7. I don't see GB resigning Evans or getting a decent O-lineman and a TW level CB for that.
Cubbygold
March 25, 2018 at 10:58 am
Edit - getting both, not "or"
RobinsonDavis
March 25, 2018 at 01:42 pm
Cap money is lower than most think, but to your point, Chris.....Jahri signed for $2.5 million last year, House for $2.8. If the Packers can find similar deals, that leaves roughly $4-5 million for Jordan or whomever (provided no cuts or renegotiatations with other contracts).
One of the elephants in the room is if Bulaga will be ready to start the season. If not, he likely will be out until week 8. If this is the case Packer fans, are you comfortable with McCray, Murphy, or Spriggs as your starting right tackle to open the season?... Especially with your star QB coming back from a broken clavicle? I think McCray did exceptional for his pedigree, especially inside, but he struggled at tackle. I would rather slide him to guard and find a tackle (probably in the draft). I also think of Murphy the same way. Both will battle you, but "hoping" they can improve, is not a good strategy IMO, especially with Murphy (and Spriggs) coming off a serious injury.
Rossonero
March 25, 2018 at 06:27 am
I'm in favor of signing Jordan Matthews-- but for the right price and incentives.
One thing I didn't see mentioned was Matthew's fairly extensive injury history, that includes knee injuries that go all the way back to 2014....it's also what landed him on IR in Dec. 2017. He's never played in all 16 games either.
However, he's a perfect buy-low candidate. It's not every day you can find a 6'3" 212 lb. WR who can run a 4.46 40.
Thegreatreynoldo
March 25, 2018 at 06:55 pm
Matthews played in all 16 games in 2014, and 2015. He played in 14 games in 2016. Your post is factually untrue. He did not have any known injuries in 2014, per the link below. The link does show several injuries to his ankle, so injury history is something to be considered.
http://sportsinjurypredictor.com/player/jordan-matthews/6963
Rossonero
March 26, 2018 at 05:34 am
I was basing it off the link below, but I was focusing on games started, not played, so my fault there. However, my 2nd link shows all games he missed due to injuries, and supports the fact that he's had knee issues since 2014.
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/M/MattJo00.htm
https://www.foxsports.com/nfl/jordan-matthews-player-injuries
Cartwright
March 25, 2018 at 06:35 am
Was hoping we were going to land the great Mike Wallace but this sounds like a much better idea. After Cobb and Adams we have a group of unknowns with potential but that's it. This goes for Graham too. Mathews has got a scorecard that defenses would need to account for, can't slough him off and forget about him allowing Cobb and Adams more space. You can plug him right in, whereas with a rookie WR you can't. Sounds rational, and as an off shoot maybe that will allow us to focus on the TE position in the draft because after Graham there is a bottomless cliff .
4thand1
March 25, 2018 at 07:50 am
You forget about R Rogers. AR likes him and teams may forget all about him leaving him wide open a lot.
4thand1
March 25, 2018 at 12:00 pm
I think Kendricks would've had a decent year last year if AR wouldn't have gotten injured. We need to make Barr pay.
RobinsonDavis
March 25, 2018 at 02:54 pm
I was disappointed in Kendricks. He dropped a number of key passes last year when we needed him most. Yet, he demonstrates the ability to get open and does create at other times. Enigma.
Bure9620
March 25, 2018 at 07:56 am
The other 31 teams are not jumping at him either, so it makes me wonder if there must be something worrisome in his medical. If heathly he does makes sense.
EddieLeeIvory
March 25, 2018 at 07:04 am
#UnleashJanis
marpag1
March 25, 2018 at 12:55 pm
We do. On punt coverage.
dobber
March 25, 2018 at 01:17 pm
His contract unleashed him. He's free to sign wherever he wants...
rvdh
March 25, 2018 at 07:29 am
Let’s see. You’d like the Packers to jump on Jordan Matthews for “probably at least an excess of $5 million a year.” He’s 6-3, 210-220 lbs., ran a 4.46 at the combine, more of a slot/possession guy now, not known for being able to gain separation easily. GB just decided that a 6-3, 215-pound guy with comparable speed and similar problems gaining separation wasn’t worth $2 million a year even though he is one of the greatest Packers of all time. Where’d the logic in spending at least $3 million a year more on Jordan Matthews than you were willing to pay Jordy Nelson? You really think Matthews would be that big an upgrade over Nelson, at that price? I don’t. If Matthews were a legit $5 million a year WR, he’d be signed already.
Cubbygold
March 25, 2018 at 08:22 am
This is why Im confused about him even getting a formal visit. If GB was going to dedicate $5M a year to a wr that isn't a true deep threat, jordy would have been the #1 choice.
HankScorpio
March 25, 2018 at 09:12 am
Found this blurb at Pro Football Rumors.
"Nagler also said that sources told him Matthews was offered a little over $1MM for a one-year deal after visiting the Cardinals earlier this week."
I don't know if that's true. But it fits the pattern of FA in years past. Once you get beyond the initial frenzy and things slow down, you see some really team-friendly contracts.
There are still lots of players left. The music is going to stop soon and everyone wants to have a chair when it does. Even if the chair is a rickety 3-legged stool, not a nice recliner with built-in cooler to keep the beers cold.
I'd be very surprised if the Packers sign Matthews for $5 mil AAV. I'm thinking more like the Evans/House/Brooks contract neighborhood. Or even less. That probably will apply equally to any other player to which they are linked from here on out. The $5 mil AAV deals are mostly gone for 2018 FA season.
Thegreatreynoldo
March 25, 2018 at 09:25 am
Well, I am glad Arizona insulted him first with a low ball offer. Now we can deliver our own low ball, and he won't feel so insulted! Apparently, low balling players without insulting them is a new, necessary secondary skill for GMs.
dobber
March 25, 2018 at 10:09 am
Well, the Packers can low-ball him and follow it with: but you'll be catching passes from Aaron Rodgers, and not Sam Bradford.
HankScorpio
March 25, 2018 at 11:20 am
If everyone is low-balling him, then nobody is low-balling him. Value is determined by what someone is willing to offer, not by the desired amount received.
John Ramble Kirk
March 25, 2018 at 01:42 pm
7-8 mil in cap savings going from oft injured Cobb to oft injured Matthews makes sense. Matthews is not a quick twitch guy which is a desired trait in a slot guy. Slot is also supposed to be fearless and tough. An oft injured guy doesn't really fit there, as he's going to get blasted. That was something I wrote about Nelson and this thought of moving him to the slot. He didn't have the desired attributes and you don't put a 30 something WR with injury issues there to take more punishment. A brilliant move getting rid of Jordy due to him being a non fit as a full time slot and way too slow to do damage outside. This is why if Matthews signs he has to be the thought for the slot. That's where Nelson would've had to go but he made no sense there and we already had spendy Cobb there. Recouping cap by doing this and getting a similar player makes a ton of sense.
It does feel like they're trying to get rid of Aaron's toys. I can't wait for his answer on how he feels about the changes in his WR corps if they part with Randall. The body language and words are going to say so much.
RobinsonDavis
March 25, 2018 at 01:54 pm
I wonder if they will try to appease Aaron with a WR in the draft.
John Ramble Kirk
March 25, 2018 at 04:06 pm
I sure hope they consider one strongly if the right one is there at 14.
Thegreatreynoldo
March 25, 2018 at 07:02 pm
IDK, if you like catching 5-yard outs and short crossers, Bradford probably is among the best at that.
4thand1
March 25, 2018 at 07:59 am
We don't need J Mathews. Save the money, we can draft a WR with more speed and fill a need, a guy that can stretch the defense. We have tons of guys that can catch passes and AR will spread the ball around.
EdsLaces
March 25, 2018 at 08:10 am
But we could use that high pick on a defender instead. #weneedadefense
4thand1
March 25, 2018 at 08:17 am
There are WR's in later rounds. WE have what most teams don't, a QB that can get them the ball.
Thegreatreynoldo
March 25, 2018 at 07:09 pm
Later round WR picks: Abby, Davis, Yancey, Dupre, Janis, Dorsey, Charles Johnson, Brett Swain, David Clowney, Corey Rodgers, and Craig Bragg. That is every single 4th to 7th round WR draft pick in the TT era. They all had either HOFer Favre or future HOFer AR "getting them the ball."
"How's that workin out fer ya?"
dobber
March 25, 2018 at 10:15 am
The less the draft is about demand and the more it's about opportunity, the better off the Packers will be in the long run.
lou
March 25, 2018 at 11:52 am
I agree Dobber, concentrating on defensive holes the last 5 drafts and missing on most cost Thompson his job. The old adage "best player available" sure works well for the Patriots.
Finwiz
March 25, 2018 at 12:12 pm
I agree 100%. He's not the kind of receiver we need.
I'd rather have Mike Wallace because that's the skill set GB needs.
Donster
March 25, 2018 at 08:22 am
If the Packers are talking to Matthews, that means they have some doubt about who they have on the roster after Adams and Cobb. Yes they let Jordy go, and I wasn't happy about it. But it was more about cost and they felt he couldn't get open like he used to. Though I feel his troubles last year was the QB after the first five games. Geronimo is slow. Davis is fast, but has shown little as a WR, and as a punt returner. We know nothing about DeAngelo Yancey as he never got off the practice squad. Clark has only shown some ability in practice, and he is a project player with limited football experience.
If you can grab Matthews for 1 year, $5 million or so, you can just draft one WR or two, and concentrate more on defensive players and offensive linemen. With Rodgers, Matthews will be an even better receiver. And we can't forget about injuries throughout the season. More veteran depth at WR gives the team a bit more insurance.
Dzehren
March 25, 2018 at 02:38 pm
James. Both can play slot CB though. Both are considered blue chip prospects.
John Ramble Kirk
March 25, 2018 at 08:05 pm
We knew they had doubt when they were looking into Sammy and AROB.
Not sure why WR isn't thought of as an incredibly high priority. I think it's 1a/1b with CB
HankScorpio
March 25, 2018 at 09:23 pm
The reason WR isn't thought of as an incredibly high priority can be stated in 5 words.
Aaron Rodgers will be back.
EdsLaces
March 25, 2018 at 08:25 am
Got a question for everyone. If they are somehow available (unlikely I know) ..do we draft Fitzpatrick or James? I think James is the better player but I'm down to debate ...
GB Jacker
March 25, 2018 at 08:37 am
I'd take James personally - I'm dreaming of Woodson 2.0 - dynamic chess piece who can rush, tackle and cover. Optimistic mind you.
EdsLaces
March 25, 2018 at 10:25 am
He's such a freakin hitterrrrr!
stockholder
March 25, 2018 at 12:43 pm
If your in Love with him Why did you ask? He's not Polamalu! Palamalu Ran 4.3. And was a hitter! I think people are going to shy away from him like Ha Ha Dix.
stockholder
March 25, 2018 at 08:42 am
They take Fitzpatrick. Dix will be a FA. Cb is a need. The Packers are tipping their hand by Not signing House. Sign Mathews? Too expensive. Wr rd. 2. Why do we have to still Trust in TT? Package the 2nd and 4th and move up!
dobber
March 25, 2018 at 10:29 am
They're not tipping their hand on House because he's going to be on the market for awhile, and there's likely 10 other CBs out there that look just like him. The only things distinctive about House are...
1. ...he's played for the Packers recently.
2. ...he's shown an ability to play press coverage, which we presume Pettine plans to employ. Are we really sure that Pettine wants to play a lot of press coverage?
stockholder
March 25, 2018 at 12:37 pm
He wants more money than they want to Fork over!
4thand1
March 25, 2018 at 08:47 am
What ever we do we better not miss. We won't draft this high again as long as AR stays healthy. This pick needs to be a bonified starter that makes an impact.
TKWorldWide
March 25, 2018 at 09:32 am
Boneless chicken wings>“bonified starter”
dobber
March 25, 2018 at 10:10 am
I think that would be a de-bonified starter...
TKWorldWide
March 26, 2018 at 05:17 am
In other words, a “boneless appetizer”?
Colin_C
March 25, 2018 at 12:17 pm
I'd go for James as well. Fitz is great as a single high safety, but I think James is overall more skilled and versatile, plus he didn't have nearly the talent level around him that Fitz did. James' 2017 tape did worry me a bit, as he looked more hesitant than the previous two years. Maybe it's the ACL tear, or he just was trying to improve on missed tackles. But either way, he's a dominate player, as well as a great team leader. In my eyes, a good dose of Derwin James is just what this new defense needs under Pettine.
Finwiz
March 25, 2018 at 12:27 pm
I like Derwin James a lot, so what's the chance he drops to 14?
My guess is he's top 8, so probably won't happen.
If he's there at 14, I'd say he's the guy for the GB secondary.
jww061356
March 25, 2018 at 06:04 pm
You can make a case for each. Fitzpatrick is considered a passionate, "coach on the field," that is rumored to raise the level of play of everyone around him. James is a physical freak that Pettine could move all over the field.
Ryan Graham
March 25, 2018 at 08:34 am
I was definitely skeptical at first, but I am sold. He has spent most of his career in a flawed Chip Kelly offense where he plugged him in the slot as a mismatch opportunity. He played pretty well there but I'm not so sure that is his natural position. First time playing in a truly prolific offense, could be dangerous....
I could be wrong, and if that's the case then I would say it's between he and Cobb. Matthews would be cheaper if they can sign him for 2-3 years at 7-8M per, but might cause more rift between GB and Rodgers. another gamble...
dobber
March 25, 2018 at 10:13 am
He raises the talent level in the WR room significantly...he's immediately, in my mind the 2b to Cobb's 2a. Someone pointed out that if Adams gets hurt and misses time, who does ARod throw to? There need to be solid answers to that question.
DD
March 25, 2018 at 09:17 am
Visited this last Thursday. Left town without signing. No chance now. Done.
Ryan Graham
March 25, 2018 at 09:25 am
I mean, that's just not true. If he wanted to as unprofessional as it may be he can be in a meeting with the 49ers pull out his phone to call BG and say "get guys, I'm in." Fleming just signed with Dallas after his visit a week ago.
4thand1
March 25, 2018 at 09:27 am
Really? So did Wilkerson, now he's a Packer.
dobber
March 25, 2018 at 10:11 am
Winner!
sheppercheeser
March 25, 2018 at 10:05 am
I am also on board with the theory that helping the defense can be achieved with a strong offense that stays on the field with sustained drives, keeping our defense fresh.
dobber
March 25, 2018 at 10:14 am
This is how Dallas won, what, 13 games in 2016.
Dzehren
March 25, 2018 at 02:54 pm
Packers’ 2018 draft class will only take up $2.9M in salary cap space
Andrew Lloyd Peth
March 25, 2018 at 10:32 am
I disagree with this article on every level--and I like Matthews as a player.
He's a terrible idea, however.
1. Matthews is most proven as a slot receiver, whereas we need a more established outside threat. I think we've all had our fill of the Packers forcing square pegs into round holes.
2. This changes, however, if we sign Matthews and cut Cobb. I'd LOVE that.
3. Everyone keeps forgetting our cap issues and Rodgers's looming extension...
4. Most importantly, we have 12 picks in this year's draft, and I can think of nothing dumber than loading up on FA's, thus removing roster slots for developing young talent. THIS IS A BAD TEAM, PEOPLE, and it will take a couple offseasons with big infusions of youth and athleticism to fix it.
THERE. IS. NO. QUICK. FIX.
So while I like Matthews, I'd only want him brought here if we save money and roster space by releasing Cobb.
Cubbygold
March 25, 2018 at 11:24 am
I'm no cap expert, but even if TWs contact is a fully guaranteed $5M that leaves GB with 12M this year and alot more next year with cobb/Matthews/bulaga dropping off.
I think they've got more than enough to sign 12 draft picks
Andrew Lloyd Peth
March 25, 2018 at 11:38 am
I didn't say they didn't have enough to sign draft picks. That was nowhere in my reasoning.
GB Jacker
March 25, 2018 at 11:35 am
Andrew - Green Bay does not have cap issues.
Andrew Lloyd Peth
March 25, 2018 at 12:21 pm
1. We have one of the NFL's lowest cap space figures.
2. We have a slow, unathletic roster that got its star QB injured by desperately trying to carry too much burden, and then needed overtime to beat the Browns and Buccaneers.
3. We have yet to make that QB by far the NFL's highest paid player.
4. We have three highly paid players (Matthews, Bulaga, and Cobb) who have no role on this team past this season.
5. While other teams are grabbing elite corners, we're forced to overpay a 35-year-old named Tramon Williams...all because we lack the resources to make serious bids on what we need.
So, yeah, WE HAVE MAJOR CAP ISSUES.
ChrisPeterson
March 25, 2018 at 12:24 pm
The Packers always have one of the healthiest cap situations in the league. If they needed to create space they could it. They can easily sign a veteran corner and receiver and have more than enough room for draft picks. I still think all three of the guys you mentioned could have a future, just have to see how this season goes. Matthews could settle into more snaps inside or a situational role. Cobb is only 28 and Bulaga isn't done yet. He might not be able to hold up but if he can, he's still a good player.
GB Jacker
March 25, 2018 at 12:49 pm
100% yes Chris Peterson
Andrew Lloyd Peth
March 25, 2018 at 06:07 pm
Chris, I have no doubt that Matthews, Cobb, and Bulaga can still play, but I believe they'd be better served on stronger, deeper teams--teams equipped to contend right now.
This team, however, has serious cap problems when one looks at the relative strength of various units (so you and I disagree). I don't think this team is loaded with talent that can make great use of a few high-paid role players at key spots. To me, the issues are deeper.
Bottom line is this: You and I want the same thing. We both want this to be a great team. We also fully agree on Jordan Matthews being a quality player (I like his game).
Our disagreement--and the main reason I'm always so hated on this site--is regarding the overall health of this roster. I believe the problems are deeper and too broad for quick fixes in one offseason. I believe we're better served targeting 2019 as our big comeback year, using this season to clear cap space and develop a draft class featuring an abundance of picks. Though these contracts are coming off next year, we can carry an additional $20-25 million forward by taking more aggressive steps now--while allowing more development of young talent.
Again, our goals are the same, but I just think pressing for instant gratification with these goals limits us going forward. This brings me constant backlash from all the fans--who are good fans--wanting to believe we can have it all this year without hindering ourselves going forward.
GB Jacker
March 25, 2018 at 12:39 pm
1. We have one of the NFL's lowest cap space figures.
Response: GB sits approximately in the middle of the league for cap space this year. So the facts don't reflect that. Rodgers deal could actually help provide cap relief in the short term - though I don't see any need for that.
http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/cap/
2. We have a slow, unathletic roster that got its star QB injured by desperately trying to carry too much burden, and then needed overtime to beat the Browns and Buccaneers.
Response: I personally don't think our roster is slow and un-athletic but that's debatable I guess. The roster did manage to go to the playoffs a league second best 8 years straight so it's not devoid of talent. There's at least a dozen players on our roster who would be difference makers on most NFL teams.
3. We have yet to make that QB by far the NFL's highest paid player.
Response: This is a good thing and an inevitability when you have the best player in the game. It also restricts a little bit what you can do in free-agency - would you rather cut Rodgers and start a new? His contract will likely fall somewhere close to parity with his last one in terms of cap impact - the cap has gone up by 50+ since his last deal.
4. We have three highly paid players (Matthews, Bulaga, and Cobb) who have no role on this team past this season.
Response: All three players have a role and should they hit the open market you would see teams give them money. Over the past two seasons their production might not match their performance, but you have to take cap spikes when players do well. CMIII was defensive MVP of the league!! I personally think all three (If healthy) have a significant role to play on this team in 2018 - seems the packers personnel department agrees.
5. While other teams are grabbing elite corners, we're forced to overpay a 35-year-old named Tramon Williams...all because we lack the resources to make serious bids on what we need.
Response: Elite corners? Come again? Marcus Peters might be an elite corner, but the other guys are just guys and they got PAID. They also got paid by bad teams with tons of cap room (which they have to spend) who have that cap room because they have not drafted enough talent to hand out many second or third contracts. Tramon Williams outperformed every other free agent DB according to PFF last year - for whatever that is worth. Value for money he could prove far better than Johnson, Butler and co.
Just my views.
Andrew Lloyd Peth
March 25, 2018 at 01:13 pm
1. When you factor in wins last year and roster quality, those teams with tighter caps than ours are actually in much better condition.
2. Watch tape--as I have--of our line and skill players against teams like Cleveland, Tampa, Minnesota, Detroit, etc. If you can still disagree after that, then I can't reach you.
3. I've never called for cutting Rodgers. Offering strawman arguments is the surest sign of a weak position. I'm simply saying we have a weak roster with a huge looming contract--do the math.
4. All 3 players have recent health and consistency issues making their contracts far large in the short term for a rebuild.
5. Tramon had once bounceback season and received a ridiculous $5 million/year. That's just plain foolish for a rebuilding roster.
GB Jacker
March 25, 2018 at 01:34 pm
Why would I factor in wins and roster quality when assessing cap space? Cap space is cap space.
I think alot of what has been up the past couple of years is on scheme and coaching. Not talent. I predict a significant improvement with Joe P and Mike P in the building. I think our O and D lines are actually above average in the NFL, certainly the starting 5 on O and starting 3-4 on D.
Well if you don't want Rodgers cut you have to live with the fact that he deserves to be the highest paid NFL player - which has consequences for the rest of the make up of the roster. Hence the success of teams in recent years with good QBs on rookie deals. Hard to have both.
Andrew Lloyd Peth
March 25, 2018 at 06:01 pm
Wins and roster quality are critical for cap space. If your team is young and talented with key players locked in for a couple years, then low cap space is no problem at all. If, however, you have a team that is low in talent, with expensive players in decline, then low cap space is devastating.
I think our current D-Line is the strongest unit on our team outside of QB. The O-Line is pretty good, though certainly not great. But now look at other units:
RB: A bottom 5 unit. Seriously, look around the league. Jones is the only hope of posing any threat.
TE: Barely average. Very poor blocking, with one older player hoping to recapture better days with new team. Backup is weak. Thankfully, Richard Rodgers is gone.
WR: Below average. Adams is a quality #2, no better. Cobb can play, but inconsistently and with unreliable health. The others have potential, but little history.
ILB: If Jones is included here (and he should be), this is a fairly strong area.
OLB: Bad. Perry is very good overall when healthy, but that is a real issue. Matthews had a pretty good bounceback season, but he strikes no fear and is in real decline. The backups are horrifying.
Safety: Weak. HHCD had an awful year, and while I too expect improvement under new coaching, it wasn't coaching that caused him to miss tackles and lag in coverage. Brice and Evans have nice potential, so we'll see.
CB: Poor. King is the only legit player, if his health and development come through. Everyone else is either old or lacking in technique.
Look, this is a bad roster, and it forces the QB to overplay and overextend in hopes of carrying it. Rodgers can't keep that up, and we're begging to get him killed out there if we don't do a serious rebuild over these two offseasons.
Rodgers is going to get paid, and should. This is all the more reason to build a young, low-cost roster over two offseasons, rather than blowing cap space this year. Remember, every dollar we spend on Cobb, Matthews, and Bulaga is a dollar we can't move to next year and the next.
There would be little issue with Rodgers's contract if we had a vibrant young talent base or loads of cap space. Thanks to terrible drafting and planning by Ted, we have neither.
RobinsonDavis
March 25, 2018 at 02:32 pm
I think the arguments here are apples and oranges to a certain extent, regarding the monies the Pack has under the cap. Since you used Sportrac, let's use their numbers. Sportrac has the current Packers' Salary Cap at $17 million under the max for the top 51 contracts. However, their numbers do NOT include the Tramon Williams signing and the signings needed for the upcoming draft class. Assuming Tramon Williams' contract averages out to $4.7 million for this year and the higher draft pick signings at an additional $3 million (this last number is fairly solid for their current draft positions), the Packers have a little over $9 million left.
Dobber, TGR, and Cubbygold to a certain extent, have all talked this point previously.
Andrew Lloyd Peth
March 25, 2018 at 11:51 am
Repost.
Thegreatreynoldo
March 25, 2018 at 08:41 pm
NFL teams can almost always easily create additional cap space. GB can ask Bakh, Perry to convert Roster bonuses to an option bonus (they don't have enough base salary to create cap space) to pick up $4M and $3M, respectively. GB can ask Bulaga or Daniels to convert base salary to a bonus to create about $4M in cap space each. I'd hate to touch Adams' contract: the only thing I like about it is the structure. Then there is AR.
All these things reduce our cap space in 2019 and 2020. GB has had a healthy cap situation precisely because we don't do this kind of stuff. Of course, they could extend (or cut I suppose) CM3 and Cobb. So there are options. Doing this once seems not horrible to me, but making a habit of it probably creates more problems.
flackcatcher
March 25, 2018 at 10:20 pm
Giving the way the Packers have handled their contracts to create cap space, I'm a bit perplex why some folks want to do a complete teardown. The risks of a hard rebuild are enormous. We all know the results if a team fails. (see Packers 1970s to 1992. Or a more recent example, see Chicago Bears last decade.) Your not just wiping out the 53 man roster, you are also(and more importantly) taking a blowtorch to your front office. For any sports franchise, that is one hell of a risk to take with no chance of future returns. No sane owner would want to turn their team into a money pit. (Not even Jerry Jones....0:)
Andrew Lloyd Peth
March 25, 2018 at 11:26 pm
No one is asking for a "complete teardown." Clearing a few large contracts on declining talents to allow a faster rebuild is not a "complete teardown." Nor is it in any way taking a blowtorch to the front office. That's just bizarre.
As for risk, there is no greater risk than guaranteeing we have $20-25 million less to spend on talent in 2019--all because of quick fix desperation. Every dollar we waste in 2018 guarantees a dollar less in 2019--all for a team that has virtually no shot at Super Bowl contention this year.
That's too much risk.
Andrew Lloyd Peth
March 25, 2018 at 11:16 pm
1. Obviously it's not so easy to create cap space, which is why teams lose players they don't want to lose. They run out of cap space.
2. Converting salary to bonus doesn't create cap space--it reallocates it, spreading it over the remainder of contract. This would be incredibly foolish, simply locking in more guaranteed.
3. Green Bay does not have a healthy cap situation, which is why we can't add higher quality players we need. After the ridiculous payment to Tramon Williams, we're in a sorry state--low talent, high dollars to declining talents, a massive impending contract to our QB, and small cap space.
Whatever. I don't know why I bother.
HankScorpio
March 25, 2018 at 11:27 pm
" Green Bay does not have a healthy cap situation, which is why we can't add higher quality players we need. "
When it comes to CB and/or Edge pass rusher, the issue was mostly that there was no higher quality players at prices that avoid creating cap issues or making them worse. They could overpay for questionable talent or pay peanuts for talent with more questions. Healthy cap or not, the smart move is paying peanuts when those are the choices.
Just because you want FA to be the solution to a problem does not mean that it can be.
flackcatcher
March 26, 2018 at 08:28 pm
ALP, you have made so very strong arguments here. I disagree, but much of what happens depends upon the CBA. I happen to think the talent on this team is better, and the Packers are already in the middle of a soft rebuild. This year and the next will tell the tale. If the Packers GM fails, then the odds are high for a total rebuild. What your suggesting could be done prior to 2010 when the CBA kicked in. Today, under the collective bargaining it makes signing FA to make up the bulk of your team very risky. The real crime is the current CBA makes it close to impossible to trade players in their prime. And that's how NFL teams use to built their rosters other than than the draft. I think you would be surprised with how many of the commentators agree with your basic point. What you want to do is simply not possible under the current structure. And that's the real crime.
RobinsonDavis
March 27, 2018 at 09:52 pm
Hang in there ALP! I Agree with the first 2 points, and it IS the silly season! Absorb the diversity of thoughts and continue to post your own. It does make me wonder if some of the other posters are as cavalier with their own monies, though.
RobinsonDavis
March 27, 2018 at 09:03 pm
Hang in there ALP! I Agree with the first 2 points, and it IS the silly season! Absorb the diversity of thoughts and continue to post your own. It just makes you wonder sometimes how some of the other posters manage their own monies.
RobinsonDavis
March 27, 2018 at 09:10 pm
Precisely! Well stated, TGR & Hank.
Minniman
March 25, 2018 at 11:28 pm
Andrew, a good point re loading up on FA's with so many drat picks.
I posted up the chain in this behemoth of a comments section, but what about trading picks for proven performers? I mentioned previously my personal interest in Martavis Bryant - who I think would be a star with AR.
Steelers have a very solid WR room, top shelf running back and a fair to good TE. With 1 year left on his contract Bryant's going to want the opportunity to be #1 WR, and early signs are that AB and Samu are the #1 and #2 locks.... so they may be unlikely to pay for what they see as their #3 WR.
I wonder if this isn't an option with CB too - look to trade with teams that are stacked in that area
JohnnyLogan
March 25, 2018 at 11:29 am
We have as a big a need at receiver as we do at CB. Behind Adams and Cobb, putting tight end aside, there's nothing. We've been obsessing about the need for speed and would be starting Allison if the season started today. He's sloooow. I'd rather try Matthews outside, he has more speed and greater tools than Allison. Davis is a bust. Yancy is a ?. Rookies are slow to develop. If Adams or Cobb goes down the receiving corps is hot garbage. Matthews, or some other veteran with some speed, is a must sign. I don't blame Gute for not signing the big name WR's that were out there, so he'd better hit on a couple in the draft. But a veteran is still needed.
4thand1
March 25, 2018 at 12:09 pm
You named 3 quality pass catchers in your first two sentences. That's pretty good for any team. Also you forgot Monty, and A Jones out of the backfield. That's 5, and R Rodgers who has good hands , that's 6. Yancy could be 7 and Geronimo 8. Kendricks is still on the team. Also a pretty good guy throwing them the ball...................R-E-L-A-X
EdsLaces
March 25, 2018 at 04:46 pm
It's funny how spoiled we are we have 3 damn good targets between Cobb Adams and Jimmy and people act like we have the worst pass catchers in the league .
JohnnyLogan
March 25, 2018 at 05:15 pm
Adams goes down and your wideouts are Allison and Clark or Yancy. A rookie may beat them out but with McCarthy that's unlikely. He'll continue to play Allison and everyone will gush about a catch here or there but in the end he's a slow JAG receiver who will scare no one. Monty hasn't proven himself as a receiver in the slot let alone outside. I don't know where all your confidence is coming from.
Thegreatreynoldo
March 25, 2018 at 08:16 pm
RR isn't signed. I've no idea what his market is. Should be negligible since he isn't very good.
NitschkeFan
March 25, 2018 at 11:52 am
Jordan Mathews has been injured a TON, from high school ( I think I read that he had a fractured back) through the pro's he has missed many many games due to injury.
If they can sign him to a very friendly deal (is there a way to protect the team if he gets injured yet again?) then yes we need another WR.
dobber
March 25, 2018 at 07:19 pm
I think you're thinking Delvin Breaux.
Colin_C
March 25, 2018 at 12:00 pm
Great article Chris! Very well written!
ChrisPeterson
March 25, 2018 at 12:20 pm
Thank you! Thanks for reading.
4thand1
March 25, 2018 at 12:48 pm
Sign U Bolt. Have him take off from the 25 on first down every time, the safety would have to play around his own 40.
Finwiz
March 25, 2018 at 12:56 pm
I've always wondered why somebody didn't lure him into the NFL.
He's got the body for it.
dobber
March 25, 2018 at 01:24 pm
Because he's a legend, especially in his home country that reveres sprinters and in Europe where track and field is a bigger deal. Why tarnish his image by failing in the NFL?
In Edit...his net worth:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/usain-bolt-worlds-fastest-man/0/how-much-is-...
4thand1
March 25, 2018 at 08:18 pm
Cap hell, he makes waaaaay too much.
lecko
March 26, 2018 at 04:34 am
He want second carrer, but in real football: He made a tryout with Borussia Dortmund : https://www.bundesliga.com/en/news/Bundesliga/usain-bolt-borussia-dortmu...
stockholder
March 25, 2018 at 01:45 pm
Draft Teks mock for the patriots. Hurst DT, Carter OLB, Jefferson LB. Who do we get. Jackson, langley, Davenport, A Wr. A Guess. Every year it's the same thing. You guys want the flash in the pan. The senior Bowl hype, or some guy that looks great in underwear. Do you really see them signing some guy for Brady. No they're after Trench and Lbs. Do we go after Lbs. No, we take drafted secondary guys that are projections. TT was replaced because he took gambles. His Comp picks didn't give you the defensive return! People; A-Rod is your next TT. And will try to use retreads! Because we think he's the only player thats going to get us to the super-bowl. Mathews isn't the answer! It's raining on your parade. The way to the super bowl must be defense! You lost out> And the packers will lose out on the future, fixing the hole.
4thand1
March 25, 2018 at 01:55 pm
Give change a chance, this a new year, new GM. New defense and new offense. A-Rod is your next TT ?????
stockholder
March 25, 2018 at 02:16 pm
He's one step from disaster. We have a team full of injury prone players. The stats did not lie. One step away.
4thand1
March 25, 2018 at 02:42 pm
I'm still confused, are you saying AR will be replaced and given a new position to play,lol
dobber
March 25, 2018 at 07:20 pm
He's going to start covering punts like Taysom Hill... ;)
AgrippaLII
March 25, 2018 at 02:13 pm
The Packers need another wideout receiver...not another slot guy.
jww061356
March 25, 2018 at 04:39 pm
Gotta be honest, I am really on board with this for the right price. I think he could still be utilized as a downfield boundary threat and maybe even a piece that would better allow them to move the other pieces around. Just imagine for a moment a lineup of Adams, Cobb, Graham, and Matthews, with a physical freak like Michael Clark taking a leap forward and having an impact in the red zone. All that and a running game? A lot of ifs and buts, but man......that would be something to see with Rogers still in his prime.
4thand1
March 25, 2018 at 08:12 pm
A running game with AR is big by itself. What do we do if one of premium backs are still there when we pick in the 2nd? BAP
Spock
March 25, 2018 at 10:25 pm
One thing I always enjoy on this site is the spirited opinions on a player I know nothing about (I don't follow/watch other teams). It gives me a feel about the 'general consensus' on a player. It appears to me that the majority here view Matthews as a slot receiver primarily. Seems to me that we have plenty of people to play that position on the Packers (Ty, Cobb, Allison, etc.). I've read repeatedly here that "we need more speed WR's". Do we really? I'm just going to throw this out there: What if Philbin gets the offense back to more of a true "West Coast" offense with shorter passes (aka Brady/Patriots style) and more runs. Would that be so bad? How many times have we, as fans, shouted at the t.v. when Arod forgoes the open receiver sure first down 10 or 12 yards down the field on 3rd down for the 'flash' long pass? Now I love watching QB1 make those long passes as much as anyone, but I hate when those don't connect and the punt team comes on. We have a decent RB backfield and plenty of 'quick twitch' athletes at the WR position. I get the need for the other team to 'respect the long pass', but how much speed vs. footwork does that actually require? Just a thought from someone who admittedly knows little about football compared to many on this site! I'm honestly asking. If we draft a WR who plays just enough to 'stretch the field' would that be enough vs. getting a FA who may or may not be able to help with that? I'd appreciate any explanations. Thanks.
Andrew Lloyd Peth
March 25, 2018 at 11:39 pm
Because we have the league's slowest set of receivers, defenses are sitting on our traditional West Coast routes. Also, compared to most teams, we most certainly do not have quick twitch athletes at WR. Far from it.
Over the past couple seasons, I've seen more press coverage against our receivers than I've seen with any other team in my memory. Teams are crowding us and defending far less field, leaving us incredibly reliant on Rodgers threading needles. It's unsustainable, and eventually, it gets your QB killed. He can only buy so much time with his feet for your turtles to get open.
No one's saying speed is everything--nothing is everything--but this notion that speed barely matters is...well...pretty unique to some people in Green Bay's fan base. I've lived in a few other major football markets, and I've never heard so many people in any other fan base try to convince themselves that speed at WR is virtually meaningless.
Thegreatreynoldo
March 26, 2018 at 03:25 am
Well done. IDK the answers to your questions. Consensus:
1. Jordan Matthews has played primarily the slot.
2. No one seems to assert that JM can play boundary.
3. No one seems to assert that JM can be a deep threat.
4. Anyone else think of Geronimo as a slot WR (hehe).
5. JM can replace Cobb, perhaps at a lower cost.
A. Can Monty replace Cobb if necessary?
B. Is replacing Cobb with JM a good idea?
C. How would Cobb, Adams, Graham fit?
Verdict: TBD
dobber
March 26, 2018 at 07:40 am
I think, added to this, is that a Jordan Matthews signing can't be an isolated move. There needs to be other dominos to fall with it--whether it's Cobb and his contract or the signing/drafting of a legit outside WR--to determine its value.
Spock
March 26, 2018 at 08:26 am
Thanks all for the replies!
IBackthePack92
March 26, 2018 at 01:24 am
I think J. Mathews would compliment D. Adams and the rest of our receivers. That's exactly what we need, a player that can be a threat at #2 wr and actually he could be as good as a #1 wr with Rodgers.
Imo- D. Adams is a #1 wr and he will prove it if he has someone like a Jordan Mathews or Matarvius Bryant as a #2. The reason I think he didnt have the numbers is due to injuries on offensive line (so short dump pass play calling), to no other threats at wr position and the slowest receiving core in the NFL. (Defenses played up a lot knowing we couldnt go deep). Imo Rodgers is the GOAT but imagine if he gets Mathews with Adams, Monty, Graham, and maybe draft Dj chark in 2nd round. We throw in Aaron Jones in the backfield, and our line stays healthy. We would be a team no defense would want mess with.
Thanks. True Packer Fan
Thegreatreynoldo
March 26, 2018 at 06:22 am
There are reports that GB made a competitive offer to Allen Robinson, whose quotes seem to confirm it. Robinson signed with the Bears on March 15 for $14M AAV, including an $11M cap hit in 2018.
Interesting.
Edit: Robinson's contract with Chicago is interesting. 3 yrs/$42M ($14M AAV), but he got a tiny signing bonus of $6M. He earns $15M in cash in year one through salary and roster bonuses, but his dead money for year two is only $4M, so there isn't a lot of dead money protecting year two earnings, and only $2M protects year three earnings. In other words, the contract sounded more impressive than it is. Cap savings in year two is $11M: anytime cap savings is that large, and any time the cap savings is about 3 times the dead money cap hit, that player is going to be a primary target as a cap casualty. And Chicago is a team that can easily absorb a $4M dead money hit. Obviously, GB's offer probably differed significantly in structure from Chicago's.
marpag1
March 26, 2018 at 07:05 am
I saw that too. The contract terms actually make sense IMO. Otherwise I thought CHI massively overpaid, but the lack of guaranteed money mitigates that. From a team perspective, if he plays lights out, he will be worth the full value of the contract. If he doesn't, dump him with no great loss. I assume that the total package offered by CHI is greater than GB's offer, even if GB may have guaranteed more, and Robinson is betting on himself that he'll do enough for CHI to keep him around.
I always thought that Robinson - who had one admittedly awesome season + a two years of blah + serious injury concern - was a rather high risk FA target.
RobinsonDavis
March 27, 2018 at 09:38 pm
TGR - as you and I have discussed, I believe this (and a couple of other FA misses) proves the Packers GM staff were willing to do some restructuring with their cap, whether it would be through cuts or contracts. Although, they would have been able to fit anyone of these guys under their cap, it would have almost negated any other moves without a restructured cap.
I am not making a comment regarding if they approached this correctly, only that they seemed to be very methodical as to how they approached these players of interest. If one failed, they would move on to the next, meaning they were willing to make one more big move. A handful of misses nonetheless, but their consistent attempts for some higher end guys, appears very different than previous years.
Thegreatreynoldo
March 28, 2018 at 04:59 am
Agreed. And I hope ALP (the comment you applauded above) understood that I was largely agreeing with him, with perhaps less emphasis.
DD
March 26, 2018 at 08:16 am
Jordy gone. Matthews left town. Not signing, draft now. Rodgers not happy.
dobber
March 26, 2018 at 08:56 am
Thank you, Tarzan. ;)
youtube.com/watch?v=TNHUMtW0uso
Ares GodOWar
March 31, 2018 at 09:22 am
How in the world is JMatt a good fit for my Packers , You do know he is a slot WR he plays the same position as Cobb right ?