WR Dilemma?

[maddogkf]

How would you guys like to go into the season with this lineup:

These are stats from the previous season:

Your #1 WR had 13 rec for 167 yds, 1 TD.
Your #2 WR had no catches (rookie)
Your #3 WR had an injury the prev year, 6 rec 62 yds the prior yr
Your TE had 36 rec for 322 yds, 9 TD
Your RB had 1387 yds, 9 TD

 

[maddogkf]

..and here's another team's stats:

Your #1 WR 25 rec for 362 yds, 1 td
Your #2 WR 15 rec for 180 yds, 3 td
Your #3 WR 13 rec for 108 yds, 1 td
Your TE 44 rec for 358 yds, 1 td
Your RB 975 yds, 5 td

 

[maddogkf]

Guess who team # 1 is and guess who team # 2 is.


Does this change your perception at all?

 

[Krangodnzr]

The two worst teams in NFL history?

 

[JeffGollin]

Stats are for Fantasy Football

Who was throwing, who was blocking and who was running? Who was injured? And who was a rookie (or close to it?) Who was the OC (then and now)?

What happened last year statistically is not necessarily a predictor of what will happen next year.

You've got new people plus a bunch of young people with an additional year under their belts.

 

[maddogkf]

Team #1 was the Packers going into last year

Team #2 is the Cards going into this year....

Green Bay had let Freeman go and they had no experience at WR

This makes me feel a little bet better I guess. What about you?

 

[maddogkf]

The Packs were:


WR #1 - Donald Driver
WR #2 - Javon Walker
WR #3 - Karsten Bailer
TE - Bubba Franks
RB - Ahman Green


The Cards are:

WR #1 - Jason McAddley
WR #2 - Kevin Kasper
WR #3 - Nate Poole
TE - Freddie Jones
RB - Emmitt Smith

 

[DevonCardsFan]

Originally posted by maddogkf
Team #1 was the Packers going into last year

Team #2 is the Cards going into this year....

Green Bay had let Freeman go and they had no experience at WR

This makes me feel a little bet better I guess. What about you?

actually that does make me feel better and never thought of comparing this too the GB situation, I think this offense will move the Ball

 

[pinnacle]

only catch is that cards will add a veteran #1 prior to training camp..frank sanders or someone....but many of the potential candidates were injured last season - so #'s may be comparable. I know I risk the rath of Houdini...but I think the packers only looked like a contender last season because they have a great qb and they played the bears, vikings and lions 2x each last season..I actually think our current receivers are as good or better than who they started last season.. If favre were to miss a few games.. I think the pack will look pretty bad - especially in the upcoming season.. but I am clearly no packer expert..I saw them play like six times last season (including the playoffs).. I must have seen off games..

 

[KingofCards]

I would love it if we only looked like a contender....

 

[Houdini]

Originally posted by pinnacle
...I know I risk the rath of Houdini...but I think the packers only looked like a contender last season because they have a great qb .

I have no problem if anyone disagrees with me as long as they give a well thought out opinion saying why. But I agree with your statement above. The Packers are an average team riding on the coattails of a future hall of fame QB. That was always my biggest beef with the Plummer apologists. Favre doesn't have a great offensive line. Several of his starters on the O-line were out with injuries last year. He didn't have a great set of recievers to start the year last year. Green is good, but was banged up most of the year. The TE is overrated. I think Freddie Jones is better than Bubba Franks, but Plummer never got him the ball for some reason. I alway felt Plummer held the Cards back while Favre elevates the play of those around him because teams fear his arm. I've never been real high on Blake, but I like him a lot better than Plummer. It will be interesting to me to see what the Cardinals do on offense without Plummer for once. But considering how some average teams like the Packers and Falcons can become playoff teams with superstar QBs, is why I still believe the Cardinals should draft a franchise QB if they can. A great QB can turn around a franchise more than any other position in my opinion.

 

[Krangodnzr]

Originally posted by Houdini
I have no problem if anyone disagrees with me as long as they give a well thought out opinion saying why. But I agree with your statement above. The Packers are an average team riding on the coattails of a future hall of fame QB. That was always my biggest beef with the Plummer apologists. Favre doesn't have a great offensive line. Several of his starters on the O-line were out with injuries last year. He didn't have a great set of recievers to start the year last year. Green is good, but was banged up most of the year. The TE is overrated. I think Freddie Jones is better than Bubba Franks, but Plummer never got him the ball for some reason. I alway felt Plummer held the Cards back while Favre elevates the play of those around him because teams fear his arm. I've never been real high on Blake, but I like him a lot better than Plummer. It will be interesting to me to see what the Cardinals do on offense without Plummer for once. But considering how some average teams like the Packers and Falcons can become playoff teams with superstar QBs, is why I still believe the Cardinals should draft a franchise QB if they can. A great QB can turn around a franchise more than any other position in my opinion.

I respect you more and more!

 

[JasonKGME]

Originally posted by Houdini
I have no problem if anyone disagrees with me as long as they give a well thought out opinion saying why. But I agree with your statement above. The Packers are an average team riding on the coattails of a future hall of fame QB. That was always my biggest beef with the Plummer apologists. Favre doesn't have a great offensive line. Several of his starters on the O-line were out with injuries last year. He didn't have a great set of recievers to start the year last year. Green is good, but was banged up most of the year. The TE is overrated. I think Freddie Jones is better than Bubba Franks, but Plummer never got him the ball for some reason. I alway felt Plummer held the Cards back while Favre elevates the play of those around him because teams fear his arm. I've never been real high on Blake, but I like him a lot better than Plummer. It will be interesting to me to see what the Cardinals do on offense without Plummer for once. But considering how some average teams like the Packers and Falcons can become playoff teams with superstar QBs, is why I still believe the Cardinals should draft a franchise QB if they can. A great QB can turn around a franchise more than any other position in my opinion.

I agree that Favre is a hall of fame Qb, and makes his offense better. But what you fail to take into concideration is the defense, GB had a MUCH MUCH better D then the Cards did. Heck they gave up 79 less points then we did last year. And the big difference in defenses is they gave up 69 points in the first quarter last year, the Cards gave up 109 points, a 40 point difference in the 1st quarter alone. Sorry but put almost any QB in the same position and his stats are bound to go down.

 

[kerouac9]

The Pack also had Ahman Green (who is a 1300 yd threat every season if he can stay healthy) and Terry Glenn (who could have been making people wonder who Jerry Rice was if he'd been able to stay healthy and keep his head on straight). Regardless, Glenn's stats as the #1 were junk because he hardly played for the Pats the season before.

How Driver can do as a #1 WR this season is a big question for the Pack, and if Walker can finally step up and prove his draft value. The real important thing that allowed Brett to become an MVP candidate again last year was Ahman Green making people pay attention to the running game, rather than letting people drop five or six into coverage on every down. He's a true franchise RB, and I'm not certain (in fact, dubious) that we have that threat.

So, in comparison, we have a similar D to what the Pack had (one good safety, decent LB corps, workmanlike D-line), but a worse QB, a weaker running game (looking realistically), worse WRs (at least on paper and from what we've seen), the same at TE (Franks is a better TE in the red zone, and throwing passes, but Jones is betted in the open field, so it's kind of a wash [both TEs would be 83s in Madden]), and we have a better O-line. What's this mean? Nothing. The Pack, especially the Packer defense (Jason), benefited because CHI got killed by injuries early in the season, and the Vikings couldn't get on track until the last quarter of the season, and the Lions were, well, the Lions. We're in a divsion that could legitimately have three playoff teams next year, and none of them will probably be the Cards.

As for drafting a franshise QB, Houdini, I only have one thing to say to that (Some of our more short-tempered posters might want to stop reading now):

Pay attention, people! We have our QB of the future, and, like it or not, his name is Josh McCown. They said it when we drafted him as the 3rd QB off the board last year, and they said it the day that we signed Blake.

I give you my Kerouac 9's LOCK OF THE DRAFT: We will not draft a QB in the first four rounds. You can take that to the bank. Maybe next year, if McCown looks like the next Gio Carmazzi, but not this year.