Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 11 of 12 FirstFirst ... 9101112 LastLast
Results 151 to 165 of 174
  1. #151
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    7,452
    I almost forgot about Funchess, as did the rest of then league potentially. You have a guy with a lot of upside, young, and assuming his deal is structured like Kirksey and Wagner, benefit to play I think it's a great deal. Kirksey and Funchess if healthy can be to major home runs. Funchess injury was a collar bone, besides that I dont think he's missed too many games. Still too early in his career to say he's injury prone. If he is in his 17-18 form this is a great move. We have Adams, Lazard, and Funchess who you can feel pretty good about. You expect a high pick as well meaning MVS, St. Brown, and Kumerow likely are competing for 1 or 2 spots. Plus Funchess is only 26. Looking forward to see the deal he got. This a move a lot of people over look and you might say wow at the end of the season.

    He's got that 2nd round pedigree as well. A guy if heals up likely a solid bounce back candidate. This was the kind of move I was hope for a young vet, not too much. Much better fit. Get better while keeping the future in mind, Funchess could end up being a long term option.
    Last edited by IRNMN; 03-24-2020 at 07:27 PM.

  2. #152
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    iowa
    Posts
    8,262

  3. #153
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    7,452
    I'm interested to see the final numbers if the deal as anything 3 mil or below it's a great deal because we paid Geronimo 2.8 mil last season. Funchess even if he's a little rusty is an upgrade over Geronimo. Funchess' worst healthy season is still better than Geronimo's best statistically speaking. Funchess had an early issue with the drops which seemed to go away in his age 23, 24 seasons. I don't have too much concern he should be good to go health-wise for the season.

    The cards fall right, Allen Lazard is our #4 this coming season with MVS, Kumerow, or St. Brown as the #5 or battling a rookie for the spot.

  4. #154
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    11,767
    Maybe I'm the minority, but I'm not sure funchess is better than lazard and they are basically the same role. Given his recent history, I can't imagine it's a huge deal, so I'm not upset, but this really doesn't do much for me.

  5. #155
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Schofield, WI
    Posts
    2,858
    Quote Originally Posted by gopackgo87 View Post
    Kind of working out as I expected. Said Pack would go ILB in FA to focus on other areas in draft and became clear when Colts OT got 16 mill that Bulaga was going to be too expensive to bring back. Packers get stopgap in Wagner. Like Both deals really as Kirksey is little risk. I don't think Pack sign either of Schobert or Littleton in FA. Too expensive. But maybe another buy low guy in second wave of FA. I think they will go cheap maybe on a WR like a Funchess or Robinson if go slot guy type. Then maybe Pierce as a run stuffer DL. I think a TE in draft like Albert O. is going to be the answer at TE with another couple WRs taken/OL depth and another young run stuffer are the needs. But signing these guys in FA allows Pack to go for a HR with early pick as not too many holes on this roster now other than those mentioned.
    Some didn't forget about Funchess

  6. #156
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    iowa
    Posts
    8,262
    Quote Originally Posted by crewfan13 View Post
    Maybe I'm the minority, but I'm not sure funchess is better than lazard and they are basically the same role. Given his recent history, I can't imagine it's a huge deal, so I'm not upset, but this really doesn't do much for me.
    I don't think its a huge move, I just think they are banking on him still being young that he could finally put it all together and become a good player. I'm willing to bet the deal is like what the Tom Silverstein tweet said. 1 year deal for the 1 mil but only count 750k against the cap

  7. #157
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    7,452
    Quote Originally Posted by crewfan13 View Post
    Maybe I'm the minority, but I'm not sure funchess is better than lazard and they are basically the same role. Given his recent history, I can't imagine it's a huge deal, so I'm not upset, but this really doesn't do much for me.
    On this it's a cheap quality receiver. What Funchess does is give us an upgrade at a cheap cost who could blossum into a plus talent. As long as he is healthy the deal will be a steal. But this helps the draft picture as well. You can take a guy like Reagor, Hamler, Shenault, or Aiyuk to add explosiveness which we may not have.

    As much as I like Lazard and I think he's going to get better. Funchess brings bigger upside. Even if you dont see him as better than Lazard he's a better option than Geronimo for example. More reliable at this point than what MVS or St. Brown has shown. If they dont feel good about these guys use one of those late round picks to take a second WR in the draft.
    At the end of the season I think this will go down as a brilliant move.

  8. #158
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    11,767
    Quote Originally Posted by IRNMN View Post
    On this it's a cheap quality receiver. What Funchess does is give us an upgrade at a cheap cost who could blossum into a plus talent. As long as he is healthy the deal will be a steal. But this helps the draft picture as well. You can take a guy like Reagor, Hamler, Shenault, or Aiyuk to add explosiveness which we may not have.

    As much as I like Lazard and I think he's going to get better. Funchess brings bigger upside. Even if you dont see him as better than Lazard he's a better option than Geronimo for example. More reliable at this point than what MVS or St. Brown has shown. If they dont feel good about these guys use one of those late round picks to take a second WR in the draft.
    At the end of the season I think this will go down as a brilliant move.
    I guess I don't know that funchess is higher upside. Lazard didn't do agility drills at the combine, so we can't compare those. And if we take funchess pro day 40 time, which was in the 4.5 range, they are basically the same athlete. Almost identical in size, speed, leaping and bench. And watching their games, they win in similar ways. Lazard has shown he can go up and get it and does a nice job using his body to shield defenders. He also does a decent job of getting a but of seperation on quick routes like slants and stops where his body size comes in handy. That's basically funchess.

    Lazard was targeted in 11 games last year and went for 35 catches for 477 and 3 tds. Funchess last year in Carolina was 44/549/4 in 14 games. His first 2 seasons in Carolina were worse than lazard and I would say the role was similar. So funchess has had 2 "better" seasons than lazard, and if lazard would have played 14 games, funchess would have 1 better season. And that season was good, with 63/840/8, but it also came on 111 targets. I get you just can't extrapolate targets, but lazard got 52 last year. So he had more than half the catches and yards on less than half the targets.

    It's not bad because it's cheap and provides some experience to a pretty weak wr group. But if lazard and funch are healthy, they are pretty much interchangeable to me. And that wr profile is nice to have, but it's not the body type where you want more than 1 of those types of guys on the field at the same time besides maybe in the red zone. So I'm fine with it, I just don't think it moves the needle much as his spot is a bit redundant.

  9. #159
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    11,767
    To me, even if funchess is a better player, I'd rather have Taylor Gabriel than funchess. No idea what each costs and maybe the cost will be very different, but gabriel is at least a little different than what we have and provides something we don't currently have as a downfield threat with some agility.

  10. #160
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Schofield, WI
    Posts
    2,858
    Quote Originally Posted by IRNMN View Post
    On this it's a cheap quality receiver. What Funchess does is give us an upgrade at a cheap cost who could blossum into a plus talent. As long as he is healthy the deal will be a steal. But this helps the draft picture as well. You can take a guy like Reagor, Hamler, Shenault, or Aiyuk to add explosiveness which we may not have.

    As much as I like Lazard and I think he's going to get better. Funchess brings bigger upside. Even if you dont see him as better than Lazard he's a better option than Geronimo for example. More reliable at this point than what MVS or St. Brown has shown. If they dont feel good about these guys use one of those late round picks to take a second WR in the draft.
    At the end of the season I think this will go down as a brilliant move.
    As far as the draft I agree. I think a lot what Gute is doing is filling some holes to kind of hone in on draft needs. Reagor/Shenault seem like real possibilities and I will throw in Albert O too. NE might take him at 32 but a 6-5 TE ...I think it also speaks to not loving the big WRs but liking the speed guys in this class. ILB was shored up, a RT..so I think this hones in on playmakers and a TE in draft and with Kirksey/Wagner you can now move the ILB. OL to later in draft also became obvious Queen/Murray likely gone. Dl run stuffer could and probably should be an early pick as well.

  11. #161
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    11,767
    I'm not sure I'd say ilb was shored up. We signed a guy who played 9 games the last 2 seasons and lost the top 2 guys from a snaps perspective in the middle of our defense. I think that could very easily still be a high priority position.

    And thats one thing I'm struggling with a bit. Our offseason wasn't bad by any means. We dont have a ton of money to spend given the future contracts we have with extensions and the growth in salary for guys like Rodgers and the Smiths. But we still have alot of holes. We are very likely going to need a OT in a year or 2. We need DL help immediately. We need wr help immediately. We could need ilb help immediately but likely soon anyway. Another upside TE wouldnt hurt. That's alot of potential holes to fill via draft.

  12. #162
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    iowa
    Posts
    8,262

  13. #163
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    937
    re: Funchess signing. depth at WR right now is this. Adams, Funchess, Lazard, Kumerow, MVS. Allison is not signed. ESB is ? i think Allison should be resigned if nothing but for insurance. MVS offers nothing. that would be Adams, Funchess, Lazard, Kumerow and Allison as well as rookies. Allison did have a crap year last year but with Funchess being a number 2 that lets Allison and or Lazard play at 3/4. it's not a dazzling core to be sure but Allison was better as a 3. Crew you are right at pointing out the many holes, however GB has close to 10 picks this year. not too long ago it was all about competition and swings in the draft. there is that upside. this could be a good year in that 2 of the positions GB needs OT and WR offer a lot of options.

  14. #164
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    11,767
    I dont think funchess is the number 2. He's competition but he isn't noticeably better than lazard. And lazard definitely has a leg up since this is his 2nd year in the system and clearly has Rodgers trust. Assuming both are healthy, I'd be surprised if funchess outsnaps lazard.

    And sure, we have 10 picks, but let's level set expectations. You aren't getting 10 quality contributors. If you get 2-3 year 1 contributors (to more than just special teams), that's a win. And anything after the 3rd or 4th round, you're looking at realistically a rotational guy at best in most cases. Sure you can definitely get good starters anywhere in the draft, but you can't count on it.

    As a rule of thumb, your expectations should be that your 1st and 2nd rounders become starters in year 1 or 2. 3rd and 4th rounders should be maybe low end starters or decent rotational guys. And after the 4th, your looking for roster depth and special teams help. You take some chances on upside in hopes of finding more, but that's a decent expectation in my mind.

    To me, we're looking at round 1 and 2 quality needs at WR, OT, ILB and DL. Maybe you can find a guy for one of those spots in round 3. But you probavly need a round 4 quality guy at TE. And it wouldn't hurt to get depth at OG/C or RB, which could free up some cash come free agent/cut decisions in Linsley, turner, Williams and Jones.
    Last edited by crewfan13; 03-26-2020 at 09:27 AM.

  15. #165
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    937
    Crew, would you bring back Allison at less than a million? 10 picks is similar to early TT drafts. i think he actually traded back in those first 3 drafts and drafted 13 guys? not correct. he drafted 11 or 12 guys in his first 3 drafts. this draft is a good draft to take swings at the WR position in late rounds. as a general rule i dislike taking 3 guys in the same position in the same draft but this year i could see it happen with OT/guard and WR. i have heard GB will be aggressive" in the draft so i expect less than the 10 picks they currently have. it sucks that all those hybrid safeties picks have left the LB core so thin.

Page 11 of 12 FirstFirst ... 9101112 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •