My Week 2 Vibes

Captain Hook · Post by **Captain Hook** » Wed Sep 12, 2007 12:01 pm

Originally posted by Tom Kessenich:
Morency is talented but I don't think he's built to be a starter in the NFL. I'd compare him to Mewelde Moore in that he's a good short-term fix but you can't trust him for 16 games. That's the problem the Packers have. Thanks to Ted Thompson ignoring several possible ways to improve his RB situation he went with Morency and a rookie who many scouts had major questions about. So far, Jackson looks like a dog and Morency's been hurt. This is all on Thompson.

If Jackson continues to stink up the joint I think Morency will get a chance to start - assuming he can ever get healthy, of course. But the Packers' RB situation is a joke. It's too bad too because they have a playoff-caliber defense and a playoff-caliber QB both of which could very well be undercut by the lowly RB corps. The answer is there on the bench Tom - DeShawn Wynn

3INTBOY · Post by **3INTBOY** » Wed Sep 12, 2007 1:01 pm

Originally posted by Ugly Yellow Tomatoes:
I would be curious to know what other QB's were available at that point. I know some people had him as the 2nd and third QB ... I didn't. I had him 6th ... and he dropped because of the INDY game ... yea it's only one game ... but it was one very ugly game against a supposedly low ranked defense. Bulger, Romo, Big Ben, Kitna and some other very good QBs.

It was a very tough league, only 1 QB was selected before Round 5 then Carson and Brees went. Everyone ended up deep at the core spots.

3'

rkulaski · Post by **rkulaski** » Wed Sep 12, 2007 2:43 pm

Originally posted by Captain Hook:
quote:Originally posted by Tom Kessenich:
Morency is talented but I don't think he's built to be a starter in the NFL. I'd compare him to Mewelde Moore in that he's a good short-term fix but you can't trust him for 16 games. That's the problem the Packers have. Thanks to Ted Thompson ignoring several possible ways to improve his RB situation he went with Morency and a rookie who many scouts had major questions about. So far, Jackson looks like a dog and Morency's been hurt. This is all on Thompson.

If Jackson continues to stink up the joint I think Morency will get a chance to start - assuming he can ever get healthy, of course. But the Packers' RB situation is a joke. It's too bad too because they have a playoff-caliber defense and a playoff-caliber QB both of which could very well be undercut by the lowly RB corps. The answer is there on the bench Tom - DeShawn Wynn [/QUOTE]The Packers running game was bad on Sunday but it was the offensive line that is much more to blame than Jackson. Jackson actually played "okay" in my opinion but he had very little running room the entire first half. The Packers rbs will be fine (although there will be a committee all year so not good for fantasy).

When Morency comes back, he will definitely get a good portion of the carries. As for Wynn, he made a great run after the catch last week in the 3rd quarter and, while I don't know that he is "the answer," he is one to keep an eye on. The Packers "stole" him late in the draft.

renman · Post by **renman** » Thu Sep 13, 2007 2:08 am

To me, Brees, regardless of his first game, is a top 4 QB. Sometimes games go bad. Sometimes the other team just came more prepared or gameplanned better, or simply had more energy... the game got away from the Saints .. the end... With all the weapons Brees has, including the ability to dump off a swing pass to Bush that results in an 80 yard score, combined with an easy schedule and few games in bad weather... Brees, to me, is a steal in the 7th round.

Tom Kessenich · Post by **Tom Kessenich** » Thu Sep 13, 2007 2:17 am

I don't see Wynn being the answer either, Perry. I think the line will be fine as the year goes. I just don't think there is quality talent at RB. It's a mess and it's one Thompson created. I don't believe he should have kept Green - the Texans overpaid for him - but there were plenty of proven RBs who were available in the offseason or he could have been ultra-aggressive in the draft and gone after Lynch or maybe Peterson.

But Thompson isn't an aggressive GM. He's very passive and unfortunately his passiveness could cost his team a chance to make some noise in a wide-open NFC this season.

KOTRAX · Post by **KOTRAX** » Thu Sep 13, 2007 2:26 am

Originally posted by renman:
To me, Brees, regardless of his first game, is a top 4 QB. Sometimes games go bad. Sometimes the other team just came more prepared or gameplanned better, or simply had more energy... the game got away from the Saints .. the end... With all the weapons Brees has, including the ability to dump off a swing pass to Bush that results in an 80 yard score, combined with an easy schedule and few games in bad weather... Brees, to me, is a steal in the 7th round. THE BEST WAY TO DETERMINE THIS STATEMENT IS TO CHECK BREES STATS AFTER WEEK 11. DON'T GET ME WRONG I BELIEVE BREES IS A TOP 5 QB MYSELF HOWEVER OF A 16 GAME SCHEDULE. SEEING AS THE WCOFF IS 11 GAME SCHEDULE AND WITH THE DISMAL PERFORMANCE IN GAME 1 I DON'T THINK HE WILL BE TOP FOR COME WEEK 11. UNLESS BELIEVE HE WILL HAVE 250 AND 2 OR GREATER EVERY WEEK UP TO 11 THEN I DON'T SEE HIM FINISHING THERE. NOW BY THE END OF THE REGULAR FOOTBALL SEASON YES I DO.

renman · Post by **renman** » Thu Sep 13, 2007 3:42 am

Kotrax,

By week 11 we might say Ronald Curry should have gone in the 3rd round. We can only talk about how someone fell or went overly early in a draft before the season. It is all based on projections. I know the WCOFF is an 11 week season. But the value Brees brings in upside for weeks 2-11 is worth it. You simply plug your backup QB into the mix and roll the dice. The overall point is that I agree with Tom that Brees falling into the SEVENTH round based on one poor game (that you don't even have to use week one due to having a backup) is a steal for someone...

KOTRAX · Post by **KOTRAX** » Thu Sep 13, 2007 3:58 am

Originally posted by renman:
Kotrax,

By week 11 we might say Ronald Curry should have gone in the 3rd round. We can only talk about how someone fell or went overly early in a draft before the season. It is all based on projections. I know the WCOFF is an 11 week season. But the value Brees brings in upside for weeks 2-11 is worth it. You simply plug your backup QB into the mix and roll the dice. The overall point is that I agree with Tom that Brees falling into the SEVENTH round based on one poor game (that you don't even have to use week one due to having a backup) is a steal for someone... I UNDERSTAND YOUR POINT REMAN. I AM JUST SAYING THIS. BREES HAD ONE BAD GAME AND I KNOW ONE GAME DOES NOT MAKE A SEASON. THAT PART IS UNDERSTOOD HOWEVER NOW YOU HAVE THE GUY FOR NINE MORE GAMES BECAUSE OF HIS BYE. NOW WITH THAT BEING SAID OF THOSE NINE GAMES HOW MANY GAMES DO YOU THINK HE IS GOING TO BE A "STUD?" IN MY OPINION I WOULD SAY ABOUT SIX. THAT IS THE HIGH END. HE IS GOING TO HAVE GAMES LIKE HASSLEBECK AND BULGER HAD LAST WEEK AS WELL. NOT TERRIBLE BUT SUBPAR GAMES. IN AN 11 WEEK WCOFF SEASON YOU CAN NOT AFFORD THAT. IF THE SEASON WAS 16 WEEKS THEN IT WOULD BE DIFFERENT. I JUST THINK DRAFTERS THINK FOR THE SHORT TERM SEASON.

sportsbettingman · Post by **sportsbettingman** » Thu Sep 13, 2007 4:11 am

Originally posted by KOTRAX:
quote:Originally posted by renman:
Kotrax,

By week 11 we might say Ronald Curry should have gone in the 3rd round. We can only talk about how someone fell or went overly early in a draft before the season. It is all based on projections. I know the WCOFF is an 11 week season. But the value Brees brings in upside for weeks 2-11 is worth it. You simply plug your backup QB into the mix and roll the dice. The overall point is that I agree with Tom that Brees falling into the SEVENTH round based on one poor game (that you don't even have to use week one due to having a backup) is a steal for someone... I UNDERSTAND YOUR POINT REMAN. I AM JUST SAYING THIS. BREES HAD ONE BAD GAME AND I KNOW ONE GAME DOES NOT MAKE A SEASON. THAT PART IS UNDERSTOOD HOWEVER NOW YOU HAVE THE GUY FOR NINE MORE GAMES BECAUSE OF HIS BYE. NOW WITH THAT BEING SAID OF THOSE NINE GAMES HOW MANY GAMES DO YOU THINK HE IS GOING TO BE A "STUD?" IN MY OPINION I WOULD SAY ABOUT SIX. THAT IS THE HIGH END. HE IS GOING TO HAVE GAMES LIKE HASSLEBECK AND BULGER HAD LAST WEEK AS WELL. NOT TERRIBLE BUT SUBPAR GAMES. IN AN 11 WEEK WCOFF SEASON YOU CAN NOT AFFORD THAT. IF THE SEASON WAS 16 WEEKS THEN IT WOULD BE DIFFERENT. I JUST THINK DRAFTERS THINK FOR THE SHORT TERM SEASON. [/QUOTE]I honestly considered going Wayne/Peyton from the 11 in WCOFF because of that logic...it would have bought me a win week #1, and put me in much better shape than I'm currently in...but I rarely go vs. my gut, so I guess by week 3 I'll know if I was correct.

~Lance

pizzatyme · Post by **pizzatyme** » Thu Sep 13, 2007 5:05 am

Lance, you could certainly do worse than securing a week 1 win and having to "settle" for a Manning/Wayne combo.

KOT, how many top tier QBs had great weeks in week 1 who won't have 4 average or subpar games through week 11?

I think Brees would be a steal in the 5th. If you take your QB that early. Now, in the 7th, I'd be estatic to get Brees!!!