Lessons Learned: James Jones Returns
Why fans went from thinking the Packers were better off without James Jones...to thinking the Packers could never afford to lose him.
By tundravision
So, what did we learn from the Packers’ re-signing of wide receiver James Jones?
Well, there’s the basics. The flurry of a three-day free agency period created a soft market for Jones, who might have found a suitor for a Super Bowl champion if they had more time to crunch numbers and take a sales pitch or two from his agent.
And, of course, we know that a fifty-catch, 679-yard performance in 2010 translates contractually to a $9.5M contract over the next three years, a respectable chunk of money made available by the departure of some longtime veterans. Pretty good change when you consider Jones vied for the third receiver spot with Jordy Nelson, and will again this season.
But when the ink dried on the signature, and Jones donned his #89 jersey again for training camp this week, we may have learned just how fast the tides turn for Packer fans. There’s a reason why when you look up the word “fanatic” in the thesaurus, entries such as “objective” and “rational” don’t appear next to it. Fans are passionate and intensely reactive, and when they collectively support or oppose something, it happens in waves. Huge waves.
James Jones was, perhaps after free agent defensive lineman Cullen Jenkins, the Player Most Likely To Leave The Team following the win in Super Bowl XL. The receiver, drafted in 2007, was a flashy playmaker type who announced he was looking for an opportunity to star, after playing behind Greg Jennings and Donald Driver his entire professional career. Consensus was that would not be in Green Bay.
The Packers seemed to agree, drafting speedy Randall Cobb in the second round. Given the entire draft appeared to be a series of replacements for anticipated departures (Sherrod for Colledge, Green for Jackson, Williams for Lee, Guy/Elmore for Jenkins), Cobb’s selection seemed to indicate that Jones’ career in Green Bay was as good as done.
And so began the wave among fans and the media, whether it was in the local bar, on Twitter, or in the blogs, justifying why the Packers were better off without Jones. It’s a natural phenomenon seen many times in fan history: if you’re with us, you’re awesome. If you’re no longer with us, there must be something wrong with you.
Most egregious in the case against keeping Jones was his dropped passes that seemed to plague him through last season. Blogs mounted lists of his mistakes, including a stripped “fumble” at the hands of Brian Urlacher in Week 3, contributing to a loss. They read like grievances, how so many of his drops woulda, coulda, and shoulda been touchdowns. Even if the Packers won the game (such as the Week 16 game against the Giants in which Jones whiffed completely on a pass whizzing by, or the Eagles playoff game where he simply had it and dropped it), Jones was too much of a hindrance to keep around.
But we didn’t stop there. We decried the glut of receivers that the Packers would have in the stable this season: with the return of tight end Jermichael Finley and the addition of Cobb, there simply weren’t enough balls for Aaron Rodgers to throw around and keep everyone happy. Most concerning was the plummeting of Greg Jennings’ stock in the eyes of the NFL, a wide receiver we know to be among the league’s best, but fading from view by not getting enough balls thrown his way.
And of course, the was the case for spending the money at one position when other positions on the team, notably linebacker and defensive line, are getting thinner and thinner. When you consider the number of times the defense had to bail out the offense last season, investing in luxury players on one side of the ball at the expense of the other seemed ludicrous. Insane. Outrageous.
And in the monotonous months of the lockout, we built that case against Jones. The Twitterati would have little to do with suggestions of keeping him, and there were even whispers that Jones’ own swaggering ego was holding him back, referring to himself in the third person and not addressing his own failings. When the end of the lockout was nigh, our biggest concern with Jones was whether or not he’d end up on the roster of a division rival.
But there was one party that we had forgotten about, someone hard and fast in Jones’ corner: his teammates. In fact, long before Aaron Rodgers began his private and public campaign for Ted Thompson and Russ Ball to do what it took to keep Jones in the fold, there was another display of support for Jones.
On February 8th, the “Return to Titletown” celebration hit Lambeau Field with bitterly cold temperatures. One of the oft-missed warm moments was when the wide receivers were brought on stage: Greg Jennings, Donald Driver, and Jordy Nelson, who all had an opportunity to speak to the fans. Jones, for whatever reason, had been excluded from the introductions and was left on the field with the rest of the players.
But that did not stop his fellow wideouts, who no sooner reached the microphone than turned around and called Jones up on stage with them. It was a class act that made a lot of people wonder why he hadn’t been with them anyway (perhaps adding to the theory that the organization wasn’t planning on having him back). In retrospect, it was a sign of the respect Jones’ teammates had in him, being willing to go up and buck the script to make sure he had his deserved moment in the spotlight, too. Anyone surprised by Rodgers’ campaign for Jones’ return need only look back to that moment to see the writing on the wall.
But, the power of Rodgers’ voice not only led to a surprise re-signing, but a sea change in the fans that had so diligently justified Jones’ departure. It should not be lost on anyone that having a Packer starting quarterback publicly and privately petition Thompson to bolster the wide receiver position once was met with ridicule and derision not too long ago. Indeed, the audacity of Brett Favre even suggesting to Ted Thompson that he should bring in Randy Moss (not once, but twice) led to a long fan debate over whether players should have any input on front office decisions.
The general consensus in those days was absolutely not, especially if the petitioner was wearing #4. But as the circumstances change, so do our opinions…and in the case of fervent fans’ opinions, the swings can be dramatic. So it was when Rodgers said, “James is extremely talented and he’s a guy that I think we need to bring back without a doubt. He should be priority No. 1 and I mean that with all my heart. He really should be priority No. 1. We don’t win the Super Bowl without him and we need him.”
Suddenly, two firmly-held opinions by Packer Nation began to waver: not only can starting quarterbacks publicly influence the front office, but suddenly James Jones was no longer a pass-dropping luxury that we couldn’t afford. Oh, to be certain, there were some folks out there still desperately invoking Favre’s name and reposting YouTube videos of Jones’ dropped passes, but the hourglass had already been turned.
Aaron Rodgers’ words flipped the script. Heck, he flipped our script. That’s the power of a Super Bowl MVP in the good graces of the Packer Fandom in full force. And not only were his words convincing to the majority of fans (many of whom immediately responded with “If he’s good enough for QB1, he’s good enough for me!’), it also apparently convinced Ted Thompson, sealing the public opinion of both Jones as an asset, and Rodgers as an advocate for players he deems irreplaceable.
The amazing part isn’t just the reversal of our appraisal of Jones’ talents, who has gone from the scrap pile to perhaps our next-in-line for the #2 receiver spot as soon as time catches up with Donald Driver. It is Thompson’s apparent concession to sign a player that, justifiably, creates a glut of personnel all trying to grab passes. Was Jones’ signing a direct cause-effect of Rodgers’ private and public politicking? Perhaps.
There’s also a world of difference between Favre wanting to bring in a mega-talented but aging head-case versus keeping a young stallion already in the fold. But the mere fact that Rodgers openly petitioned for a player—and Thompson obliging—speaks volumes of the rapport Thompson has with Rodgers, and the respect he has earned. From us.
Tides turn quickly in Packer fandom. There was a time when Favre had so much public support he could have petitioned for a private locker room and received it. Rodgers may be at that pinnacle himself today. He may retire from the Packers ten years from now with the reverence of Bart Starr. Or, as the tides turn, he could leave Green Bay in disgrace. While I would be willing to wager on the former outcome, the turn of events over the last couple of weeks leave no doubt as to how quickly fortunes..and the passionate beliefs of Packers fans...change.
What did we learn from the James Jones re-signing? For those willing to look that deeply, we learned an awful lot about ourselves.
Comments (33)
August 07, 2011 at 07:24 am
Maybe I haven't been paying attention, but this seems to be overstating the case just a tad. While Rodgers was clearly on public record regarding Jones return, there were conflicting reports about just how much he lobbied behind the scenes.
I've never thought that the Packers would be better off without Jones or, for that matter, any of the other players that have departed. But in the cap era, choices need to be made every year.
In the end, I suspect that Jones re-signing was as much or more influenced by the market coming back into GB's price range as it was by his teammates support.
I'm glad Jones is back in the fold; as TT has always maintained, you can never have enough good football players. I'm also encouraged that Jones seems to recognize the problem with his drops and has reportedly worked on the problem. Now we just need to see the improvement on the field.
August 07, 2011 at 08:04 am
I concur with your comments about making choices in the cap-era; and Jones coming back being a financial issue, not a result of lobbying.
I'll further state that a player, especially QB, can and should lobby for veterans. First, if the player comes back, you look "right"; second, if the player signs elsewhere, you "tried my best"; third, the lack of support becomes a deafening silence. AR knows that some players won't be back, he'll adapt fine with the newbies, and may, in fact, may improve because of the new skills that they bring. It's really a no lose situation. Under no circumstances does AR think that he can do anything more than "plant a seed" in TT's mind about personnel moves. Isn't there, ain't happening.
As far as the draft goes, we all know that Thompson doesn't draft for present needs; he drafts for future needs. I surmise that Sherrod was to replace Clifton; Cobb, Driver; Green/Grant; House/Woodson (though he'll leave on mostly his terms, like Rodgers); Elmore/Jones-Zombo-Walden; Williams/Finley (I'm as sure of him leaving as I was of Jones); etc, etc. Obviously, the draft isn't an exact science (Sam Shield, case in point), but you get the picture. TT is looking for a)talented players; b) high charactor that won't be distracted or be distracting; c)quick learners that get up to speed quickly, as rookies need to contribute.
I was as surprised an anyone that Jones didn't sign elsewhere, especially the division. But when the price came down, his value rose (probably to Jordy's chagrin).
August 07, 2011 at 08:36 am
Good point about AR; never thought of it in those terms.
August 07, 2011 at 08:12 am
Nice take. I've been as critical of JJ as anyone, but I never thought Jones was leaving. Too many told me I was nuts so I stopped saying it a few months ago. I just never thought he'd get the $$ he was looking for. To your point tho, I prob started buying into the overly negative comments over time. Anyway, I'll probably start griping as soon as he drops one but I'm glad he's back and the WR corps stays intact
August 07, 2011 at 08:16 am
"In the end, I suspect that Jones re-signing was as much or more influenced by the market coming back into GB’s price range as it was by his teammates support."
Totally agree. The only reason TT brought Jones back was because we got him for cheap. If the asking price was a little steeper, Rodgers could've publicly balled his eyes out over wanting Jones back, and it wouldn't have made a difference. TT doesn't operate like that.
August 07, 2011 at 08:28 am
I think the general premise is wrong b/c I don't see where Rodger's lobbying had any effect on TT's decision to retain Jones. TT stayed out of the bidding until the market fizzled, and even then he wouldn't overpay. This was a classic TT move.
August 07, 2011 at 08:37 am
Great article. Well written, good points, nice arguments. I enjoyed it.
I feel, though, that a case could be made that Rodgers had nothing to do with the Jones re-signing. For example: Thompson seems to always put an offer out there for departing free agents. According to reports he had some for Jenkins and Colledge that were turned down. Clifton said that the Packers had an offer out there for him, but he wanted to test free agency one last time. The offer may not be very much and the front office may not pursue it very hard; but it seems like it is always out there for our free agents. Now, Jones said that after a few days of playing the waiting game he told his agent he wanted to be back in Green Bay. The next day he was signed. Rodgers and Jennings (a forgotten man in your post) may have lobbied for his return, but it seems to me that they may not have influenced it as much as the media says.
August 07, 2011 at 08:45 am
Here's the thing, though--players aren't especially good at building teams, because everything's personal.
I totally could get that Jennings and Rodgers would like Jones as a friend and enjoy having him around. But how does he fit in with the team, really? Every WR that isn't a starter should be expected to play some sort of Special Teams. You have Jennings, who isn't going to be put at risk, Nelson, who is no better than average on ST, and Cobb & Swain who should both be main ST contributors.
Then you're left with Driver and Jones. Driver doesn't play Special Teams and is on the downside of his career. Honestly, if it were based on talent and ability? He'd be cut from this WR corps. But he's worth keeping around for leadership. And now, is it really reasonable to bring back Jones simply based on his camaraderie as well? Does that move really make sense?
If the Packers keep Jones and Driver, they're shorting themselves one top-level ST player--it will probably end up being Swain. ST's aren't flashy, but they're really important, and Green Bay has had a corps that's been, at best, average. Is that really worth bringing back a guy for a non-ability reason that isn't leadership?
Jones just doesn't fit well into the roster. If they cut Nelson or Driver, this move would probably make more sense from a roster-building standpoint--but truthfully, is keeping Jones over Driver or Nelson really that smart? I don't think so, maybe others will disagree.
August 07, 2011 at 08:51 am
Your assuming that Rodgers comments had an effect on TT. Some of TT's public quotes seem to say otherwise. I guess I didn't get all worked up about Rodgers making any type of public comments because I knew from the Favre days they probably had no impact on TT. At most TT tweaked the offer to placate Rodgers/Jennings but I'm guessing TT set a price for Jones, had an offer on the table the entire time, and Jones came back to that offer once he realized this offer was best for him. Or, maybe Rodgers and Jones were nudging Jones harder then they were nudging TT and these public comments were more of a way to push Jones to re-signing rather then getting TT to do something he didn't want to do. All speculation....
About your comments on fans....clearly we root for the jersey more then the person. When we thought he was going to wear another jersey and especially a purple jersey we all opined (hoped) he would fail as a #1 or #2 WR for that team. When we realized he was going to be wearing a Packer jersey again we now opine (hope) he will be best #4 WR on the greatest collection of offensive weapons ever assembled. I think those two positions can be rationalized from a talent perspective....he's not a #2 WR in this league but an amazing #3 or #4....but clearly the big change from fans is our 'hope' for Jones progress and success.
August 07, 2011 at 09:15 am
Since the price to sign JJ was reasonably. How about this situation...TT has a another year to see what he has in JJ, Jordy and the rookie Cobb. If he sees enough from Cobb and the other two recvr's produce. Could we see a possible draft day trade of either JJ or Jordy. I believe we would need to sign Jordy first.
August 07, 2011 at 09:32 am
First, on the substance of this piece, I was one of those being shouted down for stating my belief that the Packers needed to bring Jones back. DD's age coupled with Cobb's inexperience and Finley's recurring injuries suggested they needed another veteran WR who knew the system. I was surprised when people starting coming around to that position as soon as it appeared possible that JJ would be back. So the phenomena noted in this post does seem to be real. An excellent observation.
I also agree with the take that Jones' falling market price was the key factor in TT's decision to resign him, a factor more important than anything AR12 might have said publicly or privately.
Finally, a word about the form of the above. It is yet another beautifully written piece by CD; I remain envious of his gift as a writer. What strikes me is the tenor of the comments that follow such a thoughtful and well constructed article. It seems such fine writing elicits equally strong and well-written comments. Props to all concerned.
August 07, 2011 at 08:44 pm
Yah dUde, 4 realz OMG
August 07, 2011 at 09:40 am
I always thought that JJ had so much talent, that testing the free agent market would go better for him. I think in a normal market that allowed several visits and tryouts that he would be offered a contract that the packers would not match.
I was very surprised but happy he is back. I expect he will have a good year.
August 07, 2011 at 09:46 am
It was interesting watching the limited scrimmaging last night at Family Night, because Rodgers' initial interception was intended for Jones. I haven't had a chance to break it down to see if that was QB error, WR error, or a communication breakdown, but I'd be lying if I didn't look at #89 and think, "oh, boy."
However, watching his catch on the second drive near the goal line, I was relieved and encouraged. He is a playmaker and when he gets his hands on the ball, he can make some great catches-and-runs.
August 07, 2011 at 09:51 am
http://ht.ly/5X7Bt
CD, this may provide some insight on that play.
August 07, 2011 at 09:49 am
It comes down to Jones v. Swain on this year's roster (as long as James signed for reasonable money. James got a fair contract---not the huge $$$ he sought (thanks to the horrid, sure TD drops and fumbles) but not close to chump change either. He's not a # 1 or 2 receiver (as some of his many boosters in Packer fandom think), not yet.
Interesting that Jordy Nelson was the hero w/9 catches in the SB, but we still have those who think Jones is the #3 option in GB.
At any rate, good to have him back and a receiving corp. of Jennings, Driver, Nelson, Cobb, Jones, Finley and Williams has to be the NFL's best.
August 07, 2011 at 10:58 am
The main reason Jones is in Green Bay is because no one offered him more and I bet his fumbles and drops played a role in that. Great for the packers, because I think he is going to be underpaid when it's all said and done. Jason Wilde said it best when he compared Jones to Ahman Green's fumbles in Seattle and then his break-out years in Green Bay.
...and you lost me with this statement, "Oh, to be certain, there were some folks out there still desperately invoking Favre’s name and reposting YouTube videos of Jones’ dropped passes, but the hourglass had already been turned."
August 07, 2011 at 11:10 am
Really enjoyed ts article; but unlike the photo flap before the Super Bowl AR states he never visited TT and Thomas confirms that Rodgers did not ask or demand he resign anyone.
I also agree with the point about the ceremony and the receivers calling JJ up to the podium. Finally the confluence of a soft market and team chemistry permitted JJ to come back, hope he helps GB win another SB!
August 07, 2011 at 11:59 am
Like others, I don't agree with the presmise of your article at all. There are tons of knowledgable Packer fans who did not go to either extreme. I'm not half as knowledgable as some folks here, but I definitely did not fall into your description. I never felt that JJ should get starters money, and he didn't. As long as he wanted that, he was as good as gone. Remember, this is a guy who was saying last winter that there was no room for him in Green Bay because of DD being a permanent starter. I still think that was an immature remark for JJ to make, and I think that when it's all said and done DD will be a starter in name only by the end of the year. And I still have doubts that JJ will be the #2 option.
AR did not change my opinion at all. The only thing that made me waver a little was when the Eagles got rich at CB, but even then I was more rethinking how important Finely could become than JJ. The odd thing about JJ being back is there are still some teams out there with money to spend, and they did not make a run at him. Unless he was just unwilling to look at certain teams at any price (e.g. Cinci), the lack of a starters contract offer shows that many of us were right on the mark in questioning why the Packers should meet JJ's expectations.
August 07, 2011 at 02:59 pm
Agree top to bottom.
August 07, 2011 at 01:19 pm
JJ needs to learn to make the over the shoulder catch. If he can do that, he'll be a pro bowler, for sure.
As for Favre, he was used to running the team under Sherman. He was in an ego battle for control over the team, dictating to the GM what players to sign, changing plays in the huddle, etc.
With Arodge it's completely different. He's just being a good teammate by standing behind his guys. The latter is the act of a leader. The former, the act of a diva. Big difference.
tundravision
August 07, 2011 at 02:05 pm
Hey gang...thanks much for the comments.
While I know I made at least some connection between Rodgers' comments and the signing of Jones, the larger point I was trying to get at was how we, as fans, changed our viewpoint from how we feel players should provide public input into front office decisions, particularly based on who the player doing the petitioning is.
Big difference between Rodgers and Favre? Absolutely. But I could go back in time and find a lot of people who stated unequivocally that players need to keep their nose out of the front office, period. It's the sea change of when circumstances change, so do opinions.
And, by the way, thank you all for the input. I was a little nervous posting here at CHTV because of the quality of work and high expectations. I welcome any constructive criticism because it only helps me improve as a writer, and getting wrung through the wringer is one of the best teachers.
August 08, 2011 at 07:37 am
Keep it up. You are a good writer.
August 07, 2011 at 03:02 pm
Jones not being on stage had nothing to do with the organization not wanting him back..... Thats silly and like u mentioned up above so is any presumed connectio that aaron rodgers lobbied for jones to TT.... Good writing but a reach
August 07, 2011 at 04:02 pm
I was neutral on Jones staying... I didnt think it would hurt if he left. Now that he is staying its reassuring that we will have a powerful passing attack
August 07, 2011 at 06:01 pm
So... one article every 15/20 days, deal?
And I completely agree with the premise of the article, even though it was dangerously generalized.
However, compared to other fanbases, we're talking about buddist monks and scholars in here.
August 07, 2011 at 11:40 pm
Always nice to see a shot at knuckle dragging Bears fans, while complimenting the highly evolved Packer fans.
August 07, 2011 at 06:09 pm
i always wanted james jones to come back he is a match up problem for other teams and i think cobb was picked up to replace donald driver after this season.. we have 5 WRs that need to be matched up with #1 or #2 caliber corners this year.. rodgers is going to have a hayday and i am not even including finley
August 07, 2011 at 09:08 pm
OK, I think we settled this.
Now, two things need to happen here: a) I really don't care to hear any players whine about getting their share of the rock; the Lombardi trophy will be your reward. and b) I really don't care to hear fans go overboard on every word uttered by players that are really being thrown into the fire in this training camp. If a player lets slip a phrase about not getting looks, let it slide. The players are not in football shape because they haven't been getting hit. They also are getting meeting'd and studying till their brains fry to get the playbook mastered; none of us could do that. I've already read somebody doing a "I told you so" about Crosby and his injury. Get real! If you did "told us", I don't care; if you're saying it to sound smart, I care even less. I sure as heck am not going to look up what another reader did or didn't say. In general, we're all pretty privileged to have these as our biggest worries. Literally, our financial and political systems are being shaken to their foundations; Crosby's injury is of little consequence. Thug mobs are picking fights in our cities; the wisdom of JJ's signing means little. The USA lost 30 some of its finest men overseas; we sleep in our beds and post on our computers. In air conditioning, usually.
Let's keep some perspective.
Thank you, though to Aaron, Brian, et al for allowing us to retreat from the insanity of our world a few times a day. You are using your talents for positive.
August 08, 2011 at 12:05 am
I may be wrong on this as I don't really pay attention to comparative contracts for players, but $3 million a year seems like a lot of money for a player in a tie for the #3 wide receiver position.
From what I've been reading there are 11 players in this camp (between WR & TE) that are legit NFL talent.
Based on those two points, I wonder if TT considers JJ trade material?
August 08, 2011 at 06:47 am
Number of snaps.
Forget the 3rd receiver label. It doesn't apply to what the Packers do.
The two important things when looking at JJ's contract are snap count and future impact. It's even more important than current stats like receptions, yards and TDs.
I don't have the exact number of snap counts, but I do about targets, which can give a nice comparative.
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/wr
JJ was targeted 87 times. Greg Jennings, the clear starter, was targeted 125 times. That's roughly 70% of the targets Jennings had, which means that JJ was on the field at least 70% of time Jennings was. So it's clear he was heavily used in our offense.
The other criteria is very subjective. Does JJ have the potential to be worth that contract in the future? Management thinks so.
So when you add the importance of JJ to this offense and how much he is used, as well as what he may become in the near future, it was a great contract.
August 08, 2011 at 07:35 am
I posted a few comparisons about JJ's contract a couple of days ago. The hard part about looking at contract info on the net is that you can't just break it down into one number on a chart - you really have to look at how the deal was strucutured to get an idea of the true value. I haven't looked at summaries of every WR contract to do the comparisons needed, but I got the sense that JJ's contract is in line with his role on the team. Remember too, if JJ can work out the flaws in his game (easier said than done) he will be the #2 WR and at a bargain price. IF that happens I think will all be thankful for the new rules that punish hold-outs.
August 08, 2011 at 05:24 pm
Apologies if someone already said this, but I think the big difference is that Aaron lobbied for a Packer to be re-signed, while Brett wanted free agents from other teams.
Aaron lobbying for Thompson to re-sign a player that he drafted is, in effect, praising Thompson's past acquisition. Brett's lobbying came off more as telling Thompson how to be a GM.