Create Account

Or log in with Facebook


Log in

Or log in with Facebook

Should the Packers Consider Keeping Randall Cobb?

By Category

Should the Packers Consider Keeping Randall Cobb?

There is one game that matters left in the NFL season and that will be played in seven days. After that, the offseason begins and with it will come some big decisions for the Green Bay Packers.

Among those decisions will be whether or not the Packers try to keep Randall Cobb, a former second-round pick that was awarded a big contract after the 2014 season, only to never really live up to the hype.

The season before he signed the deal, Cobb caught 91 passes for 1,287 yards and caught 12 touchdowns. He hasn't hit the 1,000-yard mark since and the closest he came was in 2015 with 79 receptions for 829 yards and six touchdowns.

Last season was Cobb's worst as a professional since his rookie campaign in 2011. He played in only nine games, the second-lowest total of his career and caught just 38 passes for 383 yards and two scores.

Cobb did put together a memorable night in the season opener against the Chicago Bears, catching a short pass from Aaron Rodgers and racing to the end zone for the game-winning score.

It wasn't his only game-winning touchdown as we will never forget his heroic touchdown reception in the 2013 NFC North title game in Chicago, sending Green Bay to the playoffs.

But the question now facing the Packers front office is what do with Cobb going into the future?

The eight-year NFL veteran who will turn 29 in August, still seems to be able to run and he has good hands. Certainly, he doesn't deserve another big-money deal but if Cobb was to take something modest for a couple of years, it would seem to make sense for both sides.

Obviously, Cobb has talent. He has always been a dynamic player and you always felt he was never utilized properly in Green Bay but part of that has been his fault too.

Cobb has battled both injuries and the drops and I make no bones about the fact that he never came close to living up to that contract.

But does that mean he shouldn't be kept going forward? Would the Packers be better off signing a free agent like Cole Beasley away from Dallas? A 5-foot-8 slot receiver who is older than Cobb, shorter and has less upside? 

Beasley is more reliable. Over the past four seasons, he has missed only three games. But still,his best season was 833 yards back in 2016. This past season he got 672 receiving yards but other than that, he has gone over 500 yards just one other time in his seven-year NFL career.

You wouldn't think that Beasley would break the bank either, although when the free agent frenzy hits, the funny money starts flying, so you never know. 

If Cobb wants too much money, maybe Beasley would be a good fallback option but the Packers need a quality slot receiver. And if the team doesn't like Cobb's injury history or Beasley's age, it could go another route and grab a guy in the NFL draft.

If you watched the Senior Bowl or paid attention to practices then you will know the name Hunter Renfrow, the wide receiver from Clemson. The kid looks like an ideal slot receiver. In fact, he looks like Julian Edelman to me.

That might be strong praise, but I think he has all the traits of a really good slot receiver and the Packers could probably get him in the middle rounds. That's another attractive option.

But if the Packers can negotiate a reasonable, short-term deal with Cobb, I also think that's worth a shot. Cobb and Aaron Rodgers have a good rapport and in a new system, if Cobb can stay healthy, he could shine. 

I just know I'd hate to see him sign elsewhere and take off. But if some team is foolish enough to offer him big money, then the Packers have other viable options. They just might not be Cobb when he's at his best. 



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

  • Like Like
  • 2 points

Fan friendly comments only: off Comments (102) This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.

Pilprin's picture

I love Cobb...but I think his explosiveness is limited due to might be time to part ways.

Hawg Hanner's picture

Regardless of his salary, you have to be concerned with his durability. We might think his body can no longer take the punishment, and that makes him too great a risk to carry on the 53

The TKstinator's picture

Aging, slowing down, hurt a lot. A “fair” offer is a low offer. Would he accept it? I doubt it.
Again, I cannot believe a shifty, sure handed slot receiver should be hard to find.
Time to move on from Cobb.

jeremyjjbrown's picture

I wouldn't make any offer. He's no longer worth a roster spot.

Packersfan62's picture

Cobb is still as good as any slot receiver in the league. If you have watched any games,he has been open going across the middle only to be not looked at by the QB. Maybe it's time for him to move on to maybe the Bears and come back and torch the Packers like he have the Bears for years.

The TKstinator's picture

1. No
2. Is he worth $10 mil, given his availability?

TheVOR's picture

Exactly, dude can't stay on the field. If he signed a deal for even 2M a year, he'd still be making 1M per game, because he can't stay on the field and we'd get about 2 games out of him. Goodbye, chew your leg of please, and let the healing begin.. We need to revamp the receiving cast, and Rodgers needs to get on board with it and make it happen. You don't see Tom Brady missing to much, crimes, he plugged in Josh Gorden for like 13 weeks until he frizzed out, then never missed a beat with whatever he had on the field. Rodgers needs to be better, and we need to revamp the receiving core, starting with watching Cobb leave this roster. Also, G-mo? FLING, let him go, keep drafting. MVS has skills, Kumerow needs more action, maybe go get a Cole Beasley, lets get moving on this. Rodgers needs to be way better..

dobber's picture

I would argue that one of the Packers significant needs on offense is a dynamic pass-catcher who creates mismatches. Maybe it's a slot. Maybe it's a dual-purpose RB. Maybe it's an athletic TE. There are lots of ways to provide weapons to #12 to bolster a passing game. I just don't think Cobb fits that description.

KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

Well written and agree on creating mismatches!

I like Cobb and if cheap have him back but do not see that happening. Plus, just do not feel he has enough speed and quick twitch for slot.

Coldworld's picture

Cheap is often a mistake because it leads to an obstacle to bringing new weapons in. The real question here because Cobb is by all accounts a good person to have in the locker room, is the one posed by Dobber.

If Cobb were kept would he provide a real offensive threat on a consistent basis?

He is not that old, but he has often been injured. Looking back on last season, very early he looked sudden and shifty but injuries very quickly made him ordinary or simply unavailable.

So, do we believe Cobb can stay healthy and physically be the receiver who can make a difference inside? At this point, I simply don’t have confidence that Cobb can be a difference maker over a full season. If so, cost should not be a factor and we need to move on because that element of our offense has to be improved, whether by a direct replacement or more effective uses of other offensive tools.

Tundraboy's picture

Well said. Classic dilemma that we have fallen victim to.
And as much as I love Cobb,hoping for health hasn't worked out well. Bad enough we haven't had a TE but without a shifty quick slot receiver this offense struggles. Would rather have Cobb, at of course a price that works, because a part of me really wants to see what he could do in the new MLF Offense.

HankScorpio's picture

The Packers went into 2018 counting on big production from Cobb and Graham. Both were paid like difference makers. Neither lived up to the billing. Fool me twice, shame on me. Time for both to move on.

Turophile's picture

You can win with bigger receivers in the slot. Is Equanimeous St.Brown a candidate for playing the slot position ?

KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

I really like ESB and you could play him there at times but I would routinely like a quicker twitch and misdirection type guy there.

Rak47's picture

There are a few on the FA market Like Jamison Crowder, and Golden Tate, I think Crowder would be a great signing as he's only 25, and can return kicks and punts at a very high level, and contribute significantly on offense from the slot. Signing Crowder would open up two roster spots because the Packers can let go of Cobb, and Trevor Davis creating more depth elsewhere.

Coach JV's picture

I like the idea of Crowder too... particularly because he can be a good return man as well. Good call!

sam1's picture

My guess it depends what kind of a deal Mr Cobb would settle for and what is the other option available to the Pack, if get nothing in FA or wait for draft. Depends on what the front office wants to wait and see for! Personally I like Cobb, outside the injury history unfortunately, he has been a Rodgers favorite and quite reliable!

Savage57's picture

A reasonably reliable slot WR is a $7-8M/year proposition in today's NFL. Cobb proved he wasn't worth $10M/year, and I question whether he's worth 75% of that.

AgrippaLII's picture

I think it's better to let him go too soon than keep hanging on to him until it's too late. He's been too banged up over the last few you really want to fill a roster spot with a guy who may only be available for 8 games?

Oppy's picture

This take is as fair and reasonable as I’ve seen on the subject.

Tarynfor12's picture

This thinking excludes your favorite constantly hurt player Nick Perry, right?

Oppy's picture

Actually, Taryn, I've stated numerous times that Perry has not lived up to his contract and that the prime reason is injury and inavailability.
The only thing I have been vocal about is Perry's talent, drive, and production when remotely healthy

Tarynfor12's picture

Which is driven by slanted stats...Perry's in game real production is near 3 on a scale of 10 with 10 being the best.
Game changing play-1
Talent-3 as OLB
Drive-4 takes plays off even when healthy
My contention is injury was his protection against being outed as a Grade C/C- player to those of your mindset of him.

Oppy's picture

See my comment below.

Provide data and proof, not just your arbitrary rankings.

When healthy, Perry was a good to very good OLB. His play on the field showed that. The data backed that up. The issue has always been injuries and availability.

Old School's picture

I think if you comparePerry with all the other OLBs drafted over the last 10 years he doesn't come off that poorly.

I used the tool at pro-football -reference to compare Perry to every other DE/OLB drafted in the first round from 2011-2013.

18 names came up. 4 are out of the league already. His 81 games out him 11th, between Ingram and Ansah. His 32 sacks rank 13th on the list, as does his career average value.

You can dislike his contract, but he's been about what you can expect from a late first round edge rusher.

Slim11's picture

Very true. Sadly, Cobb’s body is older than the calendar says he is. That’s due to his injury history and the wear and tear on him when he has been healthy. It’s time to let him go.

Lare's picture

If they were staying in the same offensive scheme as they've been in the last several years I'd consider keeping Cobb for no other reason that his familiarity with the scheme and Rodgers. But that isn't the case, so I see no reason to keep a slower non-productive WR on the roster.

The point is getting this team better, not staying the same.

Savage57's picture

There's the rub. Stay with what you know and hope, or try something new and do the same thing?

Minniman's picture

I still remember the lament of 3 seasons ago when a healthy, un-concussed, Rodgers zoned-in Cobb was one of a group of WR's that couldn't get separation to save themselves.

Many thanks Randall, but it's time to force Rodgers out of his comfort zone and take the opportunities at hand.

Oppy's picture

The key to getting production from Cobb isn’t Cobb, it’s the QB.

dobber's picture

I would go the other way: we already know that Cobb just isn't the difference maker he was in his last contract year (2014) in the MM scheme. If LaF has ideas to use him that are different and make better use of his abilities, AND can keep him on the field (how do you predict that?), that might be worth bringing him back at a bargain rate. Otherwise, thank him for his contributions and wish him the best.

HankScorpio's picture

i think it comes down to keeping Allison or Cobb. Of the two, Allison is more attractive from the perspective of cost and production, iMO.

KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

Agreed! Plus, Allison is younger!

Coldworld's picture

I just don’t see Cobb and Alison as the same type of player at all. Both may be number 3 type receivers ( for the sake of argument), but they are very different in what they bring to the offense, in their athletic gifts and their strengths as outlets for Rodgers.

I don’t think, numbers aside, that the coaching staff would often find itself pondering “should we put Randal or Geronimo in to run that route?”

HankScorpio's picture

I agree that they are not similar players. I'm looking at it from the perspective of roster spaces. Adams, MVS and ESB are mortal locks. Moore is a strong bet. If you put both Cobb and Allison back in the WR room, it amounts to standing pat with the WR group. That counts on improvement from the younger guys & better scheme for upgraded production. I think they need to take a swing at improving the talent, as well. I'm not sure if that means a draft choice or a vet FA or even Lazard making a big year 2 jump. i just think it means you need to clear one of Allison or Cobb from the mix.

Old School's picture

I don't think we have to keep either.

Adams, MSV, St. Brown, Moore, Kumerow...all returning next year. Don't forget Lazard and Davis, too.

Lots of prospects....I'm not seeing any reason why we need to keep, or cut, or sign a FA, or draft anybody at that position. Especially if the goal is to run more.

BELIEVER's picture

It is time to part ways with Cobb. He had a one good game against the bears. Where was he when the Pack needed him, nursing some kind of injury. In my opinion he should’ve been gone last year. The Pack let go the wrong guy and did it with no class. Gutes first year was average at best, his draft grades are not complete so I’ll see. Hoping for the best, but as we all know hope is not a plan.

EddieLeeIvory's picture

I love Cobb. But.
I remember watching closely, on tape, in 2015 or 16, him not being able to separate from LBers quite often.

Cole Beasley gets more separation in the slot.

And then there's....... Kuuuuuumerow. Feed Jake.

Ezra's Hotdog's picture

Cobb and Perry played great in their contract years but have been hurt and not worth the money since. Time to move on..Too bad Perry is still under contract.

Oppy's picture

Perry was as good or better the year following his contract than he was during his contract year on a per snap basis.

And he played through a bevy of injuries all year to do it.

But, hey, whatever fits the narrative is probably more juicy than the truth.

Tarynfor12's picture

The per snap basis is a stat that doesn't show how his near total failure in impact plays he actual was in games. Getting three sacks against a crap team of Wash and which had really no game deciding factor is a stat that has no value except for the sake of a stat sheet. When the play of your backup is equal at least to the starter he becomes a moot player as to must have and paying him as an top 5 is foolish, which has been my point since his drafting...He will never be the OLB many had envisioned, he was and still is at best a 4-3 DE with a bull rush that can be handled far too often than not.
Keep up the narrative Oppy..Perry was and is the bust as predicted by myself and now almost everyone agrees. Remember that plate of crow bet we made in his rookie season..time to eat and stop the Perry rah rah support. You can of course use all your ' reasons ' as ' seasonings ' to hide the bad taste his dish offers.
: )

Oppy's picture

It's pretty simple, Taryn.
PRove it to me.

I've posted the data numerous times. All you do is blow hot air. I've done the number crunching. Your turn.

Tarynfor12's picture

Watch his play when healthy, look at the time difference ( games ) between performing and knowing he was in the game at all. This disputes any stat sheet numbers slanted based on minimum snaps credited.
Getting three sacks in one game is awesome as a stat and will still seem great even if the player doesn't get another for 4 games. The missing part is his total disappearance in those 4 games while his stat sheet sack number is still considered's's a useless stat used to validate inadequate play over a longer span.

Oppy's picture

See, while you're looking at sacks, I was always tracking sacks, hurries, hits, and tackles.

Now you tell me who is seeing the bigger picture?
I can tell you right now Sacks are only a small fraction of what makes a good OLB. I think hurries and hits are just as important, if not more.

Things look a bit different when you're not lazily tallying a player's worth on sacks.. This doesn't even take into account how teams doubled and chipped Perry, or ran away from him and at CMIII, when Perry was healthy.

Old School's picture

Oppy, I'm with you on Perry. I'm not happy with the contract we offered him, or his availability, but the list of late first round edge rushers who have out-performed him is pretty short.

Marc Wilson's picture

Packers have so many needs that they can't fill them all with Free Agents nd Draft picks usually don't contribute in year 1.

Nick Perry's picture

From where the Packers are drafting they absolutely CAN contribute AND they have been in recent years. There's that and the players they draft at say RG, Edge, or TE are going to be better than the players currently on the roster.

Marc Wilson's picture

Continuing...If Cobb can be signed for $3m or so, GB should do it. While GB has a decent amount of cap space, signing a top edge rusher, a safety, a right guard, a better tight end, and maybe a tackle to back up Bulaga, plus re-signing a few of our own FA's will take most of it, even if we dump Perry and possibly Graham.

Tundraboy's picture

I hope that's the plan. Pretty much my shopping list.

nostradanus's picture

It is time to move on, Cobb has been a great Packer but it is time to let some new and younger stars arise.

A new coaching staff and new, younger and cheaper players with more upside that LaFluer can mold into his Offense.

Let the new era begin!


that is all...

stockholder's picture

He's to fragile for the packers to invest more money and time in. We no longer use Cobb like he's a threat. Because He's not. They stopped using him on punt returns. He's dropped to many passes. He sits out more. It's time to let the other Wrs develop. I fear Cobb can only turn into a Monty. Gute drafted Wrs. It's their time, or we have the wrong guy drafting.

Skip greenBayless's picture

Keep Cobb? Hell no. Sign Beasely? Hell no. We have Kumerow, ESB and if this Renfro kid is the son and or grandson of Mel Renfro than hell yes, he would be a good pick up in the draft. Gutey is starting over with a young head coach. Two green guys don't keep dinosaurs like Cobb and Beasely. Rodgers is the last of the dinosaurs on this team. It will be win or lose with youth mostly with the exception of Rodgers. If they don't like Boyle they desperately need to find their next replacement this season or things will continue to go south like the last two seasons.


Savage57's picture

If he's Mel's son or grandson, someone in the Renfrow family has some 'splainin' to do.

albert999's picture

Well said Riproar!
Uncle Albert

Qoojo's picture

Some of it was injuries, and some of it was scheme. In the past, when I focused and watched the WRs run their routes under MM's system, quite often the patterns were very simple and easy to guard. I don't blame Cobb much. This past season it seems like no one knew to run back towards Rodgers when he was scrambling, even the veteran WRs. Just bad coaching.

Anyway, I can't answer if Cobb should be back because I have no clue about MLF's system and whether MLF can use him effectively.

Coach JV's picture

It's a tough call. Cobb's effectiveness has be questionable to say the least. But would a new scheme help him regain his play? Would a new scheme utilize him more properly?

The chemistry with AR is certainly an advantage. New route trees and offensive philosophy could help make Cobb a weapon again.

Tough call... tough call.

dblbogey's picture


Demon's picture

Haven't we beat the Cobb thing to death? My opinion is, unless any of our fragile 5 want to play for the WI state minimum wage of $ 7.75 per hour, they need to go! I dont care about the trust AR has in him and all that, availability is everything.

The biggest frustration/complaint about the Pack over the last 5 years is injuries. Therefore in order to try to get ahead of the injuries they need to replace the all the injury prone.

What Cobb brings to the table should easily be duplicated by receivers already on the roster. That is provided that MLF runs a real training camp that uses the alloted time for practice instead of bowling.

PeteK's picture

Cobb/Beasley, Graham and Perry or Earl Thomas ?

MarkinMadison's picture

So I have seen us talk here about the fact that the linemen in LeFleur's system are likely to be pretty similar to what the Packers were looking for in MM's system - Ts and converted Ts, probably a little on the light side, but with great feet. Personally, I would prefer to see guys with a little more beef (and preferably just as good feet) at the guard spots. But I digress...

Have we really talked about what kind of receivers fit LeFleur's system, and what that might mean for ALL of the receivers on the roster? I say this because some folks above were talking about the number of slots we have, and maybe Geronimo v. Cobb, etc. And I don't think that is entirely wrong. But then the question is, will LeFleur want a range of different types of weapons, or are there definite requirements for his system that might make one player more or less desirable?

dobber's picture

"Have we really talked about what kind of receivers fit LeFleur's system, and what that might mean for ALL of the receivers on the roster?" the million dollar question.

Since '61's picture

First, does Cobb fit the new offensive system?
Second, how much upside if any does he have left?
Third, will he stay for the right price, which for me is $3MM or less?
Fourth, he is good at the scramble drill and finding open spots on 3rd downs to keep drives alive. Which is why AR wants to keep him.

If I was the Packers I would see who we can sign during FA in terms of Edge, Safety, OL, ILB and TE. If we have any cap space left and no one else has signed Cobb I would try to resign him to a one year deal for $3MM or less. If not, he’s gone and we move on. But I would only look to resign him as a last resort and after we have filled or tried to fill our more urgent needs. Thanks, Since ‘61

Tarynfor12's picture

The ' last resort ' thinking came last year when we signed Grahman, kept Cobb instead of Nelson, continued to have blind faith in Perry and in Matthews making enough impact at any LB position to quantify even talking about resigning him. The last resort card(s) have been played and those cards lost.

I mentioned in another article about decisions that must still be made that will allow the new culture to move forward or simply hinder it and possibly fail. These are some of those decisions.

What any did in there past is of no consequence, what any might do based on past is of no consequence and neither reasoning should have enough sway to have any remain in GB.

A new regime is in place,as hoped, do not retain sympathy for players of the failed regime. I don't care if Matthews wants to end his career in GB etc....out with the old,used up and unable.

Even though the new may cause pain, at least they have the better odds of achieving going forward where the old are just done.

4thand1's picture

Oh the off season. We have discussed Cobb every way imaginable , along with CM, AR, safety,olb, o-line (RT/RG). Everyone has an opinion, theory, or this has to be done or this should be done. I'm going to sit back and see how it all plays out, accept what happens because my 2 cents won't sway what the front office thinks or does. In the end it's all about the money, you know, the salary cap thing.

Swisch's picture

With the silly Pro Bowl today, and two seasons of the Packers not being in the playoffs, and the depressing return of the Patriots to the Super Bowl, and not a compelling story to root for in the team going against the Patriots -- well, Packers fans can be forgiven for grasping at team topics to discuss.
Sad to say, the draft is still three months away, and the excitement of a new season is in the distant future, seemingly forever.
May have to start a hobby like metal detecting, home brewing, antiquing, pickleball, scrapbooking,,, or being one of those guys that collects stuff related to chiles, you know like a bolo tie in the shape of a chili.

PeteK's picture

Killjoy LOL

Doug Niemczynski's picture

In the Senior Bowl slot WR Andy Isabella looked great! 9 catches 74 yards and 1 TD. The guy is lightning quick. Just get this WR Gute !! 2nd Round !!

DE #1 12th Pick... Maybe J. Polite but haven't seen him play. Have to watch some game film.

Again with the1st round 30th pick get TE - TJ Hockenson!

Lastly, Daniel Jones QB picked it up yesterday!!

Coming out of college a little too early I think, but he will go quick. I think the Redskins and Patriots are eyeing this kid.

stockholder's picture

Your changing the packers team with cream Puffs. The article what to do with the 2 first picks was taken off. But in there we discussed taking a dL first to replace Wilkerson, and Daniels contract running out. @12 you take the DL. (Simmons or Oliver.) Both give the packers a DL greatness. And you won't get this shot next year. @30 most are thinking TE. Understandable Logic. But this is wrong. Keeping Graham and drafting a Te later is a better move. Were out to build the defense this year. It's the strength of the draft. Wilkerson, Perry, and CM3 must be replaced. Forget the Safety! Keep T. Williams or sign a FA. @30 the Packers should plug the middle with Bush. (If there). Perry played better then CM3 over the Lt. His weight was not the issue. Staying on the field was. The Packers can go bigger on the edge and not get the cream puffs. Polite, Sweat, Burns, Etc. Are gambles. I want tough Football players, not gambles. Charles Omenihu Edge is the perfect replacement for Perry. He wants to succeed. @44. Another good pick is Granderson De/OLB. Even Bryant. ( You don't need a skinny pass rusher in Green Bay when we had Perry.) Gute says he's happy with the OL. Then draft Toughness! We got MVS,st Brown, jones, etc. late. Nobody is complaining. The way to make this team great is toughness. These guys are ready!

dobber's picture

The Packers need to attack FA by supplementing the roster with players at positions of need, especially those positions where the draft pool is shallow and cap dollars tend to go further (e.g. safety, guard, RB). This leaves them in a position to more effectively draft from the best players that are on the board when they're picking.

stockholder's picture

Right. At Safety! Even RG! Free Agents start right away. Your draft choices can, but it's still a better Idea to get experience first. We have enough depth on this team, when considering how many injured players will be returning. Locking into Polite, Risner, Adderley, is not going to take you to the super-bowl. The bears and vikings still had to sign experience. And look what the bears traded away.

Doug Niemczynski's picture

all I know is we need a pass-rusher with our first pick even Ronnie Lott said you cannot hold the receivers all day long you have to get someone at the quarterback

if you want toughness and grit and you need to draft tight and TJhockenson

maybe if you want toughness and explosiveness and a Wes Welker or Julian Edelman type and you need to draft Andy Isabella

Forget drafting defense all the time spend a little bit on offense

leaerin4's picture


leaerin4's picture


The TKstinator's picture

Or twice and for all.

stockholder's picture

Ok - Lets look at the edge rusher you want first. Sweat =Range value has been 15- 30. Players Board 20- 50. Polite. 12- 30 Burns 15-30. etc. the edge player we can get is up and down the board. Thats not a sure pick. The weight, speed, hips, and bull rush, does not match up to 10 sacks. Then who can tackle outside etc. Do you want another frackwell? Or Perry type. Perry got the big contract. $$$ @12 = This has to be a DL or trade down. No safety works at 12. then theres @30. The guys who worked, showed up at the senior bowl- Compare Perry's height ,weight , speed when drafted. Compare Macks. Clay mathews. We've been using big guys to rush, and drafted Burks for speed @ilb. I'm just saying ,the guys you want, don't fit the @12 pick. Pettine is going to run the 3-4-4 again. @ 30 you could take Lawrence NT and move Clark over. But he's gone from 10 -32. ( to Patriots)

Doug Niemczynski's picture

Forget FAs. We are in rebuild mode. And it won't take is long.

Doug Niemczynski's picture

When people buy , then you sell.
When people sell, then you buy.

If the draft is deep in defense as you say,

Find out what everyone else is doing and do the opposite!

dobber's picture

Doug? You're talking to yourself again.

Oppy's picture

Besides the fact your analogy conflicts with itself..
What you are suggesting- to ignore where the talent is and draft "the opposite"- doesn't make a stitch of sense.

Stocks are about value, drafting is about talent. You don't ignore where the talent is.

albert999's picture

i love all that!

Wilment's picture

I love Cobb...good guy by all appearances, good teammate and when he is heathy? As good a guy in the slot as you could ask for, problem is, he can only be counted on for ten to twelve games a year If they are going to resign him, it has to be team friendly, and they still need to either begin to develop one of those three guys they drafted last year in the draft as a slot guy, or find one in the draft. If they don't resign him, I like the idea of Beasley . That's a guy that's hungry for a championship, and by all accounts, a pretty tough SOB. I think he would be a good fit.

Doug Niemczynski's picture

I'm referring to stockholders suggestion that we focus on the defense again. But, we need to be open minded l.

If Drew Lock is there at #12 then Goodbye Aaron!

Oppy's picture

Cobb was never properly utilized?

Uh, they used to run him at all wr positions and motion him into the backfield to play RB.

Some fans used to complain about it, but there was a season in particular where there were multiple games that the offense was puttering until A series where the creative use of Cobb out of the backfield was the only thing that got the offense rolling again.

The last few years, Cobb has been put in positions to be successful, but the QB seemingly refuses to hit the open WR underneath and allow them to create yards via YAC. Too many games where Cobb is running around with his hand up in the air and Rodgers instead holds the ball looking for a deep shot.

Yeah, I sound like a broken record. I know. Go back and watch games. It’s there for you to see if you look.

HankScorpio's picture

'Yeah, I sound like a broken record. I know. Go back and watch games. It’s there for you to see if you look."

I'm not going to accept that challenge because I really don't have the desire to rewatch the 2018 Packer games. But NextGen stats does track average separation using GPS technology.

Cobb was tied with 13 others for 60th among rated WRs/TEs. That's pretty much in the middle of the pack of ranked players. For context, he was behind Adams and MVS and tied with Graham. Allison and ESB were not listed.

Oppy's picture

2018? Cobb was injured all year pretty much.

Furthermore... Tied for 13 others for 60th among rated WRs/TEs in what statistical category?\

The reason you need to watch the games is because too often over the past 3-4 years, Cobb is running routes underneath the defense, wide open, waving his hand to get Rodger's attention.. and the ball doens't get thrown. Rodgers holds the ball looking for someone deep to come open and never throws it to Cobb.

Since you won't do the leg work yourself, I believe it was both TGR and Since '61 (I could be mistaken) who actually did take me up on my suggestion to watch old games and isolate on Cobb over the last few years, and they confirmed what I've been saying- Cobb is an open option far too often overlooked.. even though the narrative has been that he's never open.

Oppy's picture

That said, I don’t see Cobb coming back unless lefleur can convince Rodgers that taking what the defense gives you underneath is a necessary component of sustaining drives and winning football.

Based on that clip of Rodgers and Cobb before the last game, it sure looked like neither of them think he’ll be back.

ahabion's picture

If the Rams offense is what Packers are going to try to mimic, it would make sense to use Cobb as the Rams use Cooks.

dobber's picture

Cobb can't do the things Cooks can.

Rak47's picture

Yeah, like mainly running a 4.3 forty yard dash or a 10.1 100 meters.

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

Just details, Rak!

jww061356's picture

I Like the idea of a mid round dynamic slot receiver. Cheap and faster, and familiarity will be minimized by the fact that everybody is learning a new system. I also was to se what Kumerow could do. I think if you have Adams, MVS, ESB, Kumerow and possibly Moore, plus a drafted receiver, you keep young, tall, fast talent with room for a new kid in the slot.

Doug Niemczynski's picture

Cobb is done, too injury prone and only playd good against the Bears.

Doug Niemczynski's picture

Andy Isabella

JBUBN's picture


Thegreatreynoldo's picture

I have no interest in keeping 7 WRs again. Adams, ESB and MVS are making the team. Allison is a good bet. Cobb, Moore, Kumerow, rookie, FA = too many guys.

Issue is that only Cobb fits the bill as a quick slot WR. Maybe ESB can play there some, but he doesn't really fit the bill.

I don't want Cobb back at any price he realistically would accept. The only contract I'd sign Cobb to would be one that envisions him firmly on the bubble come cut downs. That means less than $500K in guaranteed money, including work-out bonus. I think in practice that means buh-bye, which in turn means GB needs to sign a slot WR or draft one.

PAPackerbacker's picture

Cobb can't stay healthy enough to keep him on the roster at the price he commands. His performance in the last couple of years has dropped to the point where he is expendable. The Packers have a lot of talent already on the team at WR. It's time to move on from Cobb and find his replacement.

Donster's picture

If Rodgers truly wants a reboot of the offense, then Cobb must go. I know the two are friends, and Rodgers wants him around like he did Jordy. He knows deep down that if Cobb isn't on the field for half the season, he is just taking a roster spot for someone who is younger, faster and can play like the Cobb of old. There are already young guys that can replace him, though we don't know what the new system will actually look like, but have an idea. It won't look like MM's offense. You have Kumerow, Lazard, Moore (if he can grasp the new offense, since he couldn't grasp the old offense), and MVS. Lazard was very good at Iowa State. He just wasn't on the practice squad until very late.

If they want to sign a FA, spend the money you might overpay Cobb, and try to sign Jamison Crowder or Golden Tate. Beasley is an option, though I wouldn't want to pay him more than you would Cobb, say $3 million a year. It would be nice to have a veteran presence on the field instead of having another rookie thrown out there. I'm not saying don't draft a kid, I'm just saying that he wouldn't have to start, and work his way in the rotation through the season.

albert999's picture

Cobb has to gooooooo

D Ernie's picture

I say we may have to keep him, only for the reason, this team is a total dumpster shit fire with so many guys you need to get rid of and replace, he is the lesser evil.
Hey you get ten picks. They want contracts and to get paid and two of them will be first rounders. With free agency, a good free agency, this team will still need one more good draft next year to be back IMO.
ex. King - always hurt cant rely on
Brice - too small cant tackle cant really play football
Willaims - 35 and playing safety????
Mathews - 35 and trying to pass rush and cover
Perry - always hurt and 34
Moore - too dumb to learn routes
Ryan - smallish, and ineffective. Gets run over a lot
Spriggs- total waste of time
Barkley - really, you would play this guy?
Bulaga - career over, legs are shot

The above alone would take 10 picks and your not filling the real needs.

Oppy's picture

Well, the good news is you got Williams age right.

Who the eff is Barkley? Do you follow the packers?

dobber's picture

If this is really what you're portraying, why would they not be real needs?

Old School's picture

I'd like to nominate this post for Least Astute Post of 2019.

ON THE TOPIC of Cobb, he's clearly one of our 5 best WRs if he's healthy. What that's worth is kind of subjective, but Spotrac listed similar players and calculated his value at about $15 million over two years.

Log in to comment, upload your game day photos and more!

Not a member yet? Join free.

If you have already commented on Cheesehead TV in the past, we've created an account for you. Just verify your email, set a password and you're golden.

Or log in with Facebook

Packers Tickets, Ticket King


"I firmly believe that any man’s finest hour, the greatest fulfillment of all that he holds dear, is that moment when he has worked his heart out in a good cause and lies exhausted on the field of battle – victorious."
"The Bears still suck!"
"A school without football is in danger of deteriorating into a medieval study hall. "