Looking At Free Agent Wide Receivers

by Brandon on Jul 14, 2011 3:00 PM CDT in Green Bay Packers Free Agency

I'm glad the Green Bay Packers aren't looking for a free agent wide receiver because I think teams looking for one before the start of the season are either going to overpay or take a big risk. If I had to sign someone, I'd prefer taking a low cost, high reward risk than overpay for someone I'd be thinking about releasing in a year or two. Which brings me to this latest piece on Randy Moss at Pro Football Talk:

"Randy has been working out, two-a-days, all spring and summer in West Virginia," Joel Segal told NFL.com. "He is determined, motivated and quite frankly has a huge chip on his shoulder. Whatever team ends up getting Randy, they’re going to know they’re getting the old Randy Moss. He’s not just coming in to be on the team, he’s going to be Randy Moss — a difference maker."

If he's going to play for the veteran minimum with little guaranteed money, which makes him easy to release, I could see taking a chance on him. He's proven he can be one of the best in the right offensive system as recently as 2009, and he has no injury concerns. And if/when he doesn't work out, he's easy to release.

The best wide receivers available either come with a recent suspension (Santonio Holmes) or a lot of past injuries (Sidney Rice). After them, teams will be wondering if they should sign Braylon Edwards, who can probably help any team but I expect will be overpaid, if Malcom Floyd can be just as good when he's not playing alongside Antonio Gates and Phillip Rivers, or if Panthers WR Steve Smith can return to his 2008 form.

None of those options are perfect, the best way to fill an opening at wide receiver is to draft Randall Cobb a year or two before you need him, but in this market I would prefer rolling the dice with a couple low cost options and see if one of them works out.

Tweet Comment 23 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

The WR pool is deep in free agency this year

There are plenty of WR’s the Bears can choose from and immediately boost their WR core.

I guess that’s not saying much though when the Bears #1 WR would be the Packers #5 WR……

I ran out of quotes.....

by Jabooty on Jul 14, 2011 5:24 PM CDT reply actions

Funny thing

Is bears fans all seem convinced that Hester, Knox and Bennett actually have alot of upside, potential and will become #1 WR!! Hell they even think that Olsen is more athletic and a better reciever than Finley just cuz he tested better at the combine!

I guess dellusion has set in PRETTY deep for them!!!

You've been Stroh'd™!!!

by Strohman on Jul 14, 2011 6:23 PM CDT up reply actions

Yeah

Over at ESPN one day, Bears fans were talking about Olsen becoming a great TE (despite the fact that he hasn’t even come close to looking like one in his 4 years), saying he’s better than the “overrated” Finley.

Forget that in only 4 games last year, Finley only had 100 fewer yards than Olsen had the entire season……

by Packers3485 on Jul 14, 2011 6:29 PM CDT up reply actions

Ugh.

I’m SO excited to see Finley in action again, and that post didn’t help me not think about it potentially being over a year from now till that happens.

by msc32887 on Jul 14, 2011 6:35 PM CDT up reply actions

Bears fans are also saying....

Clay Matthews is overrated and is a one-trick pony. At the same time, Devin Hester is the best KR in history and is a legit #1 WR.

I ran out of quotes.....

by Jabooty on Jul 15, 2011 5:17 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs

^^^ haha

If not for the words fail and epic in the subcaption, that would have been the best ever.

"Show me a good loser, and I'll show you a loser." - Vince Lombardi

by AdamA on Jul 15, 2011 8:05 AM CDT up reply actions

Man...

I am so sick of the bears fans talking about him. I’ll give them that we overrate Finley based on what he’s actually done but at least when he’s playing he gives us something to be excited about. Olson has been nothing but underwhelming!

The Green Bay Packers...Putting bad coaches out of their misery since 2010

by TrevorR on Jul 15, 2011 9:21 AM CDT up reply actions

I was just a WCG

A couple Bears fans were showing Hester an over-abundance of love because of his “versatility” in being a WR and KR. I almost literally did a facepalm after reading that one. Hester….a WR?! REALLY?! And all this time I thought he was a KR running around in zig zag routes on offense…..IDK about you, but sometimes I get the feeling that Lovie Smith told Devin Hester to “fake being the WR,” much like Bobby Boucher’s coach told him!

I ran out of quotes.....

by Jabooty on Jul 15, 2011 5:12 AM CDT up reply actions

You mean like...

how Bear’s fans fake having any football knowledge?

In Every Climb and Place....

by PhoenicianPakFan on Jul 15, 2011 5:25 AM CDT up reply actions 2 recs

Ouch!

Editor at BT Powerhouse, a Big Ten Basketball blog.
Author at Acme Packing Company, a Green Bay Packers blog
"If you don't tell him what he wants to hear, he's going to find you out. And when he does, they're going to tear your head off and throw your BODY OUT OF AN AIRLOCK!" - Number Six, "Bastille Day"

by OBrienSchofieldismyHero on Jul 15, 2011 6:55 AM CDT up reply actions

zzzing!

The Green Bay Packers...Putting bad coaches out of their misery since 2010

by TrevorR on Jul 15, 2011 9:27 AM CDT up reply actions

Who else is in a serious hunt for a FA receiver right now beside the Bears?

At a guess… the Titans, the Browns (and the Rams, though mostly because they have so many of their own receivers going to the FA).

And TBH, I fully expect the best people on this list will all be resigned by their current teams.

There’s going to be less to pick from than it looks. Following up on what Strohman said, they’ll pick up a receiver to be the number two guy to Hester and let Know be the number three guy. Personally, I think Bennet’s been their most consistent threat, but hey… their woes at receiver is a Packer fan’s gain.

"Show me a good loser, and I'll show you a loser." - Vince Lombardi

by AdamA on Jul 15, 2011 8:14 AM CDT up reply actions

I misread this post initially

And thought that you were saying taking Randy Moss on the Packers wouldn’t be such a bad idea if he was signing for the veteran minimum, etc.

In which case my response would have been one of the following.

(a) No……just no
(b) Oh hell no
© Are you smoking with Randy right now?

Thankfully, this was not what you wrote.

by Packers3485 on Jul 14, 2011 5:28 PM CDT reply actions

eh

at vets minimum, I could see us giving it a shot. He’d have a hard time even making the opening day roster here so it would force to have to perform at a high level in camp (if there is one). I don’t think we need him though but his upside is VERY high considering what we know we can do. We might be the kind of team that would be just right for him…high powered offense, ready for a title, etc.

The Green Bay Packers...Putting bad coaches out of their misery since 2010

by TrevorR on Jul 15, 2011 9:29 AM CDT up reply actions

No.

Friends don’t let friends talk about signing Randy Moss.

Imagine him alligator-arming it on a key 3rd down in a big game late in the season. How would you feel?

Now, would that necessarily happen? No, I grant you that it is not a certainty that it would. However, what are the chances that it would happen? …better than fair, I would say. So, signing Randy is just not worth the angst of hoping against hope that Randy actually plays for you. The frustration that would come if he shat the bed again would be so great that, risk versus reward, he ain’t worth it.

Only Randy can stop Randy, but, unfortunately, he always seems to do so.

by Curly Lambeau on Jul 15, 2011 11:57 AM CDT up reply actions

Yeah you are probably right on that one I guess.

The Green Bay Packers...Putting bad coaches out of their misery since 2010

by TrevorR on Jul 15, 2011 12:44 PM CDT up reply actions

Steve Smith

return to his 2008 form? Did Steve suddenly get 3 yrs. younger?

God Bless Our Troops............Especially Our Snipers!

by bigbill992001 on Jul 14, 2011 7:18 PM CDT reply actions

I'd take the 2005 Carolina Smith any day of the week.

by OBrienSchofieldismyHero on Jul 15, 2011 6:55 AM CDT up reply actions

Bears Receivers

I was just reading an article by Brad Biggs – a Chicago Tribune reporter. This is what Martz had to say.

"Size doesn’t make any difference, it makes absolutely no difference. With Matt [Forte] as a runner and our ability to run the ball, we get a lot of one-on-one coverage, and you have to have receivers that can beat corners one on one. And generally, the guys that can change direction and run fast – those are the kinds of guys that you’re looking for."

First of all Forte averaged 66 yards a game running and was close to being the second best receiver. Seems things aren’t working as you planned -which means you either need to block better for your QB or get better WRs. Personally – I think they need to upgrade both.

by Paul_chi on Jul 15, 2011 2:08 AM CDT reply actions

And I’m not expert, so certainly not at the level that Martz is, but I always thought big, strong receivers were good at wrestling the ball away and playing physically against corners and safeties when it matters (like in the Red Zone).

In Every Climb and Place....

by PhoenicianPakFan on Jul 15, 2011 4:47 AM CDT up reply actions

Until Martz's and the Bears' offensive philosophy proves to be successful this way.....

size does matter. A big WR draws more attention from the defense and would be a good compliment to speedy WR’s such as Knox and Hester. It would compensate for their mediocre (to put it nicely) route running skills. This would also draw less pressure on Cutler as the defense would have to compensate for it, thus giving Cutler more protection. Lord knows Martz owes Cutler a year long supply of protection!

I ran out of quotes.....

by Jabooty on Jul 15, 2011 5:28 AM CDT up reply actions

So what you're saying is that the Bears are going to draft a U$C receiver in the first round?

Heaven knows Jerry Angelo won’t do that.

by OBrienSchofieldismyHero on Jul 15, 2011 6:55 AM CDT up reply actions

Lovie said

we get a lot of one-on-one coverage

Why the hell do you think you get alot of one on one coverage? Did it ever occur to you Mr. Martz, that you don’t have ANY recievers who can’t be covered one on one?!! Does he really think that Hester or Knox is someone who can beat single coverage consistently.. Why would any team, unless they have crap CB, NOT cover the beats one on one?!!

You've been Stroh'd™!!!

by Strohman on Jul 15, 2011 11:58 AM CDT up reply actions 4 recs