I think that Funchess has a good chance of not making the team. I differ from you that MVS will make the next step forward to be a great receiver and Lazard will have pretty much reached his peak. I believe that Gute will be drafting at least two receivers in this draft. And if one of them looks like a contributor their first year, then Funchess will be gone. And their will be no FA WR signing.

I say Funchess gets traded. I say the Defense lost the game. I say Lowrey and Sullivan need to be replaced. I Also say Gute needs a starter at CB. And that will be the priority this draft. I also say That since so many are willing to rework their contracts. We soon will get a player that will hold out for more money.

"I just don't see him being the coveted No. 2 guy that will play opposite of Davante Adams."

Well, good call :)
Join the millions of others who share the same opinion.

I think having one receiver with a target catch rate of 52% is enough. I don't need two of them.

Corey, you are pretty far off base with your reason the Packers lost the NFCCG.

Look no further than Mike Pettine and Kevin King.

There are plenty of WTF moments from that game, however the Pettine-King axis provided an anchor around the teams collective necks for the entire game.

I am glad to see both of them G-O-N-E.

Lets not start with the revisionist history with the MLF-Rodgers BS as the reason for the loss.

Next thing you will want to tear down the Lambeau and Lombardi statues...

I can see Funchess being a nice addition in a LaFleur offense. Since Funchess can block as a receiver and is much better in the middle over his career I think he compliments well.

This isn’t an offense that has receivers one through four as MMs did. After Adams its mix and match with all receivers able to block. Funchess can also do some of what Tonyan does if needed.

Good tool to have, good price and system fit. He also makes it more likely we can look for a true slot/option type. Behind Adams, MVS and Lazard were only questions.

My take on Funchess is that he and EQ will battle for a roster spot and I believe a small rookie with speed will be WR 5/RS (and possibly RB 3-4). Unless EQ shows considerable improvement, I think Funchess will beat him onto the roster.

MLF's offense requires WRs that can block, play multiple positions and catch the football. Funchess played TE at Michigan and blocked well, he can play WR or receiving TE in the pros and has decent pro receiving stats given Cam Newton was his QB. He will be a good fit in MLFs offense whether he is WR #2, #3, or #4.

I wouldn't be surprised to see the Packers take a WR late in the draft since ESB seems vulnerable to not making the team. I will be very surprised if Funchess fails to make the team - he is versatile enough to be a really good fit in MLF's offense and will finally have a top caliber QB throwing to him.

Funchess and MVS, starring in, 'The Battle of Meh'.

Why do I think he was a michigan man? If so I remember he dropped as many passes as he caught, lacked break away speed and was a so do route runner.
Rodgers will hate this guy.
I see the two big needs a fast doenfiel receiver and numero uno, a corner with size and speed. Good luck with that at the end of the first.

Preston and Amos have reworked their contracts which makes the Pack very near the + cap level. If a few more rework their contracts we might sign a veteran or two. I would love Tomlinson , but believe Gents will sign him soon. There are a few veteran DTs and CBs that would fit very nicely and would not expect large contracts: Jenkins, Sherman, Butler,Hankins, Guy. This would take some pressure off our draft picks and allow them some time to develop. Let's go Rogers, Zadarious, and Lowry move those pots of gold around!

I disagree with you on almost everything to be honest. We lost that game due to our defense (#20, and our lack of pressure) and the guy coordinating it. However, to suggest Funchess will not be an upgrade or at least our 3rd receiver is ridiculous. Funchess is the same height as MVS and much faster than Lazard. I've seen him play live as I attended the Carolina game his first year. I had to watch him get deep on Damarius Randall twice and score on one of those deep shots. He very well could supplant MVS if we get the MVS we have always gotten which is Mr. Inconsistency. I love Lazard, but he is not the athlete Funchess is so I see Funchess being either our #2 or our #3 and it comes down to MVS being the deciding factor. The one thing Lazard does really well is block, and fortunately Funchess is just as good of a blocker and I can see Funchess and Lazard on the field at the same time with Adam's in the slot. Imagine trying to defend the run and pass against that.

Fuchness is already better than anything we have in the roster other than adams, he’s actually been a #2. He’s caught 60 balls in a season. Can run all the routes. Lazard and mvs, caught 66 balls last year in 112 attempts, the same the year before. All that and they where one on one the whole year with adams taking double and triple teams. People on this site are a little delusional about our current wideouts.

It doesn't matter who is on the field during crucial plays, especially at the goal line. Because as we saw in the championship game, Rodgers was going force it to Adams no matter what. Even though other receivers were much more open. LaFleur knew if he gave Rodgers another chance at a TD, he'd only have eyes for Adams; so did the Bucs. Could the communication have been better? Sure. Would it have made any difference? Probably not.

Turner has been restructured. Numbers are still unknown.

They did not lose for one thing (King/Miller was obscene), though pinning it on communication in the 4th is a joke. They should never have been into that position.

I go back to the two INT and 3+out. Perhaps a solid possession receiver converts one of those...

Though Aaron missing a few key throws Tom made was also a big difference

Rodgers, Jones and King have to own that loss.

Packers lost the championship game because of the defense , stop putting it on ithe offense , Kevin King and Mike Pettine to be exact .

I am likely higher on Funchess than most, he is a bargain. Funchess has basically had marginal QB play in his career. He will fit well in this offense. Rodgers can place a lot of balls for him on back shoulder throws and high and away throws outside.

Funchess is clearly a superior receiver over either of the bottom of the roster receivers EQ or Taylor or the cast of others currently on the PS. My question is if Funchess offers any ST value. I still see the Packers drafting a slot/motion receiver who would also take over the PR/KR roles. So in summary, the Packers will have one #1 receiver, three receivers that will share the #2 receiver role and a rookie who will take over the motion receiver role immediately after Tyler Ervin takes his annual pilgrimage to the IR. Actually, given the duplicative role of Ervin and a drafted slot receiver, Tyler Ervin may not even make the final roster.

1. Adams
2a. MVS
2b. Funchess
2c. Lazard
Slot/Motion a: Rookie (e.g. Amari Rodgers, Elijah Moore)
Slot/Motion b: Ervin

EQ and Taylor are squeezed off the 53-man roster unless the rookie makes Irvin expendable, then one of those two could be added to receiver group but even then, would be mainly used for ST coverage. Neither Taylor nor EQ has shown enough consistency/reliability to take away playing time from the four guys ahead of them in the primary receiver spots. If they cannot get open consistently or catch the ball consistently, they are offensive liabilities.

I will be surprised if Funchess makes the roster. And frankly, disappointed. With 10 picks and another strong rookie WR group, it's time to start setting the table for the Jordan Love era. That doesn't mean they need to jump at WR in round 1, or even round 2. Ideally, those two picks are OT and CB, IMO. But they ought to grab a couple WRs with the remaining 8 picks. And one of the two should have some return ability.

Assume that is so and then run the numbers: Adams, (Lazard, MVS, draftee1), (Taylor, ESB, Funchess, draftee2). That's 8. They won't keep 8. Only 1 or 2 of that second grouping will make the roster. Why keep the oldest of the bunch who is on a 1 yr deal with dubious credentials and no experience in the system?

Of course, that theory counts on Gute seeing this draft as the same way I do. He said he did last year and then executed the draft like he didn't. Hopefully, the 2nd tiime is the charm.

It make take until mid-season but I can see Funchess earning his way to our #2 WR. If he returns to form he is better than either MVS or Lazard. Funchess like Lazard is an effective blocker and he can catch the ball as compared with MVS.

The fact that he hasn't played in nearly 2 years is a concern which is why I believe it will take until mid-season for him to round into form.
If everyone remains healthy I can see Adams 1, Funchess 2, Lazard 3 and MVS 4 as we move into the second half of the season, unless we draft a legit #2 in one of the early rounds. That would change everything behind Adams.

We'll see how it all plays out but the price is right for Funchess to become an offseason steal. Thanks, Since '61

Unless Funchess developed some super human abilities he didnt have before hand, he will have a hard time making the roster. Hes always been a number three guy. Scantling made some big plays but also had some huge drops. One of the Packers receivers this year is somewhere in the draft. That leaves Funchess dueling with EQ for a roster spot. Who knows, maybe he comes up huge in camp, but I wouldn't go buy his jersey just yet....