2011 Fantasy Outlook: Greg Jennings' Potential Unlimited in Packers Offense
2010 Review: Greg Jennings, No. 85
I guess I can't blame those of you who had lost a little faith in Greg Jennings heading into the 2010 season—no wait, yes I can.
What in the world were you guys thinking?!?!
Packed within a talented group of Green Bay receivers in 2009, it’s true that the top wideout for the Green and Gold seemed to lose a little bit of luster. However, not only were his big-play ability and superior skills still clearly evident, but his previous career numbers also all pointed towards his minor downslide being more of an irregularity than the norm.
Even then, a “fluke season” of 1,113 yards and 16.4 yards per catch had better stats than what most other receivers in the league put up.
With that in mind, fantasy owners had to know a return to the top was imminent for Jennings and not the other way around. With Jennings having virtually no chance of ever seeing a double-team due to the amount of talent around him—along with having a QB like Aaron Rodgers running the show—you’d have to be illiterate not to be able to read the signs for the guy. The writing on the wall was so incontrovertible that even Al Davis could have made the right call here.
That said, Jennings did start the 2010 season off a bit slow, catching just 14 balls in the first five weeks of action. At the same time, however, his sweet tooth for the end zone seemed to be back in full force, as the former second-round pick out of Western Michigan managed to snag three touchdowns in that same time period.
Where do you see Greg Jennings ending up in the WR fantasy rankings in 2011?
Though his erratic play coming out of the gates wasn’t quite what fantasy owners were counting on when they drafted him, Week 6 would start a streak that must have satisfied even the most apprehensive of skeptical souls.
Over the next seven weeks, Mr. Jennings went on to compile such insanely gaudy numbers that owners suddenly found themselves sitting on a top-five fantasy receiver.
During those seven games, the total numbers looked like this: 60 targets, 43 catches, 761 yards (17.7 YPC) and eight touchdowns, all combined for a whopping average of 17.73 fantasy points per contest.
To put this in perspective, only 12 other receivers in the league caught more than eight TDs the entire season!!!
Not bad for a guy who racked up just four TDs the previous year.
When the final curtain fell on the 2010 season, Jennings would end up with the finest fantasy season of his career, once again showing that patience can indeed be a fantasy owner’s most important virtue.
On the other hand, when it’s time to draft your team for the upcoming season, you might want to throw patience out the window and grab Jennings as quickly as you can.
(Brought to you by PYROMANIAC.COM)
Pros and Cons for 2011
(+) Though Jennings started off slow, catching just 14 passes for 183 yards over his first five games, he showed a winner's determination by averaging 98.4 yards/game with nine TDs during the last 11
(+) He’s the most talented receiver on a team with a pass-happy QB
(+) James Starks looks like a guy defenses will have to pay attention to, thus freeing up space in the secondary
(+) Being the favorite target of the best quarterback on the planet can't hurt
(+) Jennings has some really nice incentives written into his contract
(–) The emergence of fellow WRs James Jones (if he stays) and especially Jordy Nelson could start to take some targets away from Jennings
(–) Will the return of Jermichael Finley hurt? In the four weeks he played in last season, the Packers TE had two 100-yard games with 21 catches on 26 targets. During those games, Jennings also saw 26 targets but only had 12 catches with zero 100-yard performances
(–) Coming off the spotlight and major highs of a Super Bowl victory, a dip in production is possible
For the rest of Greg Jennings' Player Profile, CLICK HERE
Follow Pyro® on Twitter: https://twitter.com/pyroman1ac
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?