A Mid-Preseason Look at the 53 Man Roster
by Gotty033 on Aug 25, 2010 10:13 AM CDT
Email
Print
First of all, I am a long time reader of this blog, occasional blog comment poster, and now this is my first fan post so please bear with me. In this post, lets take a possible look at how the Packers 53 man roster and the practice squad may look like.
Quarterbacks (2):
This is probably the easiest decision Ted will have to make.
Running Backs (2):
Ryan Grant & Brandon Jackson
Why only 2? I think this will be part of the annual roster surprise this year. With John Kuhn being able to show that he can carry the ball somewhat well, I could see Ted doing something just like this. I also think they will put James Starks on IR for this season and give him a shot next year.
Fullbacks (3):
John Kuhn, Korey Hall & Quinn Johnson
Again, 3 fullbacks. Johnson sticks around again for a power running game option and Kuhn and Hall are special teams stalwarts.
Tight End (4):
Jermichael Finley, Donald Lee, Spencer Havner, & Andrew Quarless
4 Tight Ends! Yes, Ted loves his Tight Ends. No way that he will drop Lee, Havner, or Quarless. Lee provides good protection incase Finley goes down with an injury. Havner is very versatile and able to play Offense, Defense, & Special Teams. Quarless will make the team based on his projected ability and the fact that he probably wouldn't pass through waivers to be put on the practice squad.
Wide Receivers (5):
Greg Jennings, Donald Driver, James Jones, Jordy Nelson, & Brett Swain
Another pretty easy decision for Ted. However if for some odd reason he wants to keep Tom Crabtree on the roster, look for only 4 receivers with Swain being the odd man out.
Offensive Tackles (4):
Chad Clifton, Mark Tauscher, Bryan Bulaga, & Marshall Newhouse
Offensive Guards (3):
Daryn Colledge, Josh Sitton, & T.J. Lang
Centers (2):
With a starting lineup of Clifton, Bulaga, Wells, Sitton, & Tauscher; the Pack is looking better upfront already. This could be a surprising strong point this year with the quality of depth in the Offensive Line. I think Allen Barbre has played himself off the roster as he probably couldn't block a stationary rock if called upon these days. Spitz and Colledge both could be interesting trade bait this year if they both complain about not being starters, if that is the case we would lose a lot of quality depth.
Defensive Line (6):
B.J. Raji, Ryan Pickett, Cullen Jenkins, Mike Neal, Justin Harrell, & Jarius Wynn
Somehow, someway Harrell seems to get a spot again this year, most likely due to Ted not wanting to admit a mistake and he is actually somewhat healthy. Let's hope that Harrell finally proves all of us doubters wrong.
Outside Linebackers (4):
Clay Matthews, Brad Jones, Brady Poppinga, & Frank Zombo
Inside Linebackers (4):
Nick Barnett, A.J. Hawk, Brandon Chillar, & Desmond Bishop
No surprise really here, Zombo has really played well this preseason to deserve a chance to be on this roster. Will be interesting if Bishop sticks it out for another season of being buried on the depth chart or if he forces a trade.
Cornerbacks (6):
Charles Woodson, Tramon Williams, Pat Lee, Brandon Underwood, Sam Shields, & Jarrett Bush
Al Harris will start this season on the PUP list, which forces the Packers to keep Bush. I had Harris coming back right away on my original list, but with today's news on him not passing his physical, I had to add Bush to this list. Once Harris is back, I would hope Bush is the one cut from this group, unless Underwood's situation gets worse.
Safeties (5):
Nick Collins, Morgan Burnett, Will Blackmon, Derrick Martin, & Atari Bigby
Bigby won't be back right away, but once he gets back the Pack has some depth at Safety this year. Burnett will have some rookie growing pains to go through, but with Collins working with him hopefully they won't be so bad.
Kicker (1):
According to an article today on packers.com, Crosby says his confidence is up and he feels a lot better this year. Let's hope that continues throughout the year.
Punter (1):
Yes, the Aussie wins the punting competition. Really it is a toss up between Bryan and Tim Masthay, and I just went with a gut feeling here.
Long Snapper (1):
Goode does his job well, no reason to cut him.
Practice Squad (8):
Graham Harrell QB, Nick McDonald C/G, Quinn Porter RB, Anthony Levine S, Robert Francois ILB, Alex Joseph ILB, Tom Crabtree TE, & 1 player from waivers to be named later
I don't see Ted keeping 3 QBs on the active roster so Harrell is stashed here and hopefully stays around to learn the ropes. Porter could make the active roster if the decision is to have 3 RBs available. Zombo would land here if he somehow is outperformed by another linebacker or we pick one up off of waivers, however I don't see that happening.
What do you think about this roster? Do you think a roster like this could make it to the Superbowl? I think this roster has great potential with a lot of athleticism and smart football players on it. If the Packers can avoid injuries and play to their full potential, I see no reason why they couldn't make it deep into the playoffs with a Superbowl berth to play for.
91 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
No on 2 HB and 3 FB
No. I know TT does weird things this time of year, but really….no.
Brandon Jackson has the potential to be a real contributor this year for the Packers. As a result there needs to be some sort of expectation of injury. Same with Grant. It’s way to risky to take a chew em up and spit em out position and go that light with it.
I wouldn’t be shocked if Porter, Starks, and Lumpkin don’t make it, but then we pick up a guy off the waiver wire who didn’t make it on a team that’s deeper at RB.
I also have a hard time seeing Johnson make the team because he’s quickly becoming replaceable. If he can’t catch and can’t play special teams then he’s not going to make it on the roster.
If I were to guess my weird TT move it would five TE’s. I know this would piss most of you off to no end, but if the creative minds behind our offense can cook something up with that then it could be interesting.
RB
I doubt the Packers only keep 2 RB… Just too dangerous, imo. Its possible but seems unlikely… Also Starks is getting close to a return and if he shows anything, the Packers would give him a shot on the 53. Jones did nothing last year in preseason except the last game and still made the roster. I think that could happen again w/ Starks… Either that or if Porter gets back soon they’ll keep him and put Starks on IR, PUP or practice squad!
5 TE is possilbe cuz Crabttree would in essence be a FB… I’ve become OK w/ 4 TE so another one isn’t that big a deal. And TE are ALOT more useful than FB on offense and as good on ST.
i agree
they need 3 rbs and i also think that masthay wins the p job because he is a better holder and has more football experience
Quinn Johnson
He’s got two more preseason games to prove himself, he’s shown some good blocking, but his bad hands as a receiver are a problem. Players dropping returns/passes is a big red flag for me during the preseason.
It’d be ironic if they kept 2 FBs but cut the one who has the most classic FB ability (run blocking). Quinn Johnson is the only guy of the 3 who can legitimately clean out a hole for the RB. Neither Kuhn nor Hall offer anything special in that regard. They can get in a LB’s way, and kinda’ sustain a gap for a moment (which is, myeh, okay I guess), but Q is the one who can actually snot-bubble a defender.
So, in my opinion, I’d hate to see Johnson get cut. I think you make a choice and keep, say, 4 guys out of the 6 “good-option” guys we’ve got at TE and FB (I’m talking about Kuhn, Hall, Lee, Havner, Crabtree, and Quarless). Obviously Finley is a lock, and I project that Johnson could easily be in a similar category someday in terms of value. He could be an absolute hammer someday soon. With his suspect hands, I’ll grant you that he’s probably not going to be a William Henderson/Tom Rathman type of guy, but he could be Lorenzo Neal. And that’s… not nothin’. It’s somethin’. It’s certainly better than the type of try-hard-and-maybe-get-the-job-done-some-of-the-time guys that Kuhn and Hall have shown themselves to be. They’re just… y’know, “guys.” Johnson could be a real asset.
by Curly Lambeau on Aug 26, 2010 1:25 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
+1
It’d be stupid to let Johnson go. He’s shown the ability to be a good run blocker, which in my opinion is the most important thing for a Fb.
by packallday555 on Aug 26, 2010 1:41 PM CDT up reply actions
Disagree on stupidity
I’m falling out of love with Johnson. Really if all he can bring to the table is thumpin’ guys you could keep Crabtree and line him up as an H back and get that. Plus Crabtree can catch the ball. Same could be said for Havner, and he can also play LB and special teams.
Really I think Johnson’s downfall is that he can’t catch, can’t play special teams, and the depth at TE.
by PackApologist on Aug 26, 2010 1:48 PM CDT up reply actions
Legit arguments by all of you against Quinn Johnson
However, when in short yardage situation and we want to run the ball, who is the best FB on the roster to make sure Grant gets the 1 or 2 yards needed for a first down? In my opinion, it’s Quinn Johnson. I don’t see the team giving up on him just yet. He’s a very good blocker.
"No player is greater than a team."
-Vince Lombardi
by Jabooty on Aug 27, 2010 12:13 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Many other solutions
While I completely agree with you on that point, I would say there are other ways of accomlpishing the same goal. For example, in those situations you could line Crabtree up in the FB spot and let him clear the path.
by PackApologist on Aug 27, 2010 7:25 AM CDT up reply actions
It's a thought considering Crabtree is better in Special Teams compared to Quinn
However, our offense has struggled running the ball in short yardage situations. Wouldn’t it be wise to make sure we get our best players in certain situations on the field? I’m just sick and tired of seeing Grant get stopped in the backfield on 3rd and 1 and 3rd and 2. It’s extremely frustrating.
"No player is greater than a team."
-Vince Lombardi
Johnson looked quite good against the Colts last night. He made a couple big blocks that enabled Grant to go through some holes nearly untouched. I understand why some of you want to cut Johnson but I just don’t agree. Kuhn and Hall are the exact same player. I’d cut one and keep Johnson, and eventually make him our every down Fb.
by packallday555 on Aug 27, 2010 3:01 PM CDT up reply actions
Johnson
Can be a Hammer if he was in a Power run scheme! Packers don’t run that scheme which makes him a bad fit for the Packers… Was worth a try but he failed to gain the ability to read a hole and block the read. Put him in a power scheme and say block #50 and he’ll be a hammer, but he doesn’t have the instincts to read like the RB hitting the hole!
Brandon's just so ordinary.
I hope I’m wrong. I’m certainly no expert. There’s nothing that he’s terrible at anymore, but if Grant goes down, I don’t think defenses will spend more than a passing thought on GB’s running game. It’s not like running the football is how this offense makes money, but you’ve got to do something to keep them honest and Jackson just isn’t enough of a threat to do that in my opinion.
Brew Crew Ball free since 8/25/10! And happier for it!
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Aug 26, 2010 12:20 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I get that
That is, and always has been, the rub with Jackson hasn’t it? I guess he’s trying out all new forms of daily habbits and practice routines to get more of a burst and explosion. Some have seen it in the preseason, I don’t think I have either. I do think the Pack is in trouble if Jackson becomes a 20 carry guy.
But that’s not what I meant by relying on Jackson for production. Right now his role as 3rd down back, which I think he can be very good at this year and his kick returning duties are what come to my mind. Between these two things he’ll have more touches, more open room to work with rather than the in between the tackles stuff, and more exposure to get hurt.
This is why three true HB are needed. With that vision of using Jackson as sort of a Reggie Bush type player (I know that’s not really how he’ll be used I just can’t think of another description for 3rd and kick returns) and Grant being the feature back there is still enough touches for a third spelling back. This will also help easy worry if either one (although it would probably be more Grant than Jackson) goes down.
by PackApologist on Aug 26, 2010 12:36 PM CDT up reply actions
My guess
Starks goes on the PUP list. It’s a conservative move that gives him some time to try out things like kick returner. Then after 6 weeks, they see what they’ve got and simply delay the decision.
by gern blanston on Aug 26, 2010 3:52 PM CDT up reply actions
Pup
Players on PUP can’t practice w/ the team until after week 6… There is a 2 week window after that in which they can and not count against the 53 roster. Anytime after the 6 weeks they can be activated and added to the roster, but there is no practicing during that 6 week period.
right
I was referring to the 2 week window. I didn’t know exactly when it kicked in. They’ve seen next to nothing of him. Why not stash him there for a while, get a peak at his abilities, then make a decision? If he looks good you activate him. If not, either cut him or IR him.
by gern blanston on Aug 26, 2010 4:25 PM CDT up reply actions
additionally
you’ll have given the FA market a chance to play itself out while keeping some insurance in your back pocket. Perhaps a good/serviceable RB becomes available? We grab him, then IR Starks and live to fight another day with him.
by gern blanston on Aug 26, 2010 4:34 PM CDT up reply actions
Starks
I’m not against Starks on the PUP. But if he can practice befor the PUP for regular season starts then I want to see what he can do. Jones had that chance last year. Don’t think he played until final preseason game and did a little to get a roster spot.
Starks might also be the only RB ready to start the regular season after Grant and Jackson. Sounds like Lumpkin is out for awile, and Porter for a couple weeks? So Porter should go on PUP and Starks the 53… A RB another team releases isn’t going to know the offense for awile, so Starks probably could contribute more than a FA, and sooner…
Good thoughts.
I think another RB could pick up the system fairly quickly though. Its not like Starks has had a lot of time in it either so I doubt he’d be too much ahead of a vet back that falls out in the FA market (Parker, Ward, etc). I hope they at least kick the tires on a few backs to see if they make sense and could contribute. I’d be nervous with just Grant, Jackson and an injured Starks on the roster.
by TrevorR on Aug 27, 2010 12:10 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I see your logic with 2RB
Kuhn would have to effectively be the 3RB… and I agree he can probably be that smash mouth guy, but then we do lack a burner. (But who cares wing that puppy on third & long).
Quinn Johnson has shown to have lead hands but just watch him take three guys out of the play on Jackson 12 yd TD run, and you can see why the guy is going to stick. Lets not forget the Packers had short yardage issues up until about mid season last year when the Oline got right & Johnson was the FB in short yardage situations.
I think 2 WRs need some consideration at the very least… Dillon & Gore… Dillon looks polished and has shown some Driverequese after the catch moves, and Gore has nice size, and is said to be pretty polished for a Canadian Football product… but none of the five from last year has done anything to disappoint, so it’ll be tough.
Tight End is a log jam, I wouldn’t be surprised at a swap somewhere, Dallas is thin at TE, they got a surplus of nickel corners?
by The Delivery Guy on Aug 25, 2010 4:39 PM CDT reply actions
The TE problem
I like the concept of trading some of our wealth of TE, but the problem is that the talent is so varied and complementary that’s tough to point to a guy and say “Yup he’s expendable.”
For example: Havner has enough talent to be a third receiving option, block, H back and play LB (where we are extra thin). Lee can block, play special teams, and is a veteran presence if Finely goes down. Crabtree is basically a Quinn Johnson who can actually catch. He is huge and can really hammer people. Then there is Quarless who is looking like a poorman’s Finely at this point, and parting with him before he has a chance to grow could bite us in the ass. And Finely I’m not going to even talk about cause there is no way the Pack lets him go. So of those four which do we give up?
I’m not liking any. In fact the 5 TE’s sounds really odd, but when consider the types of formations that we could run the intrigue is promising. Really though 4 with Crabtree going to the PS is the most prudent choice.
The only one being good trade bait would be Lee, since the others are so raw and not ready to start or be full backups. It would be a bit nerve racking then if Finely goes down then because then we are relying on a rookie who can’t catch, a guy who is more of a blocker with not much experience, and Havner, jack of all trades master of none.
by PackApologist on Aug 25, 2010 4:59 PM CDT up reply actions
I stressed that a month ago
Havner needs to make this roster he’s a football player, you need more than a couple on your team. I wouldn’t be suprised if they keep 5. I have been saying this for awhile Lee is the expendable one if they keep 4. 2 tailbacks may become a reality the fullback looked like the better tailback by far on Saturday.
I wouldn’t be suprised if they keep Preprah over Martin seems more dependable. there are about 5 positions that are up in the air
Quarless vs Crabtree
I wonder if they would consider trading off one of them? I worry that they won’t make it to the PS…and if they do they are the kinds of guys someone would nab off during the season. I think teams might have more interest in trading for a TE with the intangibles of these two over someone like Lee. They KNOW what they have in Lee but those two have shown some serious potential and have the size EVERYONE is looking for in TEs.
Sorry, but thats just dumb..
We just drafted Quarless, why would we turn around and trade him? He’s also exactly the kind of TE that McCarthy wants for his offense, you know like Finley!!! Crabtree was an undrafted FA, he’ll have no trade value whatsoever… Don’t get me wrong, I like him too, but its not like he’s going to be a special player or anything. He’d be a good backup TE for most teams but I don’t see starter material. He’ll be a backup TE and ST player at best and no team is going to trade for him!
My guess is that they try to sneak Quarles onto the practice squad...
Brew Crew Ball free since 8/25/10! And happier for it!
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Aug 26, 2010 12:22 PM CDT up reply actions
Man that would make me worry
All it will take is for him to snag one or two big catches in the preseason and someone will snatch him up.
by PackApologist on Aug 26, 2010 12:37 PM CDT up reply actions
I'm worried about that too.
… but I don’t think they’re cutting or trading either Havner or Lee and I don’t see how they can keep 4TEs. Lee might get dealt, but I doubt it, and Quarles is the only practice squad eligible guy (besides Crabtree of course).
Brew Crew Ball free since 8/25/10! And happier for it!
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Aug 26, 2010 1:02 PM CDT up reply actions
thanks for continuing to be the site jackass...
Sooo…lets see just cause a guy was undrafted means he has no trade value? None whatsoever huh? And someone better contact Crabtree and let him know that Strohman already decided he can’t be something special…we should let all the teams know that no one on our team has any value too. Thanks for filling us all in all wise one.
sigh…its the same crap as most of your posts…you think you are right about everything and everyone else is “just dumb”. Honestly its getting old dude. Get some Aleve for those cramps already!
No reallly you be the horses ass!
So tell me what Crabtree has done in the preseason game to give you the idea that ANYONE would trade for him? I sure haven’t seen him make any plays. So he’s a good blocker for a TE. Good blocking TE are a dime a dozen! His ball skills need alot of work, so it won’t be those! I guess the fact that he hasn’t made any plays has impressed you… But it hasn’t me and it won’t to any NFL teams!
Quarless probably has some trade value, but like I said we just spent a draft pick on him and he’s exactly the kind of TE that McCarthy likes on offense. SO WHY trade him?!! THat makes no sense…
You don’t like my opinions don’t read them… But you keep commenting back, just like me… So who’s more opinionated?!!!
Lemmee settle this one.
You’re both right.
Quarless has no trade value. And yes, Stroh is the site jackass.
(A good compromise leaves everyone upset.)
by Curly Lambeau on Aug 26, 2010 3:43 PM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
Q. Johnson is still not the #2 FB. He still has to beat out Hall who is much better on ST than Johnson. He’s not a good zbs FB… zbs FB need to be able to read on the run and block depending on how the D plays after the snap. Hall and Kuhn can read that, Johnson cannot! He is only a power scheme FB where his man is decided before the snap. Tell him to put his helmet on #50 or whatever, but he doesn’t have the ability to read the situation on the run.
Dillon and Gore are at best practice squad guys. Dillon could be a good find if we can stash him there… Gore will go back to the CFL!
I just don’t see any of theTE bringing in anything in trade!!! Havner has none, certainly not Crabtree and Quarless won’t be trade bait! Even Lee has little trade value, but he is valuable to the Packers being the only viable starter after Finley.
The Kuhn experiment
Ok I’m starting a new thread on this because it keep cropping up and I want to speak my peace on just this issue alone. So let’s just get one thing straight, John Kuhn is not a halfback.
He played adequate against guys who probably won’t be playing in the NFL in a few weeks. Sure, I’ll give you that…but don’t forget he was only in there because we were so down on the depth chart it wasn’t funny. Also, when the Packers wanted to make a little more happen they didn’t turn to Kuhn. They handed it over to Jackson to carry to ball and pound out the win.
Not that’s not saying Kuhn has no talent whatsoever. I’m just saying that Kuhn being a halfback would be slightly less productive than what the Vikings are seeing out of Toby Gerhert. Sure, he’s big, strong and powerful, but really he’s not quite fast enough to really be tailback at this level.
Love the guy as a fullback. He can catch, run block, pass block, do the special teams thing, etc. But having Kuhn as a fullback is like having Sam Shields as a kick returner. It’s not his thing and using him there wastes the other talents he can bring to the team.
Using him on third down is interesting thought though. I will admit to that. The problem is that the Packers would lose a bit of explosion out of that back who would be the check down. Call it a hunch, but I really think that Jackson is going to have a bit more kick to make a move and scamper for some much needed yards on a screen or check down. Kuhn could bowl over some guys as the second coming of Mike Alstot, but really nothing more…and the speed of the game has increased as to make even that role a bit obsolete.
by PackApologist on Aug 25, 2010 9:27 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs
+1
Especially the part about Gerhart, who I have said all along won’t be that good in the NFL! Big power RB in college find out its alot harder to run over NFL LB’s than it is in college where they are bigger and faster than the guys trying to tackle them!!! LOL
Totally agree about Kuhn too… Very good FB, but not as a RB!
Yeah, that was my opinion of Gerhart as well, and being over on DN I know some of the Vikings fans are a little down on Gerhart because he hasn’t looked like anything special. It doesn’t appear that his power/strength is going to translate in the NFL, and he certainly doesn’t have the speed/quickness to make up for it.
by packallday555 on Aug 26, 2010 12:09 AM CDT up reply actions
Yeah that's where I was getting my viewpoint as well
But there are an equal number of people over there who think that he’s got the promise to be a big playmaker. I don’t know which will turn out, but really the NFL is littered with guys who didn’t make it even though they were beasts in college. Sometimes players just can’t translate their game.
by PackApologist on Aug 26, 2010 12:11 AM CDT up reply actions
I think a lot of those guys are just being homers. Gerhart hasn’t impressed much in training camp or practice (from what I’ve read), and he didn’t impress me much in either of their preseason games. He runs to straight up and down, and doesn’t seem to have very good quickness/acceleration.
by packallday555 on Aug 26, 2010 12:20 AM CDT up reply actions
You already know my take on Gerhart. I like him.
I have watched every play he has run in slow motion. He does have quickness and cuts very well. He has made a few rookie running errors. His running style hasn’t been an issue. Running behind a bad secondary O-Line has been an issue. Oh, he can catch the ball as well.
But I see the Pack as getting the bonus out of Gerhart. You guys can use either Albert Young or Ian Johnson. Scat backs that catch well. I will hate to lose Albert but I’m afraid it will happen.
"Is it normal to wake up in the morning in a sweat because you can't wait to beat another human's guts out?"
Joe Kapp
by lifelongvike on Aug 26, 2010 2:15 PM CDT up reply actions
I’ve been more impressed with Young, then I have with Gerhart. I just think he runs to straight up and down. His pad level is just to high, and I don’t think his power is going to translate in the NFL where your average Lb is probably 10-15 lbs. heavier and also faster then your average college Lb.
by packallday555 on Aug 26, 2010 4:47 PM CDT up reply actions
I understand your theory.
But I have seen him move the pile this year, so it is translating on the field so far. He might be more susceptible to injury with that style though.
What I’m trying to say is that I doubt that the Vikings coaches and FO are disappointed with their selection.
"Is it normal to wake up in the morning in a sweat because you can't wait to beat another human's guts out?"
Joe Kapp
by lifelongvike on Aug 27, 2010 8:06 AM CDT up reply actions
Your probably right. I doubt their disappointed either. It’d be nice for him to run behind a better offensive line too.
by packallday555 on Aug 27, 2010 3:02 PM CDT up reply actions
our spare punter
I know this is excruciating minutiae, but do you suppose we could trade whichever punter doesn’t make the final squad for a late-round draft pick, instead of simply cutting him? I’m not exactly up to speed on every punter in every NFL camp, but from what I’m reading both of our guys are solid, and of course only one can make the team.
I thought that might be a nice opportunity to get a little something for next year’s draft.
I don't think so
Noble idea, but punters are dime a dozen. Every team knows there will be more guys who can punt than actual roster spots in the NFL so it’s relatively easy to find one. They also tend to be some of the lowest value on the roster as well so I would be surprised if the Packers were able to get anything for either of these guys. Really we pick guys off the scrap heap as it is, so I don’t know if any team looks at our punters and thinks “man, I really want that guy”
by PackApologist on Aug 26, 2010 12:13 PM CDT up reply actions
There are a lot of punters but yet we struggle every season to try to find one. There could be interest out there but I don’t know if they’ve performed THAT well. I don’t think many teams trade picks for punters though and they KNOW we aren’t keeping two so they’ll probably just wait for us to drop him
Really I think someone who makes cuts is too picky
I don’t know if it’s TT, MM, or Slocum, but someone really just wants the world from the punting position. They want a guy who can pooch it and consistently control where the ball is going. That’s why Ryan was axed (still bitter, still so bitter). That’s the montra we hear about all the crappy punters they keep bringing in who then can’t kick worth a crap when it’s cold out. Hell the first drill they let the public view with these two guys was pooch drills again!
Blah. Whoever is obsessed with coffin corner punts needs to just get over it and get a guy who can kick the damn ball a mile high and two miles long.
by PackApologist on Aug 26, 2010 1:52 PM CDT up reply actions
I am with ya on that. I still remember when they cut Ryan for a castoff from another team. I was so upset, then Ryan went onto being a pretty quality punter. sigh. I hope one of these guys can be even average and I’ll be happy! :-)
LOL. I was pretty upset over the Ryan cut as well
I’ll add in though that the Seahawk fans are not overly impressed with his performance from last season though. He really does struggle to get it inside the 20.
"No player is greater than a team."
-Vince Lombardi
Oh, and the "LOL" came from Apologist's post. haha!
"No player is greater than a team."
-Vince Lombardi
agreed
teams don’t like to waste draft picks on punters. I can’t see why they’d trade for one then. If you need one that badly, you gratefully take whomever we get rid of.
TT and staff are not doing their jobs if they’re not at least making calls to see if there’s any interest in any of the guys that don’t project to make the final roster. I think we have several guys that are potential trade bait. I’m not sure if we’d get it, however. Lots of people hit the market at the same time and it’s kind of chaotic.
by gern blanston on Aug 26, 2010 4:04 PM CDT up reply actions
True, kick it high, and cover it.
but as much as I’d like to talk about the TE/FB stituation, I think we should also consider the other players who there have been talks about trading. If Bishop doesn’t want to sit another he is one, and depending on the whole outcome of the OL. Back when the LG job was between Spitz and Colledge there was talk that the loser would get traded for either help and S or OLB.
I don’t think they are in the position to be trading away capable backups in the OL. But if it appears that Burnett is not ready, or it they arn’t getting enough pass rush, than maybe Spitz/Colledge becomes expendable. But we will see. I’m sure they will make a move to help out at OLB, Corner, or Saftey.
I don’t think they’ll trade anybody, but, if they did…
I’d say trade Barnett or Hawk, and then develop Bishop. You’d get higher value for a guy if you can say “look, he’s been a tackling machine for X years” or “Look how many fumbles he caused.” You’re not going to get much of anything for Bishop. Everybody’s going to say “hey, we’ve already got backup linebackers; what we need is a starter.” But, if he plays, you know Bishop’s going to be good, at least once he gets some experience. As it stands right now, he’s in a perfect position right now to take over as a starter. …and you don’t have to pay him as much as the other two, either.
Like I said, though, it’s not going to happen anyway, so…
by Curly Lambeau on Aug 26, 2010 3:52 PM CDT up reply actions
Hawk has more trade value compared to Bishop. No to trading Barnett
As little value Hawk brings, it’s still more than Bishop and we wouldn’t have to worry about paying Hawk $9 Million this year and $10 Million next year. I believe those are his salaries, but correct me if I’m wrong. Hawk was also playing with the 2nd stringers against Indy, is that saying something?
"No player is greater than a team."
-Vince Lombardi
My bad on Wilson
He would make the practice squad, just forgot to add him in that area.
I agree with most, but a few tweaks and I know I will be criticized on this
QB- 3. Harrell has looked good in Preseason so far and he won’t last on the practice squad. He barely makes it, but he looked sharp against Indy and that may be enough to grant him a roster spot.
HB- 3. Gotta hand it to you, the arugment on Kuhn is a good one. However, keeping with the normal trend I’m going to say Lumpkin gets the 3rd spot. I like what I see out of him. How quickly we forgot about Starks, eh?
FB- 2. Johnson and Kuhn. Tough to argue.
WR- 5. Same as yours.
TE- 4. Same as yours.
OL- 10. I went in a slightly different direction here and made surprising cuts of Evan Dietrich-Smith and Darryn Colledge. I know the Colledge one may be a little surprising, but has anyone else noticed such little playing time he has been getting in Preseason? I instead have Barbre making the team as an OG. Yes, he’s a revolving door at OT. We all know that. However, how often do you hear his name when he is playing OG? I’ve watched him closely this preseason and feel he has done well at that position. Also, although I have been mildly dissapointed with the inconsistency shown from Breno Giacomini, but I don’t think the team wants to cut him just yet. He and Tauscher are the only guys on that line that has played RT this Preseason. Lang has played stricly OG. Clifton, Newhouse, Bulaga, Spitz, Barbre, Wells, Sitton, Lang, Tauscher, Giacomini.
WR- 5. Same as yours.
DL- 5. Wynn has picked up his game a little, but seeing Neal playing better in the Nickel and seeing how difficult it is to get the team settled at 53 men forces Wynn as the odd duck out. I don’t remember seeing CJ Wilson play, so I can’t see the team keeping him. Wilson surely keeps a roster spot on the Practice Squad though.
LB- 8. Same as yours.
CB- 6. I have Bush as the odd duck out, but this will happen after Harris returns whether from the PUP or if he returns by Week 1 (hopefully), Bush is cut after Preseason.
S- 4. Tough call here. I have Collins, Burnett, Bigby (PUP), Blackmon. I feel they will keep Peprah while Bigby remains on the PUP because I like Peprah’s performance on Special Teams so far, so that barely allows him to beat our Martin for a roster spot. Very decision to make here though. Blackmon will make it because of his punt return ability.
ST- 3. Masthay makes it. Um, IDK why. I like Bryan too and can only pick one. So like you, it’s basically flipping a coin. I don’t remember seeing Bryan punting against Indy while Masthay did manage to not only get it inside the 10, but it resulted in a fumble +6 points for us. That may have been enough for the coaching staff to go in his direction. I really like the leg strength of Bryan though. Also, hasn’t Masthay been our placeholder for Crosby as well? Not really sure here. Honestly, very difficult decision here. Goode is our Long Snapper. Crosby is our kicker.
Odd ducks out- Colledge, Tom Crabtree, Jarriuss Wynn, Gore, Chery. Gore and Chery should make it on the practice squad unless another team was impressed with his punt return for a TD. Gore is our fastest WR and has done well in Special Teams Coverage.
Bush and Peprah should remain if Bigby and Harris remain on the PUP.
"No player is greater than a team."
-Vince Lombardi
Colledge
You wanna cut Colledge even though he has apparently beaten out Spitz, Barbre and now Bulaga?!! Nope, not happening… Colledge has won the LG job hands down. He played the entire 1st half at LG from what I could tell, don’t remember Bulaga playing LG in the 1st. Your dislike for him aside, he has LG locked up!
And Colledge played how often when Bulaga did play this Preseason?
No, I don’t have much against Colledge. I actually supported starting Colledge and keeping Bulaga as the LT. The team has different thoughts on that matter though. That and the fact that we have good depth at the OG position along with the little playing time I have seen of Colledge overall this Preseason, and I have a gut feeling Colledge is on the edge of being cut. It’s a gut feeling, not what I want.
"No player is greater than a team."
-Vince Lombardi
Like I said...
I heard/read that Colledge has beaten all competition and the LG job is already wrapped up… I know they split reps at LG in the first 2 preseason games to see how Bulaga would fare, but Colledge has them all beaten out. Colledge if anything would be traded, they wouldn’t just release him outright! A 4 year starter has good value and could be traded… BUt I don’t see that happening either. Consider it like keeping Wells last year… Same basic situation.
Very much a possibility
Not really sure how to interpret the limited time with Bulaga and Barbre getting plenty of reps. That could be true that he has it locked up, but why if he was so inconsistent last year would he get extra time to rest? We’ll see how it’s played out. Again, I indicated that because it based off a hunch from playing time, not personal feelings. I would be more than happy if Colledge is the starter, but would be more thrilled if he is traded away this year as he does provide good trade bait as you mentioned, and we do have good OG depth this year.
"No player is greater than a team."
-Vince Lombardi
The more I think about it, that's probably going to happen
I think I got more into the business side of things, where the team may not favor Colledge as the long term starter and wants to give Barbre more reps there. Although he has done alright and has a lower salary than Colledge, Colledge is still the better LG of the 2.
"No player is greater than a team."
-Vince Lombardi
I'd also like the add the flexibility of only carrying 5 defensive linemen
RE- Cullen Jenkins
NT- BJ Raji
LE- Ryan Pickett
backups- Justin Harrell, Mike Neal
If Raji goes down, we have Pickett available to take his spot and both Neal and Harrell are more than capable of taking the LE spot. Torribio will be safe on the Practice Squad, same as Jarrius Wynn. This keeps the roster clear of un-needed players.
"No player is greater than a team."
-Vince Lombardi
5 DL
Is a little to light for me. Wynn doesn’t have practice squad eligibility. Torribio is likely headed to PS along w/ Wilson. Its possible but seems unlikely given how much Thompson and McCarthy stress having a strong DL unit for rotational purposes
It is a little light
but it’s a possibility and an option I’m sure the team is exploring. Losing Wynn is not a big deal. Torribio and Wilson probably won’t be picked up and if we need one of them, then we can call them up.
"No player is greater than a team."
-Vince Lombardi
possibility
I would say a remote possibility. Like I said Thompson especially, and McCarthy, have always stressed that DL need to stay fresh, so keeping only 5 leaves no room for error. If one goes down the DL will get extremely gassed by the end of the game. Neither Wilson or Toribio seems ready to contribute yet. Wynn has some pass rush potential, so if the Packers still feel that way they won’t let him go. I just don’t see it…
I aint gonna lie, it is a risk. I’m not saying I support the idea, just laying out the possibility.
"No player is greater than a team."
-Vince Lombardi
difference
See thats the difference between you and I. I say only and exactly what I think! You say things that you think are possibilities so you have wiggle room. Take a stand, form an opinion and stick w/ it!!! You play both sides of the fence so your never wrong… I Say exaclty what I think and stand by it… and for that I get a label as the sites a$$. Thats fine w/ me. I would rather be known as the site ass (its only the internet after all) and have a KNOWN opinion than to just “throw” things out and not have to take a side and defend it.
Just what I see…
difference....
whoever calls you an a$$ is between you and them. don’t bring that upon me. sometimes you seem to come off a little harsh, and sometimes you really bring in some valuable insight….such as who is or is not Practice Squad eligible. I will leave it at that.
sometimes i’m make arguments and stand by them, sometimes i’m corrected and will admit when someone else is right. if i’m going to act stubborn over a stand though when someone else proves me wrong, there is no point in discussing football with someone else. sometimes i open up threads with possibilities just to start conversations. this is a place to talk football, isn’t it?
"No player is greater than a team."
-Vince Lombardi
when I'm proven wrong I can admit it... and have!
I’ll stand by my opinions to the end and if I’m proven wrong so be it. I take a stand… Chris Long from a really recent thread as an example. Without proof, I’m inclined to stick to my belief… Other opinions don’t sway me, cuz I’m as knowledgable about the game as about any fan can be.
I'm so sorry I'm not as knowledgable as the almighty Strohman
"No player is greater than a team."
-Vince Lombardi
Why should they...
If my opinion is strong, then I stand by it. Facts and proof can easily change it… But if its a stong opinion its based on sound logic! If that pompous then so be it…
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
SBNation.com Recent Stories
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- Ahmad Bradshaw says Cowboys won’t win with Tony Romo at QB
- Cruz: Manningham’s Super catch wasn’t drawn up that way
- Whitney Houston performed the greatest national anthem in sports history (video)
- Justin Tuck visits New York City cop who survived gunshot wound to head
- The Giants won the ‘Brain Bowl,’ too
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
