Packer Links: James Johnson Is A Packer, Shields Is The Nickel Back, Williams Is The Punt Returner
by Brandon on Sep 7, 2010 7:01 AM CDT
in Green Bay Packers Training Camp
Email
PrintThere's less than a week to go before the Green Bay Packers open their season against the Eagles, but I'm still looking back at the moves made to set the roster this weekend.
RB James Johnson was added to the practice squad. I expected they would add a running back with their final roster opening. There's not much to say about his NFL career so far. He spent the 2008 and 2009 seasons with the Bengals and was re-signed by them in mid-August as an injury replacement. During his last season of college (2007), he was part of a running back platoon with RB Leon Patton in an offense that gave them "only token inclusion." He was college teammates with WR Jordy Nelson and Bucs QB Josh Freeman. He had 34 receptions as a senior, the same year that Nelson had 122 receptions. It looks like they wanted a running back who's also a good receiver, and can backup RB Brandon Jackson as the 3rd down back.
According to the Journal-Sentinel, the Packers led the NFL with 5 players claimed. It's interesting that all 5 were originally undrafted free agents. Those are solid players, but I don't think the Packers lost a lot either.
I'm still surprised that CB Sam Shields has won the nickel back job. I expected someone more tenured like (shudder) CB Jarrett Bush would get the nod until CB Al Harris returns mid-season or CB Brandon Underwood's shoulder heals. Shields is the best of the rest. But what caught my eye in this Journal-Sentinel article was that he's roommates with starting rookie SS Morgan Burnett. The idea of them learning from each other after practice is interesting, and it obviously helped both of them.
I was expecting Nelson would return punts and RB Brandon Jackson would return kickoffs. Instead Nelson is the kick returner and CB Tramon Williams is the punt returner. Nelson's a solid, not a home run threat, but he's had a bunch of good ones in his career. I'm not sure I like the idea of Williams running around on defense, and then having to lineup on special teams. But anyone who remembers Williams on punt returns in 2007 will know he's a home run threat. They are the two best options, so it's certainly the correct decision in that regard.
One of the changes this season is that LB Clay Matthews has switched to the left side of defense. The first reason for this (so I've read) is to put him on the side opposite DE Cullen Jenkins, and have their top two pass rushers on opposite sides. That sounds good in theory, but it obviously didn't hurt Matthews last season to play alongside Jenkins. The reason I like better is that he's now on the strong side, and typically over the tight end. As a former defensive end who weighs 10-15 lbs. more than LB Brad Jones, it makes sense to have him play on the side that typically has the extra blocker and the bigger offensive lineman.
From the Journal-Sentinel. With the waiver and injury settlement to RB Quinn Porter, and previously S Will Blackmon, the Packers are starting a new trend. In previous years, they usually kept players on I.R. all season. It probably doesn't hurt to keep them around (they're getting paid either way) and then they have first hand knowledge whether the player can fit into their plans for next season. But instead they're clearing out the I.R. and now only CB Josh Bell remains on it. RT Allen Barbre was released earlier after receiving an injury settlement followed his trip to the I.R.
78 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Wow...
We are so thin at CB and we want Tramon back there? Scary. Didn’t Woodson get hurt back in 2007 returning punts (against Detroit on ThanksG)? With our offense, I don’t care if we average 5 yards a return. Just hold on to the ball and let’s not risk another injury to our already depleted secondary.
by PackFaninFL on Sep 7, 2010 8:34 AM CDT reply actions 1 recs
Agreed
This is a bad idea. Too much risk by exposing a starting CB from a very thin secondary. Assume that Williams gets hurt — then what do we have? Would Jarrett Bush become the nickel back?
Oh God. Please don’t make me think of that.
by packallday555 on Sep 7, 2010 10:23 AM CDT up reply actions
Probably Lee
Which is now looking possibly worse then Bush although he’s got more physical tools
by PackApologist on Sep 7, 2010 10:25 AM CDT up reply actions
Haha I won’t believe he’s worse then Bush until I see it.
by packallday555 on Sep 7, 2010 3:15 PM CDT up reply actions
Risk vs. Reward
It is a big risk, but I liked the GBPG article where McCarthy said that he put Tramon there because he was our best return option. “We’re going to line up and play and try to win games, offense, defense and special teams” was the quote I liked. It’s like a poker player going all in. This is our year, and we’re not going for prudence or sensibility. We’re putting our chips on the table, take a chance, and try to get lucky.
From that point of view, I like this move. …especially when the head coach announces his reasons like this. It creates an attitude on the team of “here we are; come and get us.”
by Curly Lambeau on Sep 7, 2010 5:48 PM CDT up reply actions
Tramon was a GREAT returner but this really does make me nervous. I’d rather have Jennings back there I think than him just cause I have more confidence that we can recover from losing him than Williams.
I am excited to watch Shields and Burnett…I know there will be some mistakes but these guys are playmakers and I just feel like one of them is going to go all Cromartie on the league (meaning bursting onto the scene with a ton of INTs, not missing tackles and being traded for cheap).
Agreed on Burnett and Shields, especially Burnett. He really showed us what he can do against Manning and the Colts. The athleticism is clearly there for both, and the way both have grown so far seem to suggest both will only continue to get better. I’m excited about both of them, even if it likely means some rookie mistakes early on.
by packallday555 on Sep 7, 2010 9:58 AM CDT up reply actions
Oh, wonderful......
Now Williams can get killed returning punts in game 3 with GB’s crap special teams and the fans can spend the next 13 games watching Jarret Bush try to cover guys while Williams is on IR. Great move, McCarthy.
Wow, this is like 100% negativity.
I sure hope the Packers would sign another CB if that was the case.
Or else we could go all New England Patriots and put Patrick Williams at CB…
Can Abbrederis shoot the long three and effectively distribute the ball to his big men?
"Because one of the great minds of the 21st century is raising glow-in-the-dark fish and weaving serapes..." -Leonard Hofstadter from The Big Bang Theory
For all the crap we give Wil Wheaton, he can still tackle better than Asante Samuel...
by OBrienSchofieldismyHero on Sep 7, 2010 11:24 PM CDT up reply actions
It's Brett Swain
That’s why they kept Swain on the roster (besides the fact he played well this preseason). In 2009, they played Swain at cornerback in the final preseason game (someone has to be the next Spencer Havner). Swain actually didn’t look lost on defense. And in no way do I ever expect they’ll actually play Swain on defense during a regular season game.
Clay and Jones at LOLB and ROLB
I know I’ve made my case on this before, and this will be the last time I bring it up. I think moving Clay to LOLB is a bad idea! I think this is good out of the Nickel/Dime Packages, but a very bad idea out of the base 3-4. I’ll even use SBN Scouting reports to help plead my case.
Brad Jones- A speedy and shifty linebacker. Can get into the backfield, stop the run well, and adjust to passing plays. Shows good pursuit of the ball.
A somewhat raw talent. Not a lights-out hitter. Still unpolished as a blitzer. May have some durability issues.
Clay Mathews- A good-sized frame for his position and a very explosive specimen. Has superior anticipation, hits hard and has the moves and strength to make plays in the backfield. A playmaker.
Tends to be too aggressive at times and overruns some plays. Needs to refine his overall technique in zone coverage to become a complete package. When he gets tied up with blockers, he struggles to break free.
While we don’t know what we have in Mathews in coverage, we do know that Jones can cover and can stop the run. By putting a TE on Mathews every down, we are working against his flaws. If he gets tied up, we are relying on Brad Jones to get to the QB. He happens to be raw yet. I understand the logic that Clay is bigger, but he’s also faster and is a more polished pass rusher. We noticed he struggled when he got chipped last year every now and then, but now he’s going to get chipped on nearly every down!
My argument is this: Clay Mathews should be the weakside OLB out of the base 3-4 at all times, but should be our LOLB out of the Nickel/Dime Packages, where most plays are passing plays. If our D struggles in the first month in getting pressure and stopping the run, we need to strongly consider going back to how things were last year.
"No player is greater than a team."
-Vince Lombardi
they'll move him around
I don’t believe for one second that Clay will not be moved around to better take advantage of whatever matchups they think they can win.
Rather, I think the point of moving him is to try to win more one on ones. He’s definitely a guy that the offense needs to take into account. If we move him around, so that they’re audibling out of certain plays, that has to be advantage D.
by gern blanston on Sep 7, 2010 10:16 AM CDT up reply actions
That's what I want, move him around
But the way I’m hearing it is that he will be moving strictly to LOLB, as opposed to ROLB like he was last year.
"No player is greater than a team."
-Vince Lombardi
Maybe
But the way I’m hearing it is that he will be moving strictly to LOLB…
That is the way our opponents are hearing it, too.
-
The glass is way more than half-full.
Regardless of where Clay is, he’s going to get chipped. I don’t think he’s an unknown in coverage either. He dropped back quite a bit when Kampman was still playing and did a pretty good job.
On top of that, like gern said he’ll be moved around for sure. I promise you a savvy coach like Capers will ensure that he can the best possible match-ups for Matthews whenever possible.
Plus, moving Clay will help Jenkins. Teams will now have to decide which side to give extra help too, as opposed to just moving a tight end and running back over Matthews and Jenkins.
by packallday555 on Sep 7, 2010 10:28 AM CDT up reply actions
Capers & Matthews
I thought Capers likes to keep 1 LOLB and 1 ROLB and not move them around?
Based upon what I’m reading, it sounds as if he’s strictly going to be the LOLB.
If they move him around, that means the offense will frequently have to audible and make adjustments at the line. That ultimately puts our defense at an advantage. I agree though, IF they move him around as the Weakside OLB, that puts us in the best situation. I just don’t think that’s what Capers is implying though.
"No player is greater than a team."
-Vince Lombardi
where's Strohman when we need him?
I’m sure he’s got a far more definitive idea of what to expect.
All I can say is that I hope you’re wrong Jabooty.
by gern blanston on Sep 7, 2010 10:52 AM CDT up reply actions
Had a pretty big weekend, its called a life!
Wasn’t around much this weekend… Did you miss me?? I’m touched. LMAO
No worries I am back now!
that was from this morning
we just start earlier than you do. (I have a life, too)
by gern blanston on Sep 7, 2010 1:51 PM CDT up reply actions
He ran out of exclamation points?
Can Abbrederis shoot the long three and effectively distribute the ball to his big men?
"Because one of the great minds of the 21st century is raising glow-in-the-dark fish and weaving serapes..." -Leonard Hofstadter from The Big Bang Theory
For all the crap we give Wil Wheaton, he can still tackle better than Asante Samuel...
by OBrienSchofieldismyHero on Sep 7, 2010 11:24 PM CDT up reply actions
Technically, I don’t even think he really labels a right and left linebacker. I’ve read multiple times that he considers the two positions basically interchangeable.
I don’t know how their going to move him around specifically (I’m not defensive coordinator haha), I just remember reading an article about Matthews and reading some quotes from him stating that he was he excited about all the extra nuances that had been added this season because of all the different things he’ll be able to do.
by packallday555 on Sep 7, 2010 1:03 PM CDT up reply actions
They weren't at all interchangable last year!!!
And I’ve never read anything to that affect! SamOLB are generally bigger and stonger than WillOLB. 34 or 43 doesn’t even matter… Weak side you want a faster quicker OLB who can run to the ball. If they were interchangable why didn’t they change last year as soon as Kampman went out. Jones wasn’t and still isn’t nearly as well equipped to handle the strong side as Matthews! If it interchangable they should have done it as soon as Kampman was lost for the season!
Maybe I’m mistaken. I thought that I had seen Capers say quite a few times that he doesn’t really designate and strong and weak side linebacker.
by packallday555 on Sep 7, 2010 3:16 PM CDT up reply actions
strong side
is the side where the tight end lines up. I think we’re saying that CM3 will be on the Left side and Jones/Zombo will be the Right side.
If the TE switches sides and we had a true strong/weak side backer, they should switch, too. I don’t believe that they do (based upon what’s being stated in this post, anyway)
by gern blanston on Sep 7, 2010 4:08 PM CDT up reply actions
If the TE switches sides and we had a true strong/weak side backer, they should switch, too. I don’t believe that they do (based upon what’s being stated in this post, anyway
This is what I was trying to say above. Last season, no matter where the tight end was, Matthews lined up on the right and Jones lined up on the left. That’s what I meant by Capers not designating them as strong and weak.
by packallday555 on Sep 7, 2010 5:09 PM CDT up reply actions
Matthews will now be working against RT instead of LT.
That should make him a more dangerous pass rusher. Jones’ bio reads just like a Will LB, him being over the TE is a bad idea and he got washed out and blocked easily by the TE most of the time. No TE is going to be able to handle Matthews vs the run. And in pass rush he won’t be going against the elite pass blockers in the NFL every game! Theres good and bad w/ it, but overall it makes more sense w/ Matthews on the Left. I don’t remember Matthews having too much trouble seperating from blockers last year.
McCarthy having WIlliams and Nelson doing returns shows that he is all in this season. You do something like this when they are your best alternatives and have real SB Aspirations!
not to mention, why change something that worked so well! We can’t just assume that thsoe two positions are interchangeable cause clearly they come with different roles. I am with you, bad decision!
This move just goes to show that Jones didn’t hold up vs the run as much as everyone thinks!! And like I said all along… Otherwise why make the change?! If Jones played LOLB over the TE really well than there was no reason to change! This also shows that Capers wasn’t satified w/ Jones’ play over the TE!!!
zombo
it’s been so long since I"ve seen Jones play. Is he clearly better than Zombo? Zombo seems to have the bulk needed to handle the TE when compared to Jones. All in all, I thought Jones was serviceable – some good, some bad. I thought he exceeded expectations for a 7th rounder that barely made the team (due to injury in training camp). My expectations have gone up for him due to a year in the system and I’ve read that he bulked up a bit.
by gern blanston on Sep 7, 2010 1:47 PM CDT up reply actions
Zombo and Jones
I too like Zombo’s size and think he’d be a good fit as the Strongside OLB. However, I think the team feels it is safer to go with Jones at this point given he has a a little more experience in the system.
"No player is greater than a team."
-Vince Lombardi
I’m certainly not convinced that Jones is better than Zombo. He has more athleticism but lacks the bulk of Zombo or Matthews! I would say Jones’ play last year was at best servicable. But I don’t have expactations that he’ll be any better than last year. I hope so, but I’m not sold. If Zombo was really ready to play I could see him being the LOLB and Matthews going back to ROLB. Honestly, I think Zombo has better potential than Jones. Hopefully, next year he can really take a step forward and demand a starting spot. That said, I still think drafting an OLB high is the draft is almost a must! We really need another playmaker opposite Matthews, and given Zombo’s past as a DE, he has alot to learn, too much to really expect that of him!
Zombo part deux
While I agree that he’s got lots to learn as an LB from a coverage standpoint, shouldn’t he be reasonably ahead of the curve in terms of rushing the passer due to him being a DE in college.
by gern blanston on Sep 7, 2010 3:48 PM CDT up reply actions
As a pass rusher yes...
Even in run support he should be ahead of Jones. One big thing thats hard for college DE to learn is playing from a 2 point stance instead of a 3 point stance. I think Kampman had some difficulty w/ that also. But from a coverage standpoint Zombo has alot to learn!
I just like saying Zombo
Zombo Zombo Zombo
by Curly Lambeau on Sep 7, 2010 5:42 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
The reason given
Capers has stated several times that Matthews was moved over so his 2 best pass rushers were on opposite sides of the field. I don’t remember Jones being abused by the run last year we did end up with the #1 rush defense he couldn’t have been to bad.
IMO, thats cuz they had 3 DT lining up on the DL
Not really anything to do w/ Jones. But I think Jones was pretty easily blocked by TE’s!
The change was made
specifically to have Matthews and Jenkins rushing the passer from opposite sides of the formation. Durring the latter part of last season teams were simply sliding protection to Clay and Cullen’s side and nutralizing our only 2 legit pass rushers. And Clay will definitely be moved around a lot this year.
http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/102314639.html
Yeah I read that awhile ago too...
And while that may be true, Jones’ play had to have something to do w/ it… Otherwise you wouldn’t have to do that. If Jones was simply playing a solid LOLB I doubt the move would have been made! Kinda have to read between the lines a little but the indication is that Jones didn’t exactly play really well either. If Jones had gotten pressure on the QB when given the chance, or played strongly against the run, it wouldn’t have been necessary to move Matthews!
THats my opinion, and I’ll stick to it…
not really
Jones did next to nothing to get excited about. If he had this move likely wouldn’t have been made! I don’t think he holds up well vs the run and gets little to no pressure on the QB!
At the risk of empowering you and your cynical attitude . . .
I agree that Brad Jones does not excite me as a starting NFL linebacker. Perhaps he will improve this year with a switch to the weak side.
Also, Strohman is right (I dislike saying that!!!!!!!!!) in that there is a difference between a Will and a Sam in a 3-4 defense. Big difference. Sam has to line up on the tight end, Will is free to roam.
Why does Strohman use so many exclamation points?!!!??
it's you
netiquette says that using exclamation points is like typing in all caps – shouting. So, unless you are shouting/angry, you shouldn’t use ’em.
by gern blanston on Sep 8, 2010 1:32 PM CDT up reply actions
It's not me...
It’s a pretty standard practice across the net. There’s even a word for it – netiquette. if you want to make a point, one ! should be sufficient. I mean, that’s the rational for having the exclamation point in the first place.
Do what you have to do, but at least understand the reasoning when people think you’re being rude.
by gern blanston on Sep 8, 2010 4:25 PM CDT up reply actions
Matthews was quoted
In one of the papers in the last 2 days Clay was quoted saying he will be blitzing from all over. Also I read about a month ago Kevin Greene saying Clay is one of the best cover linebackers he has ever been around which kind of shocked me.
Injured Reserve
I think the settlements with Barbre and Blackmon are more a matter of timing. If I’m not mistaken, players put on the IR after the start of the regular season are guarenteed their full season salary. In that instance, there’s no point in cutting the player because you’re paying them anyway. The Packers opted to get Barbre and Blackmon off the roster before the first game so as not to be on the hook for the entire season’s salaries.
Let me know if I have that wrong.
matter of injuries/play
They had injuries and weren’t playing at a level needed. Especially Barber! But Blackmon’s injury was such that he wouldn’t have played for a couple weeks to a month. Packers weren’t going to carry him during that time and he wasn’t eligible for the PUP. They could have put him on IR but decided to move on given the injury history Blackmon had even before this year. Barbre never did a thing to earn a roster spot. He was going to get released anyway, the fact he was injured at the end of training camp just necessitated that they pay him a couple weeks to stay in compliance w/ not releasing an injured player.
Neither had anything to do w/ their salaries for the upcoming season.
Totally unrelated, Cromartie conversation
Who did I have the Cromartie conversation w/ regarding running the football at Cromartie cuz he’s a whim in run support?
Seems I wasn’t the only one who thought of running at a CB. THis is a direct quote from a scout about Samuel for the Iggles.
“Last year teams tried to run wide and force Samuel to defend in the run game. "He’s elite as far as a cover guy," a scout said. "He’s a total dog as far as playing the run. He doesn’t like anything to do with the physical side of the game. When you take the ball at him, he absolutely wanted nothing to do with the physical tackling part of the game."
So who’s going to come correct and give me props? Was it Trevor or PackAllDay, maybe PackApologist? I don’t remember… LOL
Haha it was me but I’m not sure what it proves? I acknowledged and agreed that he was weak against the run. You also said teams would try and run at him, which I also agreed with. I just simply said I think the Jets have the pieces around him to prevent teams from picking on him too much. I guess we’ll just have to wait and see.
by packallday555 on Sep 8, 2010 10:10 AM CDT up reply actions
I remember
The person I was talking to didn’t think it was possible to force Cromartie to play the run. At least thats what I remember.
It’s possible, I just don’t think they’ll be able to exploit him all that much because of the supporting cast he has around them.
Though I have to admit, I wouldn’t mind seeing him struggle. I saw a quote today from him claiming that the Jets were the Miami Heat of football.
by packallday555 on Sep 8, 2010 3:47 PM CDT up reply actions
Like I said before.
Blocking down by the TE or a WR helps hold the containment inside and forces the CB to support the run. Its not that hard a concept to grasp. Any player outside the LB can block down to keep the defense from flowing outside to the ball.
I disagree
It may be simplistic, but its also effective. Have the OL and a TE block solidly and bring the WR down toward the OL to take anyone thats leading to the outside w/ the flow of the play. If you do that and block the rest of the play well the WR blocking down cuts off the pursuit. It is a pretty simple idea and pretty effective too…
Yeah, it’ll work when guys get good blocks but the MLB and S can still pursue outside and provided some support to Cromartie.
Let’s just wait and see how he fares this season.
by packallday555 on Sep 9, 2010 2:17 PM CDT up reply actions
Like anything
will work when its blocked well. Use a combo block by the OG and C on the NT with the OG rubbing off to the 2nd level to pick off the MLB. Safety is going to have to come down which won’t get there right away. Safety and the CB would be unaccounted for, but the FB could get to the safety.
Right, if the offense does everything right then he could be exploited time and time again. Offenses don’t always execute everything right though, and it obviously becomes harder to execute when the defense their facing is filled with talented players. Between Jenkins, Ellis, Scott, Harris, and Pace the Jets have some guys that play the run very well. I think most of the time those guys will be able to do enough to help Cromartie.
by packallday555 on Sep 9, 2010 5:04 PM CDT up reply actions
And defenses do???
but like I said, the OC and the DC get paid alot of money for exactly that. To take advantage of eithers weaknesses! And having a CB that can’t/won’t tackle is a big disadvantage that they will look to exploit.
But, when the offenses don't execute everything right,
it isn’t the game plan that is the problem.
The non-execution by the players is.
After all, you can’t gameplan for your players to fail to do their jobs right.
-
The glass is way more than half-full.
I was one of the people against you. This doesn’t change anything. The argument being made was that teams can scheme that all they want but their guy isn’t going to get out there much. Maybe if the game is a bubble and the other team isn’t scheming back. Don’t you think the team with Cromartie or Samuel know about the guys weaknesses???? Just cause a team tries to run at him doesn’t mean they will be successful. That was my argument…this doesn’t change that AT all.
your opinion... One I don't happen to share.
If blocked well the WR cuts off pursuit and brings the CB, in this case Cromartie or Samuel, closer to the middle of the field. Only real way to beat it is someone beating his block and getting there. Blocked well its not that hard.
It might work from time to time but again you completely eliminate the idea of the D Coordinator scheming against that as well. That is why I say its too simplistic. You are only looking at it from one side of the ball and not thinking of the big picture. He can send in LBs or even a safety to penetrate on that side of the ball if he sees someone trying to exploit his poor tackling CB.
At least I'm offering a designed play to accomplish my goal.
All your offering is The DC will scheme to prevent it. Sometimes designed plays work exactly the way they are designed. Not all the time, but if called against the way the D plays the plays work alot of the time.
Too simplistic or DC scheming can’t prevent it all the time. Some of it maybe, but the guys on the field still have to play the game. WHich Samuels and Cromartie don’t like. If the DC schemes to prevent it, its going to create opportunities for a big play. THe D has to all work together. If one guy isn’t doing his job, the whole D falls apart.
Offer me something more that the simplistic jargan, and I’ll take it seriously!!!
There is a reason people say games are won in the trenches. Not many teams have RBs that can consistently and effectively get to the outside. That is one of many reasons why most runs are between the tackles.
Between the tackles
Apparently you’ve never seen the play where Cromartie was pulled close to the formation and had the chance to tackle Shon Greene for minimal gain, but CHOSE not to even try to tackle him! Cromartie was the one guy w/ a chance to make the tackle, but instead of even trying he watched Greene run untouched for a TD… IN A PLAYOFF game! That didn’t JUST happen by accident. It was schemed to put Cromartie in that exact position and it worked!
Offensive and Defensive coordinators BOTH get paid to scheme situations like that. PLayers can be protected sometimes but its still a physical game that needs to be played physicallly!
Highlites
Here the highlites of the play. It happens at about the 5:30 mark. See how Cromartie has to be near the play, can make the tackle, but doesn’t…
http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2010011701/2009/POST19/jets@chargers#tab:watch
If I, just a fan, can design a play to accomplish it
then I"m sure the OC who gets paid millions and has alot more knowledge of the game can easily do it!
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
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.
