Packers Off-season Mini-Camp/Training Camp Discussion Thread

[Donzo]

26 minutes ago, Leader said:

Mike Clemens

 

✔@MikeClemensNFL

Despite a QB rating of 116.7 & 2 TD's, #Packers Mike McCarthy said today QB's Tim Boyle, and DeShone Kizer "both have a long ways to go" when it comes to footwork, etc. "They're from another family." I still think the plan is Hundley as 2018 back-up, Kizer learns for next year.

 

With three QB's on the active roster, it would be tough to keep extra WR's.

[Beast]

1 hour ago, Donzo said:

 

With three QB's on the active roster, it would be tough to keep extra WR's.

My last mock roster got 3 QBs and 7 WRs on it, but that's because it went light with only 8 OL. And they might be able to do it if they go with only 2 RBs for the first two weeks while Aaron Jones is suspended. But yeah it's going to be hard to get 7 WRs on the roster.

The way I see it right now is it's 7th WR or 9th OL ... and OL generally needs more depth with 5 starters vs 3 WR starters.

So 7th WR might impossible unless they're helping a good bit on STs and generally DBs help more on STs

[TransientTexan]

3 hours ago, Lodestar said:

McCarthy said in his presser after the game that "something happened" that made them start Bell over Spriggs. Didn't go into detail obviously, but kind of weird.

Bell came into possession of some compromising pictures of McCarthy 

[packfanfb]

Seems to be a foregone conclusion in the Packers media after one preseason game that Burks is starting as Ryan's replacement at ILB. I'll admit I liked the way the guy played in space and he moves better than any ILB I've seen in GB in a long time so I think he was going to get a lot of snaps anyways. That being said, I also think every guard in the NFL would man-handle him in the run game right now, and that will probably be true all year. It will be interesting to see what our plan will be moving forward in running situations when you'd expect to see Ryan on the field. I still don't think that guy will/should be Burks. 

[Shanedorf]

https://www.packersnews.com/story/sports/nfl/packers/2018/08/12/packers-camp-insider-versatility-helping-adam-pankey-bid-key-role/954546002/

» Adam Pankey is making his bid not just to make the roster for the second straight season but perhaps gain a foothold as the utility man of the offensive line. The second-year pro has been working in camp at every position but center and made a little jump up the depth chart Sunday when he filled in at left guard for Lane Taylor with the starting offense. Lucas Patrick had been working as Taylor’s backup the first two weeks of camp.

Taylor’s health doesn’t appear to be a big concern – he has been getting regular rest in camp after undergoing ankle surgery in the offseason, sat out the preseason opener last Thursday and took part only in individual drills in practice Sunday because of an apparent minor injury. 

But working Pankey ahead of Patrick is a sign the Packers like the way the second-year pro has performed in his multiple roles. Last year as an undrafted rookie Pankey made their practice squad for Week 1, then was promoted to the 53-man roster for the final 15 weeks, though he suited up for only five games and didn’t play a snap from scrimmage. “I really saw a difference when (Pankey) came back for camp,” Taylor said. “He was more confident and ready. I saw more an attack mentality than just a young guy.”

… Pankey’s ability to play both guard spots and also fill in at tackle gives him at least the chance to be this year’s Justin McCray – a guy who can fill in almost anywhere on game day. “I do kind of pride myself in being able to do that,” Pankey said.

 

[ReadyToThump]

Good to hear about Pankey. If I remember right he played both G and T in college. Gotta love the versatility in your backups. Although I wouldn't trust him much at all at LT. 

Do you guys still think Devante Mays has a chance at this roster? Him being out with a hammy makes me think he's going to be stashed on the PS or cut n gone. If I were him I'd need to be paralyzed in order to keep me off the field. Thinking back to his regular season last year... 4 carries for 1 yard and 2 fumbles. Lol. 

[palmy50]

6 hours ago, Shanedorf said:

https://www.packersnews.com/story/sports/nfl/packers/2018/08/12/packers-camp-insider-versatility-helping-adam-pankey-bid-key-role/954546002/

 

 

» Adam Pankey is making his bid not just to make the roster for the second straight season but perhaps gain a foothold as the utility man of the offensive line. The second-year pro has been working in camp at every position but center and made a little jump up the depth chart Sunday when he filled in at left guard for Lane Taylor with the starting offense. Lucas Patrick had been working as Taylor’s backup the first two weeks of camp.

 

Taylor’s health doesn’t appear to be a big concern – he has been getting regular rest in camp after undergoing ankle surgery in the offseason, sat out the preseason opener last Thursday and took part only in individual drills in practice Sunday because of an apparent minor injury. 

 

But working Pankey ahead of Patrick is a sign the Packers like the way the second-year pro has performed in his multiple roles. Last year as an undrafted rookie Pankey made their practice squad for Week 1, then was promoted to the 53-man roster for the final 15 weeks, though he suited up for only five games and didn’t play a snap from scrimmage. “I really saw a difference when (Pankey) came back for camp,” Taylor said. “He was more confident and ready. I saw more an attack mentality than just a young guy.”

 

… Pankey’s ability to play both guard spots and also fill in at tackle gives him at least the chance to be this year’s Justin McCray – a guy who can fill in almost anywhere on game day. “I do kind of pride myself in being able to do that,” Pankey said.

 

It's pretty hard to not see Pankey as the frontrunner to fill that Madison role on the 53. I don't see Pankey as Madison but he can get you out of a game at four of the five also. There is reason to believe Pankey might still have some upside also after starting his college career on the DL.

[Arthur Penske]

Nice to see this from Reggie.

 

https://www.packers.com/video/rock-report-showing-up 

[Arthur Penske]

3 hours ago, palmy50 said:

It's pretty hard to not see Pankey as the frontrunner to fill that Madison role on the 53. I don't see Pankey as Madison but he can get you out of a game at four of the five also. There is reason to believe Pankey might still have some upside also after starting his college career on the DL.

Any idea what the deal is there with Madison?

[craig]

11 hours ago, Beast said:

The way I see it right now is it's 7th WR or 9th OL ... and OL generally needs more depth with 5 starters vs 3 WR starters.

So 7th WR might impossible unless they're helping a good bit on STs and generally DBs help more on STs

Bottom line is that **IF** Spriggs and Pankey still aren't functional-enough now to win the #8 spot from Bell, then I'm kinda thinking they aren't worth keeping at #9, and could be just as well waived and kept on PS.  

I guess to me the "we usually keep 9" argument doesn't necessarily apply given the specific guys we've actually got this year.  That's particularly so *IF* the 9th man isn't necessarily great enough to get claimed.  *IF* you can stash your 9th OL on the PS, why waste a 53-man spot?  9th OL has no ST function, never gets any rotation snaps, and is healthy-inactive every week anyway.  *IF* injury gets so awful that you need to be playing your #5 tackle, add him to 53-man then as needed, but not before.  

Personally I don't see much value in keeping 9 OL.  Unless the 9th guy is too good/talented/promising/certain-to-get-snagged-on-waivers to risk exposure; yet at the same time is too raw to actually play this year.  

That's the profile in years past when we'd have 4th/5th-round draft picks learning the system, and/or adapting to NFL guard after only playing college tackle.  Developmental guys we needed to protect but weren't game-ready yet.  Barbier, Giacomini, Newhouse, Lang, rookies like that.  (Pre-camp, I assumed Cole Madision would be OL #9).  

But this year, case-by-case 9th OL candidates?

• If Bell, why keep him?  If he's not good enough to crack the top 8, let him go.
• If Day, why roster him?  Send him to PS.  (The risk of him getting claimed is negligible.)
• If Pankey, same (I think).  Send him to PS.  Pankey's got a full year of NFL body-optimization, two camps, and 4 years (?) of high-tier college.  Sure, he's still got improvement potential.  But if he's not adequate yet, and can't crack the top-8, how likely is it that he gets claimed if waived; or that another year will turn him into an integral guy we can't live without, in the event he does get claimed?  
• If Spriggs, same (maybe).  He's the odd one. 
• Somebody smart:  has he played so little and lost so many games to IR and inactive that he, too, is PS eligibile?  Or not so, and it's keep him or lose him?
• Spriggs has three pro camps and played high-tier college.  If he's *still* not able to function as a 4th tackle, and he's *still* not able to move past Bell or Pankey on the tackle ladder, then is he *still* worth burning a roster spot on, even if you can't stash him to PS?  If he's still a raw developmental prospect in year 3 who isn't good enough to crack the top-4 at his position, is he worth a spot?
• Unique case, though, so probably not but not necessarily not?  He's had the injury which perhaps delayed progression.  He's finally added weight that he's not used to carrying.  Cheech has talked about the inside/outside hand-placement adjustment  So, perhaps in year 3 Spriggs still is a raw developmental prospect with too-good-to-cut future potential, even though he still has no Nowacrat utility?  If so, then I suppose he'd be a guy to keep.

Certainly the ideal desirable landscape for me is that before camp is over, that Spriggs shows enough to crack the top-8 and to beat out Bell.  Cut Bell, send Pankey and Day to PS.  

 

 

 

 

[packfanfb]

7 hours ago, ReadyToThump said:

Good to hear about Pankey. If I remember right he played both G and T in college. Gotta love the versatility in your backups. Although I wouldn't trust him much at all at LT. 

Do you guys still think Devante Mays has a chance at this roster? Him being out with a hammy makes me think he's going to be stashed on the PS or cut n gone. If I were him I'd need to be paralyzed in order to keep me off the field. Thinking back to his regular season last year... 4 carries for 1 yard and 2 fumbles. Lol. 

Personally, I want to see more of Judd. Only guy on the roster with more bounce to his step is Jones. I think Judd, even though a late add, could make the team over a guy like Mays who hasn't really shown much to date. When Jones comes back from suspension, my guess is GB drops to 3 RBs plus Rip, so you're talking about carrying either Judd or Mays probably for 2 games and then sending them to the PS. 

[craig]

Wonder if Pankey has any aptitude for center?  Not sure he's any good, but Patrick has practiced some center.  Need somebody game-day active who can fill in for Linsley.  So **IF** Pankey wants to beat out Patrick, he'll need to be viewed as sorta-kinda adequate on a given Sunday.  (That's said realizing that Linsley is REALLY tough guy; so he'll finish a game even if an ankle or foot or knee or shoulder is pretty badly hurt.) 

The winner of the Pankey/Patrick battle wouldn't necessarily  need to be the better multi-week starter at center should Linsley get hurt; if you know Linsley is out for a while, you can call up the better backup center from PS if need be.  

 

[Arthur Penske]

Apparently Gutey is about to update on Cole Madison in his press conference.

 

The update is don't expect him back anytime soon . But Gutey did say pretty confidently that he thinks Cole will play football in the future so that is good news.

[Beast]

1 hour ago, craig said:

Bottom line is that **IF** Spriggs and Pankey still aren't functional-enough now to win the #8 spot from Bell, then I'm kinda thinking they aren't worth keeping at #9, and could be just as well waived and kept on PS.

Yesterday the Packers.com updated their unofficial depth chart and they made all the change you with expect with respect to the order guys are going in, except putting Bell over Spriggs. So I THINK they still like Spriggs more than Bell, but switch the order of them for some other reason... maybe trying to light a fire under Spriggs' behind? Or 2nd string gets more reps and Spriggs (as the coaches side) is still adjusting to his additional weight and broken knee cap from December? Something strange seems to be going on with the Bell / Spriggs move as everyone seems to be higher on Spriggs but they're letting Bell practice first.

1 hour ago, craig said:

I guess to me the "we usually keep 9" argument doesn't necessarily apply given the specific guys we've actually got this year.  That's particularly so *IF* the 9th man isn't necessarily great enough to get claimed.  *IF* you can stash your 9th OL on the PS, why waste a 53-man spot?  9th OL has no ST function, never gets any rotation snaps, and is healthy-inactive every week anyway.  *IF* injury gets so awful that you need to be playing your #5 tackle, add him to 53-man then as needed, but not before.  

Personally I don't see much value in keeping 9 OL.  Unless the 9th guy is too good/talented/promising/certain-to-get-snagged-on-waivers to risk exposure; yet at the same time is too raw to actually play this year.  

That's the profile in years past when we'd have 4th/5th-round draft picks learning the system, and/or adapting to NFL guard after only playing college tackle.  Developmental guys we needed to protect but weren't game-ready yet.  Barbier, Giacomini, Newhouse, Lang, rookies like that.  (Pre-camp, I assumed Cole Madision would be OL #9).  

But this year, case-by-case 9th OL candidates?

• If Bell, why keep him?  If he's not good enough to crack the top 8, let him go.
• If Day, why roster him?  Send him to PS.  (The risk of him getting claimed is negligible.)
• If Pankey, same (I think).  Send him to PS.  Pankey's got a full year of NFL body-optimization, two camps, and 4 years (?) of high-tier college.  Sure, he's still got improvement potential.  But if he's not adequate yet, and can't crack the top-8, how likely is it that he gets claimed if waived; or that another year will turn him into an integral guy we can't live without, in the event he does get claimed?  
• If Spriggs, same (maybe).  He's the odd one. 
• Somebody smart:  has he played so little and lost so many games to IR and inactive that he, too, is PS eligibile?  Or not so, and it's keep him or lose him?
• Spriggs has three pro camps and played high-tier college.  If he's *still* not able to function as a 4th tackle, and he's *still* not able to move past Bell or Pankey on the tackle ladder, then is he *still* worth burning a roster spot on, even if you can't stash him to PS?  If he's still a raw developmental prospect in year 3 who isn't good enough to crack the top-4 at his position, is he worth a spot?
• Unique case, though, so probably not but not necessarily not?  He's had the injury which perhaps delayed progression.  He's finally added weight that he's not used to carrying.  Cheech has talked about the inside/outside hand-placement adjustment  So, perhaps in year 3 Spriggs still is a raw developmental prospect with too-good-to-cut future potential, even though he still has no Nowacrat utility?  If so, then I suppose he'd be a guy to keep.

Certainly the ideal desirable landscape for me is that before camp is over, that Spriggs shows enough to crack the top-8 and to beat out Bell.  Cut Bell, send Pankey and Day to PS.

Actually we usually keep 8 or 9 OL (not just 9 OL) and sometimes 10 but that's only been when they've drafted two rookie OL and like them both.

You have made a great case in there isn't much value for a 9th OL... but problem is the same exact case can be made for 7th WR.

• The 9th OL won't be active on gamedays, but neither will the 7th WR
• The 9th OL won't be active on Special Teams, but neither will the 7th WR, they'll be on the bench.
• The 9th OL wasn't good enough to make top 8 OL, but the 7th WR wasn't good enough to make top 6 WRs.
• Some of these OL were PS guys, so we can put them back there and claim there later, which is also true for WR Kumerow

Based on your points, I was say forget both 9th OL and 7th WR and give it to DB such as S Evans who'll be playing ST gunner... or WR Davis even though he's ST only type and being out played at WR so far. 

 

My point earlier was just to get depth for the long haul of the season

• There are 3 WR starter spots, so 6 is doubling it and there is depth.
• There are 5 OL starter spots, so 8 is NOT doubling it.

Of course you might have a point with the ST are valuable and go with a ST like S Evans. And if he was already there, then more LB (ST value) and/or 6th DL Looney, who's showing good pass rush (though needs work against the run), but it's a passing league, so that's more valuable.

[{Family Ghost}]

Yeah .. that is good news on Madison.  He apparently still has the heart to play football.  I wonder what ails him .. probably is something of a medical nature.  If so I hope it's something he can recover from in short order.  It's looking like this year is going to be a redshirt season though.