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

[Leader]

3 hours ago, NormSizedMidget said:

FWIW, Lane had been in front of the coaches and they must have had an idea what they had, to a degree. These are rookies. (I guess not the guys on the roster like Gmo, kinda forgot about that part lol)

I just thought the part about the dog freaking out kinda funny.

[vegas492]

17 hours ago, CWood21 said:

I'll try and answer these as best as I can.

I think that goes without saying, but that's also a disingenuous argument.  We had arguably the best WR group in the NFL.  There was nowhere to go but down from there.  Realistically, we weren't going to keep at that level without investing more into the position.  Over the last three years, we've drafted six WRs but only one in the first four rounds  Over the last five years, we've drafted 8 WRs but only two in the first two days of the draft.  There's a direct correlation between what we have invested into the WR position, and your comfort level with the WRs this year.  You want a "better" WR group, which one of your Day 1 or Day 2 picks are you willing to give up from 2016-2018?  The only two you'd give up are Fackrell and Spriggs.  The only WR that made that kind of production that would have been available was Tyreek Hill and let's be real, the Packers weren't even considering taking him.  Instead of Spriggs?  I'm not sure there is anyone other than Hill.  Short of heavily investing in the position early, I think the Packers did the best job at filling a long-term hole.  They took 3 athletic, big receivers and hoping one sticks.  I'd rather invest what we did in our WRs than invest a Day 1 or Day 2 pick into one of the WRs this year.

Are we assuming Bulaga is healthy?  Because quite frankly, this is no different than the year we released Josh Sitton and everyone and their dog freaked out about lining up Lane Taylor at LG.  Fast forward a year, and nobody was complaining about Lane Taylor.  We're consistently a top 10 OL, and I've got no doubts that that will be the case this year.  Is it an elite OL?  Obviously not, but it's going to be more than capable of getting the job done.  Much like your WR argument, I'd make the argument that your point here isn't really going to hold much weight.

Pre-Ahmad Brooks, I'd argue that our EDGE position looks better than it did last year at this time.  There are questions that I have about our EDGE, but as I posed the question to TOT if you want to invest in an EDGE this year, who are you giving up?  Jaire Alexander or Josh Jackson?  I've already mentioned in another thread that value for EDGE didn't really hit the board until around the 5th round.  WE passed on Harold Landry AND Marcus Davenport, so that should tell you enough about what the Packers' FO feels about their options at EDGE?  Would I like a Myles Garrett or Von Miller?  Who wouldn't, but that's not realistic.

Rosters are cyclical.  I think that's what you're having a hard time comprehending.  A team that was stacked at WR/OL, but weak in DL and S a few years ago will change over the course of the years.  I'd make the argument that our DL this year is exponentially better than the group that helped win the Super Bowl.  Our WRs are clearly inferior.  DB was better during our Super Bowl year, but I'd argue our LBs are better this year.  I think you're holding a wildly unrealistic stance if you think you're going to keep positions of strengths as strengths when you're busy investing in other positions.  There's only a FINITE amount of draft capital you have so if you're using them to fix your holes, your strengths will eventually weaken.

I appreciate the response.  For the bolded, I'm not playing the hindsight game.  There's no way to say what I would have preferred.  I was fine with the Spriggs pick, I understood the Fackrell pick.  No worries.  I'm just saying this...the WR corp this year is the worst I can remember.  And as you stated, most of the time, our WR corp has been a top unit in the league.  It is not now.  That's all I'm saying.  Not arguing for or against rookies either, just stating that as it stands today, the club is weaker at WR than it has been in a long, long time.

Offensive line.  I think BB is out for the first part of the season, then what are you getting back?  That is my point.  You don't know what Bulaga is anymore.  RT is a weaker position this year than it has been in the past.  Weaker at RG.  Our center hasn't played at a high level since being a rookie, maybe part of that was breaking in Taylor and then having Evans next to him last year.  Top 10 OL?  I hope you are right, but I don't see it that way...right now.  Could change with a strong camp from McCray or Madison.  And again, I don't feel the line is as strong this year as it has been in years past.  That is my only point.

Edge, again, not playing the hindsight game.  Just looking at guys we have now, and their age, compared to the past, we aren't as good as we have been.  Maybe we are slightly better this year than we were last year, but we took a huge hit the year before when we let Peppers go.  I don't care about those other named guys, I'm just looking at what we have...and it isn't as good as it has been in the past.  Freely admit that SCHEME from Pettine can make a LARGE difference here.

I'm comprehending just fine.  Just stating facts.  Just as I stated that I really like the DL, much stronger than it has been in the past and that I like the MLB, because I dig Martinez.

You seem to take offense to anyone stating that this year's team isn't as talented as some teams from the past.  I'm not sure why that is.  But, you've done it before and you are doing it again.  I didn't say that this is a poor team, or a bad team.  Just stating that it isn't as talented as it has been in the past.  That is a FAR CRY from stating this is a bad roster.  Heck, it has Rodgers on it, right there it is going to win 10 games, plus or minus one...if he is healthy.

 

[Leader]

"On one of the deeper, more competitive rosters this team has had in recent memory, a number of players need to get off to a fast start in order to solidify their standing on this team both in the short-term and for the future"

Ty Mongomery, RB

Kevin King, CB

HaHa Clinton-Dix, FS

Vince Biegel, OLB

Geronimo Allison, WR

https://www.acmepackingcompany.com/2018/5/21/17376080/five-packers-under-the-most-pressure-as-green-bay-kicks-off-otas-king-biegel-clinton-dix-montgomery

[Golfman]

33 minutes ago, Leader said:

"On one of the deeper, more competitive rosters this team has had in recent memory, a number of players need to get off to a fast start in order to solidify their standing on this team both in the short-term and for the future"

Ty Mongomery, RB

Kevin King, CB

HaHa Clinton-Dix, FS

Vince Biegel, OLB

Geronimo Allison, WR

https://www.acmepackingcompany.com/2018/5/21/17376080/five-packers-under-the-most-pressure-as-green-bay-kicks-off-otas-king-biegel-clinton-dix-montgomery

I agree with this regarding Allison and MonTgomery. Biegel would have to totally flop in TC to be in jeopardy. Dix is probably going to get paid and King isn't going anywhere anytime soon.

[James Lofton]

Here some things I think about:

1) Generally I like Mini/Training camp to see if the second year players are showing any spark. I've got my eye on a bunch of guys:

Hopefully Kevin King is healthy enough to grow that potential he showed. I suspect the new defense to be taylor made for his athletic abilities.

Josh Jones is a great athlete but didn't strike me as a instinctively smart player, but hey, he was a rookie and being aggressive in the new defense should be good for him. I like him blitzing a lot.

Montravious Adams is a big question mark. He will be part of a position group the is already quite strong, so I don't expect too much impact from him.

Vince Biegle - hope he develops into something more than just a guy - hard to say

All the running backs looked good to me - they could be the best thing for a young defense. A long, slow, grinding offense is a defens' best friend, but with the golden arm of Aaron Rodgers, you probably will not get to enjoy that. If you're on the defense, you better condition yourself for a long, hard year of running up and down the field.

2) Another thought I have is that picking quality CBs is a crap shoot. You really never know with them. Fuller of the Bears sucked and was in danger of being cut, now he's so great we tried to steal him. I remember when the Viking took Trae Waynes in the first round. He was the clear best corner in the draft and most NFL ready -- but then he wasn't and took several season of seasoning to progress into a descent CB.

[SSG]

1 hour ago, vegas492 said:

 

Edge, again, not playing the hindsight game.  Just looking at guys we have now, and their age, compared to the past, we aren't as good as we have been.  Maybe we are slightly better this year than we were last year, but we took a huge hit the year before when we let Peppers go.  I don't care about those other named guys, I'm just looking at what we have...and it isn't as good as it has been in the past.  Freely admit that SCHEME from Pettine can make a LARGE difference here.

 

 

While we weren't great on the edge last year either at least there was excitement around Perry and Fackrell.  Move forward a year and Perry was very mediocre while Fackrell had very few moments where he looked like anything more than a ST player.   This is exactly the same group as last year which is a discomforting thought given how horrid they were at getting pressure.  Hopefully our defensive line picks up the slack for our edge because I don't want to live and die with all out type blitzes. 

[Packerraymond]

[Norm]

42 minutes ago, SSG said:

While we weren't great on the edge last year either at least there was excitement around Perry and Fackrell.  Move forward a year and Perry was very mediocre while Fackrell had very few moments where he looked like anything more than a ST player.   This is exactly the same group as last year which is a discomforting thought given how horrid they were at getting pressure.  Hopefully our defensive line picks up the slack for our edge because I don't want to live and die with all out type blitzes. 

Was there really "excitement" around Fackrell...

[vegas492]

28 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

Can we get pads on that guy and have him work the EDGE?

[Leader]

 

[mikemike778]

21 hours ago, CWood21 said:

Rosters are cyclical.  I think that's what you're having a hard time comprehending.  A team that was stacked at WR/OL, but weak in DL and S a few years ago will change over the course of the years.  I'd make the argument that our DL this year is exponentially better than the group that helped win the Super Bowl.  Our WRs are clearly inferior.  DB was better during our Super Bowl year, but I'd argue our LBs are better this year.  I think you're holding a wildly unrealistic stance if you think you're going to keep positions of strengths as strengths when you're busy investing in other positions.  There's only a FINITE amount of draft capital you have so if you're using them to fix your holes, your strengths will eventually weaken.

 

The problem for me isn't that receiver is inferior or the line is inferior or that we have no depth at tight end or that any of these positions have been neglected in the draft. As you say,  things are cyclical - there is no guarantee you can get the TE you want or the OL you want - some positions will be neglected in the draft. The problem is that most of the areas that are being neglected in the draft are on one side of the ball.

The team lives and dies with Rodgers but for 4 years, we have given him virtually nothing in the draft other than late round picks.

I think we can probably get by patching the offense this season and still have a top offense. The bigger concern is in a couple of years. You draft for a few years down the line and the level of young talent on offense in a few years could be truly desperate unless the late-rounders hit - combine that with an ageing Rodgers and the offense could fall off a cliff. 

You can end up chasing your tail here - defense is bad so pump all your draft capital into defense (and it pretty much is all your draft capital- the late rounders wont make much of a dent in the value chart) until you fix it and by then you have holes all over your offense - do you then use all your draft capital on offense ?  For me, you need a bit of balance. One year drafting defense is fine but 4 years is too much. 

[Leader]

 

[Norm]

Inb4 omg the hamstring injuries fire s and c staff

[packfanfb]

44 minutes ago, Leader said:

 

Glad to see Matthews and Perry looking healthy for a change...

[packfanfb]

 

Someone needed to say it. Might as well be Clay.