DeShone Kizer

[blankman0021]

1 hour ago, craig said:

I'm a super-optimisit, and like to hope for the best, so that's a thing.  But here are several optimistic thoughts.

1.  Kizer:  He's got a strong arm, he's a good athlete, and he's supposed to be a smart kid classroom wise.  (Which is not at all equivalent to being a quick good-decision-maker on the field.)  I am very hopeful that he's going to show a LOT of improvement in Green Bay with a year of experience behind him, and that he will become a very capable, good backup QB.  I admit I'm optimistic that he's also got a chance to develop into a respectable starting-caliber NFL QB in due time.  Expectant, no; but I think it's not beyond plausible, and I'm hoping it works out well. 

2.  Gute is a new GM and MM is going to remain the coach indefinitely.  I'm not sure how the decision-making went in acquiring Kizer; but I think BOTH of those guys like him, kind of a lot.  The optimist in me is hopeful that Gute is not an idiot, and I'm hopeful that while MM may have many faults, that on the whole that he's reasonably intelligent as well.  So, I'm optimistic that they are good evaluators, and are not idiots to like Kizer.  They had all the tape from last year; they saw all the INT's and the INT/TD ratios.  They had all the info we've got plus more; yet they still think the guy is a very good QB prospect.  How could they reach that conclusion?  Either they are dummies, or else perhaps there are rationale, intelligent, good-evaluation thoughtful reasons to believe Kizer's got value and has a decent chance to be good.  Maybe I'm in denial, but it just seems too soon to already conclude that Gute is super dumb and MM is dumber.  *IF* that evaluation is true, that Gute is dumb and MM is dumber, then I don't think the Packers have any chance. We've GOT to have good evaluation and good decision-making at the top; if Gute is really dumb and MM is dumber, we're cooked.  So, for the moment, I'm going to give Gute the benefit of the doubt, and MM too, and at least HOPE that their optimism regarding Kizer is both reasonable now, and will be vindicated in due time.  (I hope it's not TOO vindicated for a while, bcause I want Rodgers too healthy to let Kizer play enough to vindicate anything.)  

I like the optimism. I think Kizer has some untapped potential too. Hopefully CLE didn't break his spirit. Here's my breakdown of the trade:

1) I think the decision to trade for Kizer was more of a trade to move on from Randall who wore out his welcome last year here. When your teammates do not want you on the roster mid-season, that's saying A LOT.

2) Randall also was coming into the last year of his deal, and we had to decide by May 2018 if he would be receiving his 5th year option. This staff definitely didn't want to invest any more in a player that was not liked or respected by his peers. 

3) This wasn't one of Gute's guys. Gute was a SEC scout, and he probably didn't have the same affinity towards Randall that others in the building did. (Unrelated note - Gute did pound the table for Josh Jones. One of the big reasons why I think we're giving him a little extra slack. Good or bad.).

4) Most importantly, we traded Randall's 1 year of contract for 3 years of a backup QB. 

5) It's telling me a lot that CLE also had to swap round picks to get this deal done. Clearly we valued Randall higher than Kizer, or it would have been an even swap. Especially given the value placed on QBs.

[HyponGrey]

1 hour ago, craig said:

I'm a super-optimisit, and like to hope for the best, so that's a thing.  But here are several optimistic thoughts.

1.  Kizer:  He's got a strong arm, he's a good athlete, and he's supposed to be a smart kid classroom wise.  (Which is not at all equivalent to being a quick good-decision-maker on the field.)  I am very hopeful that he's going to show a LOT of improvement in Green Bay with a year of experience behind him, and that he will become a very capable, good backup QB.  I admit I'm optimistic that he's also got a chance to develop into a respectable starting-caliber NFL QB in due time.  Expectant, no; but I think it's not beyond plausible, and I'm hoping it works out well. 

2.  Gute is a new GM and MM is going to remain the coach indefinitely.  I'm not sure how the decision-making went in acquiring Kizer; but I think BOTH of those guys like him, kind of a lot.  The optimist in me is hopeful that Gute is not an idiot, and I'm hopeful that while MM may have many faults, that on the whole that he's reasonably intelligent as well.  So, I'm optimistic that they are good evaluators, and are not idiots to like Kizer.  They had all the tape from last year; they saw all the INT's and the INT/TD ratios.  They had all the info we've got plus more; yet they still think the guy is a very good QB prospect.  How could they reach that conclusion?  Either they are dummies, or else perhaps there are rationale, intelligent, good-evaluation thoughtful reasons to believe Kizer's got value and has a decent chance to be good.  Maybe I'm in denial, but it just seems too soon to already conclude that Gute is super dumb and MM is dumber.  *IF* that evaluation is true, that Gute is dumb and MM is dumber, then I don't think the Packers have any chance. We've GOT to have good evaluation and good decision-making at the top; if Gute is really dumb and MM is dumber, we're cooked.  So, for the moment, I'm going to give Gute the benefit of the doubt, and MM too, and at least HOPE that their optimism regarding Kizer is both reasonable now, and will be vindicated in due time.  (I hope it's not TOO vindicated for a while, bcause I want Rodgers too healthy to let Kizer play enough to vindicate anything.)  

An idiot? Nah. Overconfident? That can describe MM more than I like to admit. So far with Kizer all I see is another Hundley type story: an athletic QB prospect whose prowess in the classroom has yet to transfer to the field.

[Norm]

46 minutes ago, Golfman said:

I think the given is Rodgers stays healthy and plays another, 5-7 years. Not exactly a guarantee with a guy who has broken both of his collarbones. 

Yeah I agree that's been taken for granted. Not just health wise either. Like he undoubtedly wants to play that long. I'm sure he thinks he does now but that could change one day too, who knows.

[jontat83]

49 minutes ago, HyponGrey said:

An idiot? Nah. Overconfident? That can describe MM more than I like to admit. So far with Kizer all I see is another Hundley type story: an athletic QB prospect whose prowess in the classroom has yet to transfer to the field.

Stubborn is the word I would use.

[Uffdaswede]

35 minutes ago, jontat83 said:

Stubborn is the word I would use.

Stubby. It fits.

[vegas492]

Just catching up....thought AG20 made some very, very valid points that were overlooked.

I wasn't a fan of the trade.  Felt we gave up too much for a backup QB.

Since what is done is done, I hope to takes to MM's coaching.  I hope he stops throwing putrid interceptions.  I also hope he never plays a meaningful snap in Green Bay.  And if he does, I hope he shows a lot more in GB than he did in Cleveland.  Looking at our line and our offense, compared to the parts in Cleveland, well, I'm not sure that there wasn't more talent there.  In other words, he needs to do more with less...and that could be accomplished with coaching.  Coaching that didn't work with Hundley.

We shall see.

I am looking forward to seeing what Kizer can do with his old ND wideout in the second half of pre-season games...

[blankman0021]

1 hour ago, HyponGrey said:

An idiot? Nah. Overconfident? That can describe MM more than I like to admit. So far with Kizer all I see is another Hundley type story: an athletic QB prospect whose prowess in the classroom has yet to transfer to the field.

If you listen to Packers beat writers who know MM on a more personal level, most of what you see from him is a persona. He's an incredibly loyal guy, and knows how to use the media to push a storyline. Not everything he puts out there is his 100% belief, but it's 100% what he wants his players hearing. Whether it's calling out Lacy, or pumping up Kizer. He's a good guy, "guys guy" kind of person. 

He can be stubborn, and slow to change. But at the same time he's one of the better innovators of the past decade. But point being, is that we will never know if he really believes Kizer is the guy he's pumping him up as. It could be real, or more likely it could be him saying all the right things.

[N4L]

The statement 'would be a first round pick if he came out this year' is pretty comical. So he went in the second round in a weak QB class, but somehow he would have gone in the first in one of the strongest QB classes in the past 10 years? 

Kizer has some serious accuracy issues. QBs with accuracy issues don't last long in the NFL. Not always that simple but I think this may be one of those times where it is. 

[AlexGreen#20]

14 hours ago, badgers0821 said:

Randall is a FS not a SS, so starting over Jones or Brice...wrong.

FS and SS are dead monikers. Guys need to be able to do both.

[packfanfb]

3 minutes ago, N4L said:

The statement 'would be a first round pick if he came out this year' is pretty comical. So he went in the second round in a weak QB class, but somehow he would have gone in the first in one of the strongest QB classes in the past 10 years? 

Kizer has some serious accuracy issues. QBs with accuracy issues don't last long in the NFL. Not always that simple but I think this may be one of those times where it is. 

Yea, but in case you didn't know, Mike McCarthy is a quarterback wizard. Like literally the best in the business. He just needs the QB's name to be Aaron Rodgers. That's a prerequisite. 

In all seriousness, who knows about Kizer. Guy had one year where he was thrown into the fire as a rookie on a bad team. Maybe he turns out to be a quality player, maybe in 3 years he's Brett Hundley 2.0.

[blankman0021]

2 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

FS and SS are dead monikers. Guys need to be able to do both.

x2. At least in GB under Capers. We'll see how Pettine uses them. League trends point to them being one main position too. Especially with the league serious about taking out helmet-leading hits (something some well-known SS were known for over the last decade)

[Blink]

I guess I don’t understand all the fuss about trading Randall.

His contract is up after this year, if the front office knows they have no plans of re-signing him then why turn down an offer to get a pretty highly regarded QB prospect and move up in the draft?  Even if he was converted to safety this year, I doubt that he would transition fast enough to take snaps away from any of the top three guys at the moment.  Then, either way he performed would you be willing to give him a decent contract based off of one limited season?

Randall flat out wasn’t good enough at corner, and given the short time frame there wasn’t a realistic opportunity to switch him to safety before his contract was up.  I highly doubt he will be very successful because I think his biggest weaknesses will be even more exposed at safety(run support, fragility, and mental errors).

 

I have no idea if Kizer will be any good, but I’m not going to judge the guy after one year on the worst franchise in sports under who’s widely regarded as the worst coach in football by far.  Everyone knew he was a project that needed a few years tuning, it was unfair to throw him to the wolves so early and then be thrown under the bus by his coach.

About time for some people to get over Randall losing.  He wasn’t going to be given a new contract, there’s really no reason to fret about getting something in return for him.

[Blink]

25 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

FS and SS are dead monikers. Guys need to be able to do both.

 

I understand the point but have to disagree, while you need to be able to handle all of the responsibilities it’s pretty obvious that there are safeties that excel in single high, your rangy coverage types, and your in the box types that are more suited to help in the run game/blitzing.

 

Yes, there’s been a transition to a more positionless league in general kind of like basketball with a lot of hybrid players, but just like basketball there’s still a place for the well defined role specific players.

[HyponGrey]

1 hour ago, Blink said:

 

I understand the point but have to disagree, while you need to be able to handle all of the responsibilities it’s pretty obvious that there are safeties that excel in single high, your rangy coverage types, and your in the box types that are more suited to help in the run game/blitzing.

 

Yes, there’s been a transition to a more positionless league in general kind of like basketball with a lot of hybrid players, but just like basketball there’s still a place for the well defined role specific players.

I was thinking how soccer players play whatever position they feel like that week. 

I feel like in today's game you have a CB that plays S, and a S that plays LB, so your "base" set is similar, if not the same personnel as your "nickel"

[CWood21]

3 hours ago, N4L said:

The statement 'would be a first round pick if he came out this year' is pretty comical. So he went in the second round in a weak QB class, but somehow he would have gone in the first in one of the strongest QB classes in the past 10 years? 

Kizer has some serious accuracy issues. QBs with accuracy issues don't last long in the NFL. Not always that simple but I think this may be one of those times where it is. 

Not really.  Given another year of development and production at Notre Dame, it's not really a stretch.  The Packers were rumored to be high on him last year, no reason to think that's changed since then.