DeShone Kizer

[packfanfb]

7 hours ago, NormSizedMidget said:

Well this is just not factual. And even if it was, it wasn't because they didn't think he could do it. It was we had jack **** at corner lately and plenty of safety help at most points.

Didnt help we had Capers running the defense and TT running personnel. A smarter DC would have recognized that Randall should be moved to S, a smarter GM would have allowed that to happen by acquiring some CB talent via trade or FA to allow that flexibility. Probably the latter is more to blame bc like you said, we had jack **** at CB and TT didnt do a damn thing about it.

[Gopackgonerd]

51 minutes ago, packfanfb said:

Didnt help we had Capers running the defense and TT running personnel. A smarter DC would have recognized that Randall should be moved to S, a smarter GM would have allowed that to happen by acquiring some CB talent via trade or FA to allow that flexibility. Probably the latter is more to blame bc like you said, we had jack **** at CB and TT didnt do a damn thing about it.

I mean we were pretty loaded at S and the beginning of the year so there's no point moving Randall to saftey. We were looking pretty good at corner with House, King, Randall, Rollins too. I don't think the talent was the main issue, Doms scheme was figured out and we were getting injuries at the CB position.

[squire12]

 

@Leader here is a discussion on moving Randall to safety.  Likely was before you joined here.

[Norm]

42 minutes ago, Gopackgonerd said:

I mean we were pretty loaded at S and the beginning of the year so there's no point moving Randall to saftey. We were looking pretty good at corner with House, King, Randall, Rollins too. I don't think the talent was the main issue, Doms scheme was figured out and we were getting injuries at the CB position.

Yeah all I'm really saying is we were in a bad spot at corner so it didn't make much sense for the team is all. Not that he didn't have the skills and everything. 

[Leader]

36 minutes ago, squire12 said:

 

 

@Leader here is a discussion on moving Randall to safety.  Likely was before you joined here.

December 2017? I was posting here - so thanks for that - but what I was meaning - or the context for my comments was that during DRs tenure at various CB positions there wasnt discussion of his playing Safety. December last year....was DR even on the roster still?

And no, no, no, no......please somebody dont mention that DR couldnt move to Safety because of CB injuries. Please dont go there. I've got that already. I'm talking about discussion about a potential move - while (IMO) he was struggling in coverage. I had nothing against DR. Dont for any player, but a CB with coverage issues is problematic. I just never thought he was all that great in coverage . Recovery skills? Those he had - but straight off the LOS coverage skills? Lacking IN MY OPINION (what I was seeing) - so - pairing MY OPINION with his public head case issues, I wasnt as busted up as others about shipping him out of town.

[craig]

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.)  

[squire12]

6 minutes ago, Leader said:

December 2017? I was posting here - so thanks for that - but what I was meaning - or the context for my comments was that during DRs tenure at various CB positions there wasnt discussion of his playing Safety. December last year....was DR even on the roster still?

And no, no, no, no......please somebody dont mention that DR couldnt move to Safety because of CB injuries. Please dont go there. I've got that already. I'm talking about discussion about a potential move - while (IMO) he was struggling in coverage. I had nothing against DR. Dont for any player, but a CB with coverage issues is problematic. I just never thought he was all that great in coverage . Recovery skills? Those he had - but straight off the LOS coverage skills? Lacking IN MY OPINION (what I was seeing) - so - pairing MY OPINION with his public head case issues, I wasnt as busted up as others about shipping him out of town.

As a safety, would Randall have been better than Burnett, Clinton-Dix or Hyde?

Randall showed some nice CB ability during his rookie year.  The primary CB that year were Shields, Hayward, Williams. With Randall and Rollins as rookie picks.  2nd year, it is Shields,  Randall, Rollins.  Hyde as a hybrid DB those first 2 years.  

Moving Randall from CB to safty did not seem necessary nor best for the overall function of the defense until this past offseason with the likely departure of Burnett and the already departed Hyde.

As others have noted, playing the slot/star DB spot is a hybrid CB /safety position that Randall played reasonably well.

[Leader]

Here's the deal........consider this.......

DRs having a up and down tenure at CB - cant move to Safety now because we cant trust his backups yet and the positions are manned already - BUT - Morgan's contract is coming up (this year) and HHCD's contract is coming up (next year) - so - outside his head case issues - was anybody within the GB organization thinking of potentially moving him to Safety? Move DR over - draft / FA his replacement. Was anybody considering that? I certainly dont know - but - that would (or could) have been a more normal roster "flow" 

Also - like the players coming out this year, I had no background knowledge of DR when he came out / was drafted. His history was a mystery to me. I went and watched some YouTube videos and paired with a confidence in the GBP talent evaluators were on their game - thought we had ourselves a ball hawking player. Thats it. Nothing more complicated than that.

In subsequent years - because of what I perceived as his coverage liabilities - I came to think we should have selected a pure boundary (or slot) CB - ESPECIALLY after I learned he was a Safety to begin with and (apparently) had his best success there. Thats on the the organization and coach - not the player IMO.

 

[Leader]

6 minutes ago, squire12 said:

As a safety, would Randall have been better than Burnett, Clinton-Dix or Hyde?

Who knows? Its nothing but pure conjecture at this point.

If CLE moves him there and he does well or better than CB - we'll have a better idea.

[craig]

On Randall tangent, I think he had the tools, speed and athleticism and size, where he was an excellent corner prospect, outside or slot.  He had the measurables to be excellent at either corner OR at safety.  Don't think using him at corner was dumb.  

He had a promising rookie season.  Don't think there was much from rookie year that spelled "can't-play-corner", think there was justifiable reason to anticipate that with growing experience and 2nd-year-jump and stuff, that he'd become an excellent corner.  Again, nothing in his toolbox necessitated otherwise, IMO. 

Year 2, he was awful, but the excuse was that he was playing hurt.  Personally I thought that was too simplistic:  yes, part of his issue was limited speed, but his decision-making and awareness and focus was often horrible.  But, not sure it was obvious that if healthy, that his toolbox for corner was inadequate.  The common pro-Randall story was that it was all about the health.  

This year, it became pretty obvious that some of his decision-making and focus was just very inconsistent,  and that maybe man-on-man coverage he's just not that good, even on plays where his head is in the game.  But maybe that's more hindsight than obvious at the time.  And certainly entering the season there were high hopes for HaHa and Burnett, and that Brice and Evans were combine-measurables toolsy guys with good chance to "2nd-year-leap".  

I get it, we could have kept him and his tools to shift to slot or safety for 2018.  And that might have been a good move.  And perhaps in a new defense under a new coordinator he'd have thrived.  But, apparently the effort and attitude and self-centeredness was sufficiently excessive to justify moving him along.  The guy was pretty obviously a self-centered jerk, that was fairly evident I think.  And pretty obviously winning NFL teams probably take advantage of the on-field play of plenty of self-centered jerks, so that alone is not necessarily a "gotta-dump-him" thing.  Again, I'm an optimist; I want to believe that MM and Gute had a good enough feel for this to make a thoughtful and reasonable decision, on when the "selfish-jerk" stuff is over the line and harmful, and when the value of Kizer in return justifies the deal.  

It may be that some of Randall's limits in coverage will be less exposed at safety.  But I htink it's also likely that if a guy has a hard time giving max effort all the time; if a guy has a hard time making good decisions at game speed; if a guy just sometimes seems really game-dumb; I'm kinda suspicious that some of those failures will continue to haunt him at any position, whether safety or slot or boundary.  We shall see.  

[Golfman]

Holy off topic Batman! 

DeShone Kizer people! Focus, I need total concentration! 

[Green19]

Fun aside: during draft coverage on bleacher report matt miller said something interesting about Randall. While discussing Cleveland they were talking about Landry and the notion that they paid Landry what they did because they knew they had to. That they have to over pay in Cleveland.

Miller then said yeah when I talked to Randall after getting traded to see what was going on... he said all I know is I’m about to get paid.

Grain of salt but yeah. I think regardless we were never going to be able to keep Randall long term. Kudos on getting something for him.

[Leader]

1 minute ago, Golfman said:

Holy off topic Batman!  DeShone Kizer people! Focus, I need total concentration! 

When Kizer starts throwing passes for the GBPs - I'll start filling in the book about him. I'm not interested in achievements (or lack thereof) while with CLE and projecting an arc to GB. Two different worlds IMO.

[Norm]

25 minutes ago, Golfman said:

Holy off topic Batman! 

DeShone Kizer people! Focus, I need total concentration! 

What's there to say that hasn't been said. He has talent. He hasn't been good so far. He will be fun to watch. Mike is excited about him. He'll get to throw to a college teammate. Maybe one day we can trade him for something.

That's about it.

[Golfman]

32 minutes ago, NormSizedMidget said:

What's there to say that hasn't been said. He has talent. He hasn't been good so far. He will be fun to watch. Mike is excited about him. He'll get to throw to a college teammate. Maybe one day we can trade him for something.

That's about it.

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.