Jump to content
deltarich87

LB Jake Ryan out for season with Torn ACL

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, TheOnlyThing said:

Given that we have disagreed about the ILB position since the day Martinez was drafted in 2016 (and I predicted he would be the better ILBer), I can see why you do not like the above-described facts about Jake. (Though I appreciate your concession that Martinez is clearly the better player).

Nonetheless, responding to your "contentions: ...

1) Jake Ryan played outside for Ol' Brady Hoke (if you want to insist Ryan was an outside linebacker rather than a DE in that bad Mich. defense so be it) during his first 3 seasons at Michigan. However, there is no denying that "The 6-foot-2 3/8, 240-pound Ryan moved to middle linebacker in Michigan’s 4-3 defense as a fifth-year senior" https://detroit.cbslocal.com/2015/05/02/packers-draft-michigan-lb-jake-ryan-in-4th-round/

Perhaps it was his lack of experience at the position, but Ryan was simply not an instinctive ILBer.

2) As previously stated, Ryan eventually (my word) overcame the "fierce competition" of Nate Palmer and began starting at ILB during his rookie season with the Packers in 2015 -- Palmer "lost his starting job to rookie Jake Ryan on Dec. 3 against Detroit". https://www.packersnews.com/story/sports/nfl/packers/insidersblog/2016/04/08/palmers-release-ilb-nate-palmer/82808540/

To pretend that Ryan did not become a starter as a rookie is, at best, disingenuous.

3) Yes, Blake was calling defensive signals as a rookie -- "Martinez also has the ultra-important role of defensive signal-caller, wearing the helmet headset through which defensive coordinator Dom Capers communicates" http://www.espn.com.au/blog/green-bay-packers/post/_/id/33645/shake-n-bake-jake-n-blake-by-any-name-packers-like-linebackers-ryan-martinez ...

And,  "Blake Martinez ... began his rookie year as one of the starters ... He was even tasked with calling defensive plays at the beginning of last year" (https://lombardiave.com/2017/08/01/green-bay-packers-2017-roster-inside-linebackers/.

Ryan played more snaps that Blake in 2016 because the latter sustained a knee injury and was either out of the lineup or severely hampered late in the year. Indeed, Ryan played 195 snaps compared to only 39 for Martinez after week 10 of 2016.

4) I did not say Ryan had NO ROLE on the team, I said "there was simply no role for Ryan in the PASSING GAME," though I can understand why a Ryan fan would omit "the passing game" portion of the statement.

5) I based my opinion of Ryan being a poor blitzer on his 3 years of play as a Packer.

Now, to be fair, the previous defensive coordinator may well have played a role in Ryan's inability to effectively blitz, but only his biggest boosters could possibly contend that Ryan displayed an aptitude for blitzing during his time in GB.

6) Um, huh, what? I asserted the Packers drafted Burks "to take snaps away from Ryan" not Martinez.  Are you disagreeing with that assertion or do you simply not like that fact?

7) Yes, losing decent players hurts depth and as I stated Ryan was "decent" against the run. Thus at this point, the Packers run D depth has sustained a blow.

However, I am confident the Packers can find a body to replace Ryan's decent play against the run, and don't believe Jake Ryan's absence will substantially impact the Packers D in a negative way.

I also retain hope that his replacement(s) might actually lead to improved play (as with Bishop in 2010) at what has been one of the team's weakest positions both before and during Ryan's tenure in GB.

1. I was actually waiting for someone to correct me on my statement that Jake Ryan was an edge guy, but nobody did. So here it goes for the last god damn time you ignoramus:

5 hours ago, TheOnlyThing said:

Sad to see any player, especially a Packer, get injured.

That said, here are some cold, hard facts pertaining to Jake Ryan:

A defensive lineman until late in his Michigan career – and after he returned from his first ACL tear, he was drafted in round 4 of the 2015 draft;

You're probably not aware of this, but did you know that Michigan football has obsessive records kept regarding their players? I'm happy to report that:

Jake Ryan was an ILB in high school and recruited as an inside linebacker: https://247sports.com/Player/Jake-Ryan-2901/high-school-3567

Jake Ryan was a 4-3 Sam Backer in his freshman year: http://mwolverine.com/Michigan_Football_Depth_Chart_2011.html

Jake Ryan was a 4-3 Sam Backer in his sophomore year: http://mwolverine.com/Michigan_Football_Depth_Chart_2012.html * This is the only year you might be able to claim that Ryan was an edge guy. He played some edge in certain packages because of a suspension to Frank Clark: http://www.annarbor.com/sports/um-football/michigan-linebacker-jake-ryan-could-split-time-at-defensive-end-if-frank-clarks-suspension-lasts-int/

Jake Ryan was a 4-3 Sam Backer in his junior year: http://mwolverine.com/Michigan_Football_Depth_Chart_2013.html All of zero sacks that year. 

Jake Ryan was a 4-3 Mike Backer in his senior year: http://mwolverine.com/Michigan_Football_Depth_Chart_2014.html

The idea that Ryan was ever a defensive lineman was started by dumb-***** who don't understand the difference between a 3-4 and a 4-3.

+++

2. You said: 

5 hours ago, TheOnlyThing said:

Sad to see any player, especially a Packer, get injured.

That said, here are some cold, hard facts pertaining to Jake Ryan:

In his 3 years in GB, mostly a starter, Ryan accumulated 1 forced fumble, 2 fumble recoveries, 1 sack, 0 interceptions, and 3 passes defended (none in either 2015 or 2017);

Jake Ryan played: 24.7% of stats in 2015. 54.1% of snaps in 2016. 48% of snaps in 2017. Jake Ryan is a role player. The idea that he was some kind of every down defender playing every snap is idiotic. Blake Martinez played 93.1% of snaps in 2017. Martinez played almost as many snaps this year as Ryan has in his entire career. Even if we just go by box score stats, Ryan has only started 56% of his games as a Packer. That is not "mostly". 

Nobody is concerned the loss of Ryan is devastating. The concern is that we don't have another player who has shown the ability to play that role. 

3. I stand corrected on point number 3. Martinez did have the headset as a rookie.

4. You said:

1 hour ago, TheOnlyThing said:

4) I did not say Ryan had NO ROLE on the team, I said "there was simply no role for Ryan in the PASSING GAME," though I can understand why a Ryan fan would omit "the passing game" portion of the statement.

That's not what you said in it's entirety. You said: 

5 hours ago, TheOnlyThing said:

But the NFL is primarily a passing league, and there was simply no role for Ryan in the passing game.

The first part of the sentence is important. Jake Ryan has a role on an NFL team. To pretend otherwise is ridiculous when you've got a guy who was starting in camp.

5. You said: 

1 hour ago, TheOnlyThing said:

5) I based my opinion of Ryan being a poor blitzer on his 3 years of play as a Packer.

Now, to be fair, the previous defensive coordinator may well have played a role in Ryan's inability to effectively blitz, but only his biggest boosters could possibly contend that Ryan displayed an aptitude for blitzing during his time in GB.

The Packers just didn't blitz their inside backers last year. 

Martinez had 4 QB hits and 4 pressures in 982 snaps.

Ryan had 2 QB hits and 1 pressure in 507 snaps. 

That's with Martinez getting way more reps in the pressure package. How do you judge a guy on something he's not asked to do?

https://www.packers.com/team/players-roster/jake-ryan/

https://www.packers.com/team/players-roster/blake-martinez/

6. You said: 

1 hour ago, TheOnlyThing said:

6) Um, huh, what? I asserted the Packers drafted Burks "to take snaps away from Ryan" not Martinez.  Are you disagreeing with that assertion or do you simply not like that fact?

The Packers drafted Burks because they had no depth at ILB and don't have a good coverage guy to fill the other ILB spot. Nobody is claiming that Jake Ryan is a stand out starter. You draft guys to potentially upgrade average players. That doesn't mean the guys suck. Just means you can try and do better. The loss of Ryan being problematic isn't problematic because Ryan is a great player. It's problematic because we don't have **** behind him.

7. You said: 

1 hour ago, TheOnlyThing said:

7) Yes, losing decent players hurts depth and as I stated Ryan was "decent" against the run. Thus at this point, the Packers run D depth has sustained a blow.

How is Ryan only "decent" against the run? What is the measure you're using to make that assessment. He's "decent" against the pass. He's good against the run. Unfortunately you don't get to know what the defense is going to do ahead of time. How would you not rather have Ryan than "player to be named later"?

Edited by AlexGreen#20

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

7. Losing decent players hurts depth even if you don't like the player and think the depth might be better. It's better to have options than not.

This. From the practice I watched Burks looks smooth but raw.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, ReadyToThump said:

It's time for the Burkinator

It's time for the Burkinator

It's time for the Burkinator

That's gonna stick...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sign Bowman... please Gutekunst. Have him at least compete.

 

ILB  is the most neglected position on this damn roster... smh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

bowman would be a great addition 

excited to see what oren burks can do too

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was thinking to myself, "How many players are there on the roster who it would hurt to lose more than Jake Ryan?" I scanned through the roster and came up with 29, but there are a lot that could have gone either way. He's a solid role player with a shrinking role. Not one of their more important players, but due to his experience, not necessarily easy to replace either. I feel bad for him and hope he comes back strong next year. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Greg C. said:

I was thinking to myself, "How many players are there on the roster who it would hurt to lose more than Jake Ryan?" I scanned through the roster and came up with 29, but there are a lot that could have gone either way. He's a solid role player with a shrinking role. Not one of their more important players, but due to his experience, not necessarily easy to replace either. I feel bad for him and hope he comes back strong next year. 

Clinon-Dix

Brice

King

Tramon

Alexander

House

Martinez

Perry

Clay

Clark

Daniels

Wilkerson

Rodgers

Graham

Adams

Cobb

Allison

Bulaga

Bakhtiari

Taylor

Linsley

+++

I've only got 21. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

Clinon-Dix

Brice

King

Tramon

Alexander

House

Martinez

Perry

Clay

Clark

Daniels

Wilkerson

Rodgers

Graham

Adams

Cobb

Allison

Bulaga

Bakhtiari

Taylor

Linsley

+++

I've only got 21. 

to be fair, you are missing Crosby and (presumably) Scott

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Cakeshoppe said:

to be fair, you are missing Crosby and (presumably) Scott

That's fair, though I think you could probably patch those holes via FA with minimal effort. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Aaron Jones has an argument too. Not because of what he has done, but of what I think he will do. Loss of a potential I think is high.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

I think Aaron Jones has an argument too. Not because of what he has done, but of what I think he will do. Loss of a potential I think is high.

Same. Give me Jones over 2 Ryans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

I think Aaron Jones has an argument too. Not because of what he has done, but of what I think he will do. Loss of a potential I think is high.

There's an argument. I just don't think we suffer too much with the downgrade to Montgomery, Williams. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What makes Ryan a little more important is the depth behind him.  The drop off from some of our starters to their back-up  isn't as steep as the drop off behind Ryan (Ie. RB or DL).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×