Packers Roster Cuts

[Cheech]

2 hours ago, craig said:

Q for you exhibition watchers and good scouts:  

Do you have any scouting observations on the new guys who made it and who didn't necessarily get a lot of discussion during camp?  Think Boyle and Kumerow and Tonyan, they've all been discussed extensively, but I don't recall much about the other four.  So if you've got any observations and thoughts about any or all of them, I'd love to hear them.

1. Raven Green
2. Alex Light
3. Crawford?  
4. Herb Waters?  

Greene is a SS body type.  He looks like a sure tackler who will come down and hit.  I'm not sure how well he diagnoses plays though.  Guessing that he's better on ST than Evans.

Light has nice size and he sinks his rear in pass pro.  I thought he looked mechanical and stiff at times though.  He didnt seem like a high upside player to me.

Crawford played about 30 to 40 snaps in the preseason.  Nobody knows anything besides the fact that he's fast.  Don't get this one - why give Thomas and Martini all of those PS snaps?

Waters was the best of the rest of the CB group.  Had some decent moments in coverage.  I thought he should have diagnosed what looked like a super slow developing slant-flat vs. Oakland that went for a TD.  He does look fluid in coverage though.

[ReadyToThump]

Few things that surprised me

No FBs and 4 TEs. Looks like LK or RT will play a H back role? 

Kumerow or 1 rookie wr to IR when Jones comes back 

Thought we'd keep biegel or donnerson

Crawford at LB surprised, wanted Thomas

Waters at cb was kind of surprising 

Raven Greene over evans surprised me

Light over pankey surprised me

 

[palmy50]

Craig,

Pretty happy to see Greene around. He has great eyes and attacks the football. He'll grade well enough on teams to develop the rest. He would have been a tough cut for me, no doubt. 

I liked Light going into camp. He's Murphy with less bend and more sand in the pants. Average athlete but tough and smart. Packers have had success with guys like that in the past. I understood the sign post draft. Figured he was a PS guy for them but they might need him now with Murphy down. Fun fact: Light had the biggest feet we measured this year! Think he sports a size 20 or something. I've seen feet like that but they are usually on the 6'9 monsters.

Crawford is pretty much Biegel without the feet issues. High motor college edge that can't beat NFL tackles and is making the move to OTB. Wish they would have done the same with Biegel day1. No issue keeping Crawford though. That's a damn talented kid. 

I would have cut Waters. He's a long smooth athlete with good hips though. Better hands than most also after playing WR in college. I just haven't seen him come close to putting it all together at CB yet. The selling point is that you could definitely say he had more upside than those cut. Rollins was a sleeping pill for them also. With Rollins down the numbers look better with another body. 

[Leader]

 

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

I have to wonder if the odd offensive roster distribution in part reflects the changes in the offensive playbook for this year.  With Philbin's return, are the moving toward spreading out the defense and going to quicker shorter plays with yards after catch potential, with less max protection calls that take longer to develop?  Will we see more two tight end sets rather than using a fullback as the extra blocker?

I am really curious to see what roster moves occur over the next 24 to 48 hours, and what implications those have for scheme on Sunday night.  Aaron Rodgers with a new scheme and thus all unscouted looks could be a difficult situation for the Bears.

[Cheech]

8 minutes ago, Ragnar Danneskjold said:

I have to wonder if the odd offensive roster distribution in part reflects the changes in the offensive playbook for this year.  With Philbin's return, are the moving toward spreading out the defense and going to quicker shorter plays with yards after catch potential, with less max protection calls that take longer to develop?  Will we see more two tight end sets rather than using a fullback as the extra blocker?

I am really curious to see what roster moves occur over the next 24 to 48 hours, and what implications those have for scheme on Sunday night.  Aaron Rodgers with a new scheme and thus all unscouted looks could be a difficult situation for the Bears.

I do hope so.  While we have two of the best at OT,  we all saw what happened when one or both went down.  Some of the young guys really have YAC potential, too.

It sounds like Rip will be back by the end of the week but he had such a limited role in the preseason that I can see the FB phased out soon.  

[craig]

Thanks much, cheech and palmy, for your thoughts on the four less familiar roster guys.  Each seems to have some long-term possibilities. 

From my perspective, it's hard to imagine that Light or Crawford would have possibly gotten claimed?  In past, I've assumed that part of the strategy was evaluating risk; you might waive a "safe" cut to PS, even if perhaps you valued the guy a little more than somebody else that you kept.  So keeping at least a couple of seemingly "safe" guys is interesting:

• A reflection that back of roster is pretty weak?  Anybody in the 50-60 range is pretty safe?
• Perhaps a simplification; rather than bothering to speculate what other scouts might see or teams might want or need, just keep it simple.  Evaluate which guys have best chance to help the Packers long-term, and don't mess around.  Keep those guys regardless. 

Seems to me that overall, they just went with the talent.  Without Jones, aren't 3 NFL-worthy RB.  Fine, stick with two.  Between Davis as return-specialist and 7 NFL-worthy WR, keep them all.  If you don't have many NFL-worthy OLB, don't force it; keep what you've got.  

Think the same with ILB.  Can say you want more ILB.  But with the defensive flexibility, even *if* you'd kept Martini, for example, I doubt he'd have actually gotten used.  I suspect that rather than using Martini, they'd likely be using a safety (Jones) in the box, or using Matthews inside with Perry and Gilbert outside?

[craig]

1 hour ago, Leader said:

 

That's pretty amazing.  Over 40% turnover.  And that's with very little injury-necessitated turnover.  

[Reaper]

1 minute ago, craig said:

That's pretty amazing.  Over 40% turnover.  And that's with very little injury-necessitated turnover.  

Wow I had no idea the turnover was that much; I guess Pettine likes a different type of player on D? and of course the recievers make a big part of that

[Beast]

1 hour ago, Leader said:

 

I think they're wrongly eliminating the suspensed players and it should be 30 outta 54 adding the suspensed position

But not surprising when you lose guys in FA, draft a lot of guys and then try to keep them all.

[Hands]

Alex Light, Raven Green, and Herb Waters all have the athletic skills for their position. They all need development and doubted they would have stayed on the PS. Light has been mentioned several times as a very good OT prospect. The selection of keeping Crawford at LB is a little surprising since Donnerson best fits the pattern of Light, Green and Waters.

From the offensive side of the team, Philbin must have some really explosive ideas for the passing game. Might see 5 wideouts going long on one play and bring out three fresh receivers and go long on the next. I keep thinking back to 2011 and how he kept pressure on opposing team's defense with the passing game. 

[Cheech]

41 minutes ago, Reaper said:

Wow I had no idea the turnover was that much; I guess Pettine likes a different type of player on D? and of course the recievers make a big part of that

I want to say it is 30% most years.  There are some good articles out there today about the poor state of the last 3 drafts.  Thankfully Ted finally dipped into UFA for role players and we can see Gute doing the same.  

This team needs to have a few years of 3 - 5 "hits" per draft to get back to where it needs to be.  

Fingers crossed, CB and WR could be the first position groups to get the much needed influx of young talent.  

Next year OL and EDGE will need to be a priority.  Maybe even safety.

[Packerraymond]

James Crawford over Thomas is baffling to me.

Also Alex Light was absolutely miserable at LT vs KC. Not sure what he showed to be kept but it wasn't on the field Thursday. Pankey was clearly better to me.

[n8ghee]

Here’s my two cents on the roster cuts:

 

The roster construction, in general, seems a bit wonky. But, from a talent standpoint, I’m not upset about any of the cuts.

 

surprised? Perhaps...

 

I was probably most surprised by Marwin Evans. I thought he would be very valuable on STs and I still liked his ceiling as a sub package player on D/possible reserve...but he got cut for someone, Raven Greene, who could possibly be that Sub Package player out of the gate. So I understand it.

 

I was completely in aggreance about Amichia and Biegel and Yancey, three recent mid round draft picks.

Amichia- I never noticed Amichia in a positive light in two preseasons

Yancey-I appreciated Yancey and his time working to improve. He just didn’t bring the type of slot presence perhaps the coaches were hoping for this preseason.

Biegel- I didn’t like Biegels college tape from an athletic standpoint, I didn’t see him being able to beat NFL players...and he failed miserably at doing so this preseason. 

 

I am am now excited to watch Crawford and Light. I didn’t watch any game tape or anything on these two players from college or the preseason...so now I’ll  have to do some homework. I never even gave these two guys a legitimate chance to make the squad. Sorry fellas.

 

Theres gotta be a move or two coming before week one...it’d be pretty surprising to go into week 1 with 12 pass catching options and only 2 running options.

 

 

[palmy50]

12 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

James Crawford over Thomas is baffling to me.

Also Alex Light was absolutely miserable at LT vs KC. Not sure what he showed to be kept but it wasn't on the field Thursday. Pankey was clearly better to me.

Can't really say I have an issue with any of it really. I don't think they cut any premium talents/prospects. If they want to work with Crawford or Light I'm more than ok with it and can understand their point. The injuries made some of this particular 53 work a little better on paper also.

If I had a pause for concern it's Bell over Pankey and Bradley over Triner. I think a GM with a little more time in the chair/rope wouldn't have made those moves. He paid Bell and drafted Bradley though.....