craig Posted July 22, 2023 Share Posted July 22, 2023 DuBose's agent probably figures a spot on the 69-man would be a good outcome. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig Posted July 22, 2023 Share Posted July 22, 2023 I'm pleased with the PUP/non-football-injury lists. With a 90-man roster, having only 6 guys is really good. No bad surprises. Often some guys show up on the list that we didn't know about, after some OTA or other off-season injury, or following some surgery that we didn't know about, or after injury rehab that we hoped would be complete. No bad surprises. DuBose, Cotton, Hanson, McDonald, all due respect to those men, but if you're going to have 4 guys unready that we didn't know about, it's nice to have them all back-of-90-roster guys. Stokes is the only one I was disappointed about. Some of the reports back in May and June had been favorable, so I'd hoped that in the time since, that he'd be progressed enough to be fully ready to go. Think getting him back is really important. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Guy Posted July 22, 2023 Share Posted July 22, 2023 1 hour ago, craig said: I'm pleased with the PUP/non-football-injury lists. With a 90-man roster, having only 6 guys is really good. No bad surprises. Often some guys show up on the list that we didn't know about, after some OTA or other off-season injury, or following some surgery that we didn't know about, or after injury rehab that we hoped would be complete. No bad surprises. DuBose, Cotton, Hanson, McDonald, all due respect to those men, but if you're going to have 4 guys unready that we didn't know about, it's nice to have them all back-of-90-roster guys. Stokes is the only one I was disappointed about. Some of the reports back in May and June had been favorable, so I'd hoped that in the time since, that he'd be progressed enough to be fully ready to go. Think getting him back is really important. I am hopeful the Stokes deal is the Packers being overly cautious as usual with injuries. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packfanfb Posted July 22, 2023 Share Posted July 22, 2023 58 minutes ago, Old Guy said: I am hopeful the Stokes deal is the Packers being overly cautious as usual with injuries. Seems to be that way. Watched a video recently of Stokes working out with Pitts and he was doing a full on workout, running, cutting, etc. Wasn't limited in the slightest from what you could see. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packfanfb Posted July 22, 2023 Share Posted July 22, 2023 2 hours ago, craig said: DuBose's agent probably figures a spot on the 69-man would be a good outcome. Yea if Dubose misses more than a week, you can probably completely write him off for a shot at the 53. Opens the door even wider for Melton and Heath. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Refugee Posted July 22, 2023 Share Posted July 22, 2023 9 minutes ago, packfanfb said: Yea if Dubose misses more than a week, you can probably completely write him off for a shot at the 53. Opens the door even wider for Melton and Heath. WR is going to be green this year with seasoned veterans like Watson and Doubs. I still think keeping 6 is a stretch with at least 4 TEs and always needing a backup plan at RB3/4. The new PS rules will help with that but we might see some of our fringe WR stashed there, as well. Interesting balancing act of not cutting a developmental guy too early but also keeping enough guys on deck who can play at least competently right now. I guess if it all falls apart this year but we get a good eval on QB1 and some other young guys it will still have a silver lining, but I watch the games in hopes of victory and losing stinks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig Posted July 22, 2023 Share Posted July 22, 2023 I don't feel like 6th WR makes much difference. Last year I don't think any games really hinged on Toure, Amari, or Winfree. *IF* the Packers hypothetically like some depth guy so much that they want to keep a 6th WR as a developmental guy, great! That's what back-of-roster spots are for in a D+D organization, and I'd love it if somebody really pops up. But I don't really imagine the Packers W-L this year is going to hinge on whether they keep any of DuBose, Melton, or Heath as the 6th WR, or Bonds or Cotton or Watts. I don't think any of those 6 guys are getting claimed. So whether on the 53 or PS makes no difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norm Posted July 22, 2023 Share Posted July 22, 2023 1 hour ago, craig said: I don't feel like 6th WR makes much difference. It never does, yet every year I also fall into the trap of being obsessed with it. lol 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PossibleCabbage Posted July 22, 2023 Share Posted July 22, 2023 1 hour ago, Norm said: It never does, yet every year I also fall into the trap of being obsessed with it. lol I mean, I have to assume Jeff Janis was the 6th WR at least one season, and he was a very good special teams player. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zycho32 Posted July 22, 2023 Share Posted July 22, 2023 3 minutes ago, PossibleCabbage said: I mean, I have to assume Jeff Janis was the 6th WR at least one season, and he was a very good special teams player. In 2015, briefly, whenever Ty Montogmery was active and participated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packfanfb Posted July 22, 2023 Share Posted July 22, 2023 (edited) Thank God. Hanson passed his physical. Crisis averted. Edited July 22, 2023 by packfanfb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Refugee Posted July 23, 2023 Share Posted July 23, 2023 15 hours ago, packfanfb said: Thank God. Hanson passed his physical. Crisis averted. All joking aside, this probably helps us in preseason. You want the line of misfits to be as experienced as possible late in those games so you can get a fair look at everyone else. If your line is a complete shambles, nothing on offense will really work. He’ll probably be decent in that role. I also hope this is the year they trust the younger guys enough to move him to the PS or move on completely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikemike778 Posted July 23, 2023 Share Posted July 23, 2023 18 hours ago, craig said: I don't feel like 6th WR makes much difference. Last year I don't think any games really hinged on Toure, Amari, or Winfree. *IF* the Packers hypothetically like some depth guy so much that they want to keep a 6th WR as a developmental guy, great! That's what back-of-roster spots are for in a D+D organization, and I'd love it if somebody really pops up. But I don't really imagine the Packers W-L this year is going to hinge on whether they keep any of DuBose, Melton, or Heath as the 6th WR, or Bonds or Cotton or Watts. I don't think any of those 6 guys are getting claimed. So whether on the 53 or PS makes no difference. How many of these back-end of the roster stashes amount to something significant ? As in not just ST or depth. Can't think of many of the top of my head. Nijman is the obvious recent one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R T Posted July 23, 2023 Share Posted July 23, 2023 15 minutes ago, mikemike778 said: How many of these back-end of the roster stashes amount to something significant ? As in not just ST or depth. Can't think of many of the top of my head. Nijman is the obvious recent one. Guess it depends on what you call 'something significant'. Tonyan, Lane Taylor, Lazard, Shields, Tramon Williams, Lucas Patrick. Players like Pennel, Zombo, James Starks probably fit here also, along with Nijman. If you are thinking they need to be Pro Bowlers, you are probably not very realistic about the process. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatJerkDave Posted July 23, 2023 Share Posted July 23, 2023 I think you guys are being a little hypercritical of Hanson. No, I don't want him starting. But as a preseason second string center? He should be just fine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.