ThatJerkDave Posted August 19 Share Posted August 19 43 minutes ago, CWood21 said: Just go for it on 4th down every time. I’m only half joking. If you convert 2 point attempts at a 50% rate, it evens out. Maybe we can save a roster spot simply by not having a FG kicker. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chili Posted August 19 Share Posted August 19 (edited) We knew prior to the draft that our OT depth wasn't all that. Previously we had Bakhtiari as the starting LT and also had Walker and Nijman as depth but they since have left which pushed Walker into the starting lineup by default. Everyone knew OT was a priority. We proceeded to draft Morgan with our 1st round pick. Great, fantastic. It showed the Packers understood our priorities. Then the coaches had other ideas and only played Morgan at RG throughout the off season. Why? We also lost Runyan so guard was another position needing depth and I thought we addressed that with Monk and invested more than usual to sign Jennings. At least I thought that was the plan. We should've been putting pressure on Walker and Tom by having Morgan compete with them. Competition sharpens iron yadda yadda...Doing so would also ensure we would have a viable depth. Also wouldn't the coaches want to know if Morgan is better than Walker? If he is then great, Walker can be the swing tackle instead. We're going to potentially give Walker a big contract without knowing first if Morgan is better!!??? If Morgan is better then we saved alot of money. So why the heck are we not doing that? Right now we're facing a scenario if one of them goes down Morgan is going to have to slot in there with very few offseason reps. I guarantee they will play Morgan because he's a 1st round pick and also there aren't any viable alternatives. The coaches has done a poor job getting him ready. If you're worried about RG then let Rhyan compete with Monk and Jennings. Playing Morgan there took reps away from Monk and Jennings. We need to get them ready too. Have we even seen Rhyan take any tackle reps either? I don't recall him doing so. He was a college tackle and could potentially backup Tom at RT if needed. Training him there would help add depth to our tackle spots. Instead we're seeing him mess around at centre, a position he has never played before. Again....why? Just give the reps to Monk. Now we're in a potential situation where Morgan is not ready to slot in at tackle and Monk/Jennings is not ready to slot in at guard, and Monk not ready to play centre cos we flaffing around with Rhyan there. Our centres are obvious, Myers, Monk and then Tom as last resort. No need to overthink this. Instead of having to rely on Dillard, Telfort or Jones at tackle we could be leaning on Morgan and Rhyan at tackle instead but they had very few reps. Edited August 19 by Chili Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Guy Posted August 19 Author Share Posted August 19 3 hours ago, Chili said: We knew prior to the draft that our OT depth wasn't all that. Previously we had Bakhtiari as the starting LT and also had Walker and Nijman as depth but they since have left which pushed Walker into the starting lineup by default. Everyone knew OT was a priority. We proceeded to draft Morgan with our 1st round pick. Great, fantastic. It showed the Packers understood our priorities. Then the coaches had other ideas and only played Morgan at RG throughout the off season. Why? We also lost Runyan so guard was another position needing depth and I thought we addressed that with Monk and invested more than usual to sign Jennings. At least I thought that was the plan. We should've been putting pressure on Walker and Tom by having Morgan compete with them. Competition sharpens iron yadda yadda...Doing so would also ensure we would have a viable depth. Also wouldn't the coaches want to know if Morgan is better than Walker? If he is then great, Walker can be the swing tackle instead. We're going to potentially give Walker a big contract without knowing first if Morgan is better!!??? If Morgan is better then we saved alot of money. So why the heck are we not doing that? Right now we're facing a scenario if one of them goes down Morgan is going to have to slot in there with very few offseason reps. I guarantee they will play Morgan because he's a 1st round pick and also there aren't any viable alternatives. The coaches has done a poor job getting him ready. If you're worried about RG then let Rhyan compete with Monk and Jennings. Playing Morgan there took reps away from Monk and Jennings. We need to get them ready too. Have we even seen Rhyan take any tackle reps either? I don't recall him doing so. He was a college tackle and could potentially backup Tom at RT if needed. Training him there would help add depth to our tackle spots. Instead we're seeing him mess around at centre, a position he has never played before. Again....why? Just give the reps to Monk. Now we're in a potential situation where Morgan is not ready to slot in at tackle and Monk/Jennings is not ready to slot in at guard, and Monk not ready to play centre cos we flaffing around with Rhyan there. Our centres are obvious, Myers, Monk and then Tom as last resort. No need to overthink this. Instead of having to rely on Dillard, Telfort or Jones at tackle we could be leaning on Morgan and Rhyan at tackle instead but they had very few reps. Summarizing, we have six NFL offensive lineman and Monk who shows some potential. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mazrimiv Posted August 19 Share Posted August 19 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packfanfb Posted August 19 Share Posted August 19 (edited) A few spots left with one week to go, but I'm pretty confident in the following 44 "locks" at this point: Offense (24) QB (2): Love (likely still Clifford v. Pratt to battle for No. 2) RB (3): Jacobs, Dillon, Wilson (Lloyd on IR) TE (3-4): Musgrave, Kraft, Sims (Packers could carry Davis as No. 4) WR (6): Watson, Doubs, Reed, Wicks (Melton, Heath and Dubose fighting for 2 spots) OL (9-10): Tom, Morgan, Myers, Jenkins, Walker, Rhyan, Dillard, Monk (probably one spot for a developmental OT, likely Telfort or Jones). Newman may hang on if they go heavy and carry 10. Defense (26) DT (5): Clark, Slaton, Wyatt, Brooks, Wooden DE (5): Gary, Smith, Van Ness, Enagbare (Cox v. Mosby for No. 5) ILB (5): Walker, McDuffie, Hopper (Might be Wilson v. Welch for a vet ST spot depending on Cooper injury) (Cooper is a lock but could be IR candidate if he doesn't return to practice this week) CB (6): Alexander, Stokes, Valentine, Nixon, Ballentine (Rochell v. King for No. 6) SAF (5): McKinney, Bullard, Williams, AJJ, Oladapo Special Teams (3) Carlson (yuck but I'm not expecting a bold move here) Whelan Orzech Edited August 19 by packfanfb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vegas492 Posted August 19 Share Posted August 19 After last night, I'm wondering if Taylor Heinike would be available as a cut or a late round trade candidate. He'd look better at backup than Pratt or Clifford. And those guys can get onto the PS if we really like one of them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tperk Posted August 19 Share Posted August 19 30 minutes ago, vegas492 said: After last night, I'm wondering if Taylor Heinike would be available as a cut or a late round trade candidate. He'd look better at backup than Pratt or Clifford. And those guys can get onto the PS if we really like one of them. Didn't Heinike grow up as a Packers fan too? I seem to remember hearing that at some point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Guy Posted August 19 Author Share Posted August 19 2 hours ago, packfanfb said: A few spots left with one week to go, but I'm pretty confident in the following 44 "locks" at this point: Offense (24) QB (2): Love (likely still Clifford v. Pratt to battle for No. 2) RB (3): Jacobs, Dillon, Wilson (Lloyd on IR) TE (3-4): Musgrave, Kraft, Sims (Packers could carry Davis as No. 4) WR (6): Watson, Doubs, Reed, Wicks (Melton, Heath and Dubose fighting for 2 spots) OL (9-10): Tom, Morgan, Myers, Jenkins, Walker, Rhyan, Dillard, Monk (probably one spot for a developmental OT, likely Telfort or Jones). Newman may hang on if they go heavy and carry 10. Defense (26) DT (5): Clark, Slaton, Wyatt, Brooks, Wooden DE (5): Gary, Smith, Van Ness, Enagbare (Cox v. Mosby for No. 5) ILB (5): Walker, McDuffie, Hopper (Might be Wilson v. Welch for a vet ST spot depending on Cooper injury) (Cooper is a lock but could be IR candidate if he doesn't return to practice this week) CB (6): Alexander, Stokes, Valentine, Nixon, Ballentine (Rochell v. King for No. 6) SAF (5): McKinney, Bullard, Williams, AJJ, Oladapo Special Teams (3) Carlson (yuck but I'm not expecting a bold move here) Whelan Orzech Pretty spot on. Last night opened up the opportunity for guys to step up and take a spot in the next week. We do not currently have 53 players that deserve roster spots based on last night. IMO, we could use a vet backup QB and offensive lineman. Flacco or Tannehill are the dream scenario at QB, but very highly unlikely we go get either. Clifford and Pratt are at best guys for the practice squad. It feels like Cooper has to be back this week or he goes to IR, same with Lloyd. I'd like an upgrade over Dillard, but that is a pipe dream. Not sure who is still available on the offensive line other than Bakh, who ain't coming back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zycho32 Posted August 19 Share Posted August 19 54 minutes ago, Tperk said: Didn't Heinike grow up as a Packers fan too? I seem to remember hearing that at some point. The broadcasters chirped about it when Washington came here a couple seasons back. He even got a QB Run into the End Zone that was called back(complete with an Enemy Team Lambeau Leap). I wouldn't be against it; in fact I was up for him possibly being acquired back when Love was still unproven and we were just getting rid of Rodgers, but even I have to admit he's probably only winning an extra one or two games in a full season compared to Clifford/Pratt, dawg in him or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
15412 Posted August 19 Share Posted August 19 (edited) 1 hour ago, vegas492 said: After last night, I'm wondering if Taylor Heinike would be available as a cut or a late round trade candidate. He'd look better at backup than Pratt or Clifford. And those guys can get onto the PS if we really like one of them. The answer is yes to Heinike. Why is Ryan Tannehill still available? He and his agent waiting for an injury to a starter? He sure has backup quality. Edited August 19 by 15412 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mazrimiv Posted August 19 Share Posted August 19 I assume Tannehill is available because he doesn't want a QB2 level contract, and those are the only offers he's seeing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Guy Posted August 19 Author Share Posted August 19 12 minutes ago, Mazrimiv said: I assume Tannehill is available because he doesn't want a QB2 level contract, and those are the only offers he's seeing. Even if somebody gets hurt, his deal will only be for 1 year and they go back to the original plan. Most teams with marginal quarterbacks have two guys like that to begin with. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Guy Posted August 19 Author Share Posted August 19 13 hours ago, CWood21 said: Just go for it on 4th down every time. I’m only half joking. 12 hours ago, ThatJerkDave said: If you convert 2 point attempts at a 50% rate, it evens out. Maybe we can save a roster spot simply by not having a FG kicker. I said it before, and I'll say it again. No kicking of fgs, no kick-offs and no punts other than a position player punting out of an offensive set, defense gets 2 points if you punt. Saves you 3 positions, you can remove the goal posts and let them have at it. After a score the opposing team gets the ball at the 20. If two-point conversion fails. the offense takes over at the spot of the conversion attempt. That is their penalty for allowing a score. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squire12 Posted August 19 Share Posted August 19 (edited) Supposedly Dillard has a 90ish pass blocking grade in preseason per pff Edited August 19 by squire12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mazrimiv Posted August 19 Share Posted August 19 14 minutes ago, squire12 said: Supposedly Dillard has a 90ish pass blocking grade in preseason per pff High PFF scores only matter if you like the player. 3 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.