IrishCheeseHead
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2006
- Messages
- 16
- Reaction score
- 0
Havent heard on him in a while now, whats his situation with suspension? would be great to have him this year for rotation with us most likely having a hybrid defense.
Johhny Jolly
- Thread starter IrishCheeseHead
- Start date
danielchile
Cheesehead
This guy is 6'3'' and 320 pounds. Our starting DL could be Pickett - Raji - Jenkins. IF Pickett falls down, Jolly could enter there. He has the size and stuff...but he needs to mature, c'mon. If I want players with legal problems, I would cheer for the Bengals.
OP
OP
IrishCheeseHead
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2006
- Messages
- 16
- Reaction score
- 0
yea thats what i was wondering whats up with his legal stuff? when is his court case and how long if he's suspended will be out for?
PackersRS
Cheesehead
Even being heavy and such, he, IMHO, never played well. Never is a bit too much. But he ain't good. Don't know if it was just maturity, or plain lack of capacity to be a good NFL player. Okay, maybe he can play at DE in the 3-4. But if he's suspended I will not care at all...
croxeye
Cheesehead
Jolly has produced a LOT of value for being a 6th round pick in the NFL.
umm I don't see the judges in Houston actually charging him with anything, because his friends where using the car and it could have easily been theirs, I mean Houston judges let people off for much BIGGER things than simply the possesion of codein, again I don't think he'll be charged with anything.
as for our starting lineup?
LE------NT------RE
Jolly Pickett Jenkins
and I see Raji rotating in as NT to keep them both fresh!
umm I don't see the judges in Houston actually charging him with anything, because his friends where using the car and it could have easily been theirs, I mean Houston judges let people off for much BIGGER things than simply the possesion of codein, again I don't think he'll be charged with anything.
as for our starting lineup?
LE------NT------RE
Jolly Pickett Jenkins
and I see Raji rotating in as NT to keep them both fresh!
PackersRS
Cheesehead
Produced a lot for being a 6th round pick?
Really don't want scrubs in the dline. it's okay for backup, but when you put okay players in the lineup, well, your D gets runned over, like last year...
People got mad Cole wasn't signed. Cole, Jolly, those kind of guys can make a roster, but not the starting lineup...
Really don't want scrubs in the dline. it's okay for backup, but when you put okay players in the lineup, well, your D gets runned over, like last year...
People got mad Cole wasn't signed. Cole, Jolly, those kind of guys can make a roster, but not the starting lineup...
croxeye
Cheesehead
PackersRS, when I look at Jolly, I look at a man who had quick feet, good hands, and adequete strength, personally I always saw him as a 3-4 DE and NOT as a 4-3 DT, a lot of times on running plays I would see him do an OK job to keep his OL to keep from the 2nd level, and if pickett was resting they would double HIM and keep Cole on the 1-on-1 (cole had NO penetration ability at all, he was JAB [Just Another Body])
when I saw jolly going against one-on-one blocking, he would do his job 100% of the time (holding him up to close up the running lane), when I saw him being double teamed, he looked like a Cole, in other words JAB again.
However as a 3-4 DE he won't face double's as much and will only have to focus on stopping the OT for the first two downs, and then maybe pulling a bull rush to the inside to set mathews loose on the blitz!!!
and just to touch the harrel topic, I haven't set any expectations for this guy, now don't take that as a bad thing, because if he had high expectations this season we would probably be dissapointed. I don't know how he will do in the 3-4 DE position (never got to see him play enough to determine if he could) lets just hope our defense does better in general.
when I saw jolly going against one-on-one blocking, he would do his job 100% of the time (holding him up to close up the running lane), when I saw him being double teamed, he looked like a Cole, in other words JAB again.
However as a 3-4 DE he won't face double's as much and will only have to focus on stopping the OT for the first two downs, and then maybe pulling a bull rush to the inside to set mathews loose on the blitz!!!
and just to touch the harrel topic, I haven't set any expectations for this guy, now don't take that as a bad thing, because if he had high expectations this season we would probably be dissapointed. I don't know how he will do in the 3-4 DE position (never got to see him play enough to determine if he could) lets just hope our defense does better in general.
PackersRS
Cheesehead
Yeah, maybe he can be a good DE, for the reasons you said, good hands and adequate strenght, because he lacked the elite streng and the pass rush ability to be a 4-3 DT. He did his job okay, but he never collapsed the pocket, and couldn't handle double teams. Hope he does well at DE. I'm not cheering against him, cause if he do well, he will help the Packers, and that's all I want. Just saying it's not much of a concern if he can't play, IMHO, at least for what he showed playing the 4-3...
OP
OP
IrishCheeseHead
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2006
- Messages
- 16
- Reaction score
- 0
I have to agree with Croxeye. He does suit the 3-4 alot more because of his size. On Harrell i just hope he can make it onto the field this year without hurting himself....
hubbabubba
Cheesehead
I've been following his situation a little, and to me the consensus is that even if the prosecutors decide to refile the case (which they have to do within 90 days putting us already in Nov), there is no way a trial will occur during the season at least. Sucks for him being under a legal shadow during a contract year...
For those of you know whats going on with his legal ****, or know law at all...
Here's my understanding of part of the case:
1. The bottle with the drugs was in the middle cup holder of the front seat.
2. One of his buddies who was in the car at the time made an affidavit that the drugs were his.
3. The prosecution dismissed this affidavit saying that the guy had a questionable/suspicious past, basically you can't trust what he is saying and that hes just sticking up for an old friend.
4. Jolly tested negative for codeine and every other drug on the screen except for pot (stupid, but forgivable).
Here's my question...how does the prosecution expect to prove that the bottle is Jolly's, which is the only debate right now, when it seems to me the only evidence they can provide is verbal testimony from the other passengers of car, yet they discredit these same passengers as being questionable? Fingerprints on the bottle could come from when he moved the bottle around, I do that all the time with other people's **** thats in my car. He had none of it in his system.
It seems to me like the pros is just trying to create a high profile example, but theres nothing actually there to go on.
For those of you know whats going on with his legal ****, or know law at all...
Here's my understanding of part of the case:
1. The bottle with the drugs was in the middle cup holder of the front seat.
2. One of his buddies who was in the car at the time made an affidavit that the drugs were his.
3. The prosecution dismissed this affidavit saying that the guy had a questionable/suspicious past, basically you can't trust what he is saying and that hes just sticking up for an old friend.
4. Jolly tested negative for codeine and every other drug on the screen except for pot (stupid, but forgivable).
Here's my question...how does the prosecution expect to prove that the bottle is Jolly's, which is the only debate right now, when it seems to me the only evidence they can provide is verbal testimony from the other passengers of car, yet they discredit these same passengers as being questionable? Fingerprints on the bottle could come from when he moved the bottle around, I do that all the time with other people's **** thats in my car. He had none of it in his system.
It seems to me like the pros is just trying to create a high profile example, but theres nothing actually there to go on.
Packerlifer
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2008
- Messages
- 1,782
- Reaction score
- 118
I believe Jolly has a court appearance this Friday.
In updating myself on the news; the case against Jolly has been dismissed, though it could be refiled.
If charges are refiled, the case won't come to trial before early next year. The league is unlikely to take action without charges or a conviction on a first time offender under the conduct policy.
So, bottom line, Jolly is in the Packers' defensive scheme for 2009.
In updating myself on the news; the case against Jolly has been dismissed, though it could be refiled.
If charges are refiled, the case won't come to trial before early next year. The league is unlikely to take action without charges or a conviction on a first time offender under the conduct policy.
So, bottom line, Jolly is in the Packers' defensive scheme for 2009.
Similar threads
