53 man roster for 2022

Krabs

I take offense to that sir.
Joined
Nov 10, 2020
Messages
1,478
Reaction score
881
I don't see a kicker on PS, if needed they can call him or other kickers at home.
I do. With 16 spots now why not? This way they stay in Green Bay and keep practicing with the team. Crosby is old and brittle. It would be nice having a guy ready to go.
 

buckthorn

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 10, 2021
Messages
63
Reaction score
46
Location
Black Earth, WI
I was very impressed by Goodson during the preseason (I've seen him in B1G play, too). He was well-coached at Iowa, has a good nose for the hole, hits it quickly, and runs downhill. He just looks good. I was also surprised to him him go undrafted. I've seen less of Taylor. I was a little surprised to see that they kept only two backs. I guess they're expecting that at least Goodson or Taylor will make it through wavers. But they're going to need a third back on game days, aren't they?
 

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
14,215
Reaction score
5,060
I was very impressed by Goodson during the preseason (I've seen him in B1G play, too). He was well-coached at Iowa, has a good nose for the hole, hits it quickly, and runs downhill. He just looks good. I was also surprised to him him go undrafted. I've seen less of Taylor. I was a little surprised to see that they kept only two backs. I guess they're expecting that at least Goodson or Taylor will make it through wavers. But they're going to need a third back on game days, aren't they?

Elevations from PS for gamedays is a function they can 100% utilize. They could also utilize Amari as their third back type similar to Tyler Ervin was on some gamedays.
 

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
14,215
Reaction score
5,060
The Packers would only save close to $6 million of cap space by moving on from Bakhtiari before March 20 next year. In addition that move would result in $23 million of dead money counting against the team's cap. I don't see that happening as long as he doesn't have to retire because of the injury.

While I don't necessarily see them cutting him if healthy, I think we all need to be prepared to possibly given everything about his injury and Jenkins needing paid the concept of him not here in 2023 is not a crazy thought. If Aaron stays I could also see Bakh and team work out a restructure too...making him here and getting Jenkins his due.
 

MadScientist

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 9, 2022
Messages
25
Reaction score
20
I was very impressed by Goodson during the preseason (I've seen him in B1G play, too). He was well-coached at Iowa, has a good nose for the hole, hits it quickly, and runs downhill. He just looks good. I was also surprised to him him go undrafted. I've seen less of Taylor. I was a little surprised to see that they kept only two backs. I guess they're expecting that at least Goodson or Taylor will make it through wavers. But they're going to need a third back on game days, aren't they?
The third back duties will be split between Amari Rodgers or a right end, depending on needs.
 

buckthorn

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 10, 2021
Messages
63
Reaction score
46
Location
Black Earth, WI
The third back duties will be split between Amari Rodgers or a right end, depending on needs.
Judging from past experience, that just sounds a little iffy to me, except for a few special plays (end arounds, jet sweeps, etc). I think you've got to have a third, bonafide running back available to run in between the tackles. I never liked the way the Packers believed that Montgomery and Cobb could serve as regular running backs.
 

GBkrzygrl

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 6, 2012
Messages
777
Reaction score
243
I’m thinking we see a good bit of Amari running the ball, jet sweeps, etc. This offense might have quite a few different looks, I’m wondering if we see Watson in the opener at all.
I forgot that they can use Rodgers in the RB spot if needed. I was rather surprised that they only kept 2 RBs.
 

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
14,215
Reaction score
5,060
Is Hill coming back at RB, is there clarification on his injury?

He is on the PUP list, zero need until removed to either release and see if he clears waivers or activate him to the 53 which would mean someone else released from 53.
 

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
14,215
Reaction score
5,060
I forgot that they can use Rodgers in the RB spot if needed. I was rather surprised that they only kept 2 RBs.

They can elevate a RB in regular season for games from the PS as well. The keeping of 2RBs was actually discussed by many of us as an option to not release players to waivers that may have been claimed
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
6,729
Reaction score
1,864
The tight end group isn't deep by any means. There's an argument to be made they actually lack a starting caliber player at all.



I'm not in favor of paying a running back a significant amount of money at all. While the Packers signed Jones to a reasonable deal compared to other players at the position I believe the money would have been better spent on other positions.



In my opinion there's reason to be concerned about the offensive line as long as Bakhtiari and Jenkins won't be able to play.



The Packers would only save close to $6 million of cap space by moving on from Bakhtiari before March 20 next year. In addition that move would result in $23 million of dead money counting against the team's cap. I don't see that happening as long as he doesn't have to retire because of the injury.



There's no reason for the Packers to keep two kickers on the active roster. Hopefully Ahmed will make it to the practice squad.



The Packers can elevate a running back from the practice squad without having to make room for him on the active roster for some games.
It's hard to quantify how much better the OL is with Bakhtiari and Jenkins active. I'd just say "a whole lot" better and leave it at that. But yeah, without them present, it changes the plays that can be called. Rodgers has to get the ball out faster, and that allows the opponent's secondary to "cheat".

I'm hopeful Jenkins will be back in the first month. The sooner the better.
 

milani

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 11, 2012
Messages
4,238
Reaction score
1,528
Think of the 53 man roster today as just a placeholder. With the 16 put on the PS in the next few days, (some of which might currently be on the 53), the few put on IR and the potential to sign other teams cuts, the Packers will have at least 3-4 RB's to choose from, to suit up for the Viking game.

I sure hope so. Even a team that is pass, pass, pass must throw TO the backs as well.
 

milani

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 11, 2012
Messages
4,238
Reaction score
1,528
I’m thinking H-back Josiah Deguara can fill that short term role if needed. We’ll obviously sign one to the PS squad also. If 2 went down before Hill is back they’d bring one up from PS the following week etc..

I believe Hill is expected to be back in that week 5 area also (fulfills PUP) I think he’s getting close now and he was our RB3/KR to start last season
There was the KC game in 2011. The only backs that day on the 45 that MM suited up were Ryan Grant and John Kuhn. And we lost our only game of the regular season. Back in the day when the NFL roster size was 40 on GameDay Lombardi had 4-5 in uniform.
I’m thinking H-back Josiah Deguara can fill that short term role if needed. We’ll obviously sign one to the PS squad also. If 2 went down before Hill is back they’d bring one up from PS the following week etc..

I believe Hill is expected to be back in that week 5 area also (fulfills PUP) I think he’s getting close now and he was our RB3/KR to start last season
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
While I don't necessarily see them cutting him if healthy, I think we all need to be prepared to possibly given everything about his injury and Jenkins needing paid the concept of him not here in 2023 is not a crazy thought. If Aaron stays I could also see Bakh and team work out a restructure too...making him here and getting Jenkins his due.

I agree it's not a crazy thought the Packers might consider moving on from Bakhtiari after this season, just wanted to point out that they wouldn't save a ton of cap space. In addition they need to make that decision before March 20 as he's due a $9.5 million roster bonus at that point.

It's hard to quantify how much better the OL is with Bakhtiari and Jenkins active. I'd just say "a whole lot" better and leave it at that. But yeah, without them present, it changes the plays that can be called. Rodgers has to get the ball out faster, and that allows the opponent's secondary to "cheat".

In addition the Packers might be forced to keep a tight end in pass protection as well, limiting Rodgers' targets.

no. just rehab work. not even sure he can sit in on the position meetings.

I don't know for a fact but am quite sure that players on injured lists are allowed to attend meetings.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
32,621
Reaction score
8,194
Location
Madison, WI
I sure hope so. Even a team that is pass, pass, pass must throw TO the backs as well.
With the signing of both Goodson and Taylor to the Practice Squad yesterday, the RB position and depth, is well represented. Also keep in mind that Kylin Hill, a guy that most liked as the #3 RB, is sitting on PUP and should be playing again at some point this season.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
32,621
Reaction score
8,194
Location
Madison, WI
I agree it's not a crazy thought the Packers might consider moving on from Bakhtiari after this season, just wanted to point out that they wouldn't save a ton of cap space. In addition they need to make that decision before March 20 as he's due a $9.5 million roster bonus at that point.
One would hope that if Bahk either continues to be unable to play or his quality of play drops off, he and the Packers can figure out a new deal that is more reflective of what kind of player he has become. Now they can't wave a magic wand and wipe out the already accrued dead cap, they could restructure to something much more team friendly, at a greatly reduced salary.
 

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
14,215
Reaction score
5,060
One would hope that if Bahk either continues to be unable to play or his quality of play drops off, he and the Packers can figure out a new deal that is more reflective of what kind of player he has become. Now they can't wave a magic wand and wipe out the already accrued dead cap, they could restructure to something much more team friendly, at a greatly reduced salary.

Capt may be able to assist more but honestly they'd have to use some serious void years to lesson his hit too much given the structure of guarantee and such in his no?
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
32,621
Reaction score
8,194
Location
Madison, WI
Capt may be able to assist more but honestly they'd have to use some serious void years to lesson his hit too much given the structure of guarantee and such in his no?
All depends on his level of play. Obviously, if he can't come back, he retires and I believe the Packers get some cap relief in that situation. If he can play, but is compelled to rework his contract to say a base salary of vet minimum, that wouldn't eliminate accrued dead cap that is still on the books, but could greatly reduce the total cap hit each year he plays.
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2014
Messages
14,492
Reaction score
5,827
Is Hill coming back at RB, is there clarification on his injury?
I haven’t seen much on him actually. He started on PUP and I recall seeing him several weeks ago doing some drills with the rehab group. I think maybe he’s just a few weeks behind some of the other initial injury group.

I’m just guessing but I think we’re being extra cautious with Hill, but seeing him out there moving pretty good is a good sign.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
One would hope that if Bahk either continues to be unable to play or his quality of play drops off, he and the Packers can figure out a new deal that is more reflective of what kind of player he has become. Now they can't wave a magic wand and wipe out the already accrued dead cap, they could restructure to something much more team friendly, at a greatly reduced salary.

Capt may be able to assist more but honestly they'd have to use some serious void years to lesson his hit too much given the structure of guarantee and such in his no?

Actually the Packers could significantly reduce Bakhtiari's cap hit for the 2023 and '24 season if he agrees to a pay cut as he's due a $6.7 million base salary and a $9.5 million roster bonus for next year as well as a base salary of $20.2 million for '24.

It's true that adding void years could reduce the cap as well but if he doesn't return to being an elite player I don't expect the Packers to keep him without a pay cut moving forward.

All depends on his level of play. Obviously, if he can't come back, he retires and I believe the Packers get some cap relief in that situation. If he can play, but is compelled to rework his contract to say a base salary of vet minimum, that wouldn't eliminate accrued dead cap that is still on the books, but could greatly reduce the total cap hit each year he plays.

While the Packers could try to recoup some of the money already having been paid to Bakhtiari if he needs to retire I don't think their chances of succeeding would be good.

In additio while he might be inclined to agree to a pay cut there's no reason to expect him to play for the veteran minimum either.
 

Members online

No members online now.
Top