53 man roster for 2022

gopkrs

Cheesehead
Joined
May 12, 2014
Messages
3,892
Reaction score
533
Just wanted to point out that on that last holding/PI call, King was beaten badly. Guess it would have been better to let the play play out but looked like a first down in any case...to me.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
27,216
Reaction score
4,930
Location
Madison, WI
He’s better than all 3 of those examples imo.
For sure. Rollins and Jones are no longer playing and Jackson hasn't played a down since he was a Packer. I see the Cardinals just signed him to their 90. Glad they didn't sign King.
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
3,701
Reaction score
559
As long as he doesn’t let a returner get past him he’s a pretty good downhill tackler/disruptive. Once the the ball Carrier gets past him he’s screwed. He’d be an upgrade in ST imo because he is good laterally and at diagnosing plays that are in front of him, Which is largely what ST is all about. I agree though, he’d absolutely be valuable at 4th CB, just not $5M valuable
Totally agree. And even though some fans may not like him, they're not gonna notice when he's in the game anyway. As Poker noted, he's better than Rollins, Jackson, and Josh Jones. A lot better IMO. I don't really care if they keep him or replace him with someone who is at least as good. That probably means he stays and that's fine. My guess is he'll settle for around $3 ml/year. Maybe Bisaccia can get something extra out of him on special teams.

Nobody's expecting him to start. If he can give the other guys some rest, and hold his own on the field, resign him.
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
3,701
Reaction score
559
For sure. Rollins and Jones are no longer playing and Jackson hasn't played a down since he was a Packer. I see the Cardinals just signed him to their 90. Glad they didn't sign King.
King is way better than those three. I think the sticking point is money (what's new?). Give him $3 mil and call it a day.
 

Schultz

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 8, 2021
Messages
1,185
Reaction score
530
As evidence of your post, 2 plays that were arguably in the top 5 most influential (or costly) in our playoff losses were Defensive.
The Aaron Jones fumble against Tampa and the Marcedes Lewis fumble against San Fran. Those plays took the wind from our Offenses sails on what were promising drives. I’ve noticed that colder weather makes the ball more slippery. That needs to be a focus of our Receivers if we go postseason.
2 hands securely on the ball, even if it costs us a few yards after catch.

You’ve got to have a balance on O and D, but if I had to choose? I’d rather a Defense that is stifling and can create turnovers. That was our 2010 Defense. An area I’ve noticed we can do a better job is in creating fumbles. Woodson literally had an art of punching the ball as he wrapped the player up. We need to put more emphasis there. (E.g, When Woodson went down, Greene challenged CM3 to execute that role and on the very next play he pulled a Woodson) There are several Defenses that obviously put lots of time into those drills and it’s apparent.

I’m curious at which newer Roster additions will bring that critical “turnover flavor” to the Defensive dinner table. If we pair a turnover D machine with a low turnover O? Expect lots of Wins
I see your point but my memory of the Aaron Jones fumble was that it gave Tampa the ball in our red zone. Hardly yet a promising drive. I was more disappointed in Jones in the SF game. With time running out in the half Rodgers hit him with a perfect wheel route pass that led to the blocked FG. My issue was that after Jones caught the ball he made a cut inside. He should have run as fast and as far as he could along the sideline making sure he got tackled out of bounds gaining a few more yards and stopping the clock. IMO the play calling would most likely been different in that situation. Again no guarantees, but.....................
 
Last edited:

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
3,701
Reaction score
559
I see your point but my memory of the Aaron Jones fumble was that it gave Tampa the ball in our red zone. Hardly yet a promising drive. I was more disappointed in Jones in the SF game. With time running out in the half Rodgers hit him with a perfect wheel route pass that led to the blocked FG. My issue was that after Jones caught the ball he made a cut inside. He should have run as fast and as far as he could along the sideline making sure he got tackled out of bounds gaining a few more yards and saving a time out. IMO the play calling would most likely been different in that situation. Again no guarantees, but.....................
When Jones fumbled Devon White recovered and returned to the GB 8 yard line. Brady threw a dime for a TD on the next play. When Rodgers had the ball later in the game, it was also with a first down at the TB 8. Rodgers threw 3 incompletions and MLF chose a field goal. Yeah King held and was penalized later, ending the game. But he wasn't alone among the reasons GB lost.
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2014
Messages
8,588
Reaction score
2,189
King is way better than those three. I think the sticking point is money (what's new?). Give him $3 mil and call it a day.
It would solve our depth at CB and give us a couple of viable #3-#4 CB’s in case of injury.

We could turn turn our attention to Safety. 2021 5th Rounder, Shawn Davis is an early, presumptive #3 Safety thus far, there’s a battle going on there at backup Safety.

The other position group that has a ? in depth is OLB. Although I believe if we can get a riser from either Enagbare or Garvin we should be fine. Garvin had positive play flashes and looked really good on specific plays. My hope is that he generates more consistency this season.
 
Last edited:

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
3,701
Reaction score
559
It would solve our depth at CB and give us a couple of viable #3-#4 CB’s in case of injury.

We could turn turn our attention to Safety. 2021 5th Rounder, Shawn Davis is an early, presumptive #3 Safety thus far, there’s a battle going on there at backup Safety.

The other position group that has a ? in depth is OLB. Although I believe if we can get a riser from either Enagbare or Garvin we should be fine. Garvin had positive play flashes and looked really good on specific plays. My hope is that he generates more consistency this season.
I guess the good news at OLB is we have two solid starters, and this allows the backups we have to develop behind the best. Overall, the team is now looking for depth. Why? Because the starters are pretty damned good.
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2014
Messages
8,588
Reaction score
2,189
I guess the good news at OLB is we have two solid starters, and this allows the backups we have to develop behind the best. Overall, the team is now looking for depth. Why? Because the starters are pretty damned good.
No question the Packers starting Lineup looks formidable.


As an example. If we somehow got starting level production from our #3 Edge we’d be in ultra good shape. What’s also interesting is they have already used Quay Walker in an Edge role. I think that in itself is a testament to how important that position is. He’s such a good Run Defender with elite lateral movement. If he showed signs of an upgrade as far as Pass Rusher in packages? Now that enables us to use Barnes/Campbell inside, thus giving us a capable #3 from the word go. If our #3 Edge in subpackages is Quay Walker? Things get very interesting because he can just stay on the field and move around like a Chess piece. Check. Check. Check
Checkmate
Its intriguing to me that they are using Quay in that Edge capacity this early in. He’s actually got the size/length of a small Edge player and they might think he good enough to do it all. His most likable feature is his humility. He continues to impress and has said “I will go wherever this team wants me to be for us be successful”
he’s a very focused and humble kid.
 
Last edited:

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
3,701
Reaction score
559
No question the Packers starting Lineup looks formidable.


As an example. If we somehow got starting level production from our #3 Edge we’d be in ultra good shape. What’s also interesting is they have already used Quay Walker in an Edge role. I think that in itself is a testament to how important that position is. He’s such a good Run Defender with elite lateral movement. If he showed signs of an upgrade as far as Pass Rusher in packages? Now that enables us to use Barnes/Campbell inside, thus giving us a capable #3 from the word go. If our #3 Edge in subpackages is Quay Walker? Things get very interesting because he can just stay on the field and move around like a Chess piece. Check. Check. Check
Checkmate
Its intriguing to me that they are using Quay in that Edge capacity this early in. He’s actually got the size/length of a small Edge player and they might think he good enough to do it all. His most likable feature is his humility. He continues to impress and has said “I will go wherever this team wants me to be for us be successful”
he’s a very focused and humble kid.
Humility. Nice to see from such a young guy and a first round pick. I agree they must have a lot of confidence in him if they're already looking at him at Edge. And Krys Barnes is a solid #3 ILB. And with the additions to the D-line - Reed, Wyatt - could be an interesting year. I'm sure Joe Barry likes the talent, and the versatility.
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2014
Messages
8,588
Reaction score
2,189
Humility. Nice to see from such a young guy and a first round pick. I agree they must have a lot of confidence in him if they're already looking at him at Edge. And Krys Barnes is a solid #3 ILB. And with the additions to the D-line - Reed, Wyatt - could be an interesting year. I'm sure Joe Barry likes the talent, and the versatility.
Its an all star cast, but we’ve seen how some movies rely on the cast to carry a substandard plot. It’s really up to Barry to utilize these pieces and get the best 11 on the field simultaneously. What I do like is Barry’s expertise in that LB area. This group should rival anything he’s ever seen and if he gets the most out of it we should be dangerous. Opponents are not accustomed to facing a great Defense in Green Bay. They usually have enough on their hands with #12.
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
3,701
Reaction score
559
Its an all star cast, but we’ve seen how some movies rely on the cast to carry a substandard plot. It’s really up to Barry to utilize these pieces and get the best 11 on the field simultaneously. What I do like is Barry’s expertise in that LB area. This group should rival anything he’s ever seen and if he gets the most out of it we should be dangerous. Opponents are not accustomed to facing a great Defense in Green Bay. They usually have enough on their hands with #12.
Yeah it's great to have a solid team on paper - it will be proven on the field. What amazes me is how defenses have changed since the Packers last won the SB. Across the board, everyone is bigger AND faster. So it's not unrealistic to expect an ILB to slide over and rush the QB, or drop into coverage on a WR or TE.

The only area I see where the Packers might improve a little is S. But that's a minor complaint - Amos and Savage are talented. That's a nice problem to have, if it's a problem at all.
 

texaspackerbacker

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 8, 2004
Messages
384
Reaction score
27
As long as he doesn’t let a returner get past him he’s a pretty good downhill tackler/disruptive. Once the the ball Carrier gets past him he’s screwed. He’d be an upgrade in ST imo because he is good laterally and at diagnosing plays that are in front of him, Which is largely what ST is all about. I agree though, he’d absolutely be valuable at 4th CB, just not $5M valuable
I always thought King was better suited to be a Safety - for the reasons you said on the positive side and because of his sad lack of speed to play Corner. And we could maybe use a Safety - but not for any more than the veterans minimum.
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
3,701
Reaction score
559
I always thought King was better suited to be a Safety - for the reasons you said on the positive side and because of his sad lack of speed to play Corner. And we could maybe use a Safety - but not for any more than the veterans minimum.
Interesting idea. I don't know if he has ever played S. GB could use depth behind Amos and Savage. I'm not convinced King is the guy for S - but he's nor nearly fast enough to be considered anything but an average CB. Given the starters, maybe that's all GB needs out of him.
 

captainWIMM

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Messages
27,376
Reaction score
2,279
We probably disagree on this - I want him playing somewhere else. Some players, fairly or not, get a bad reputation with their teams. This is subjective stuff. He just has a lot of bad mojo associated with him. His mistakes during the NFCCG against TB, and being unfairly associated with the Packers NOT taking TJ Watt. That's not King's fault. But fans associate him with it. If he goes somewhere where they don't know him (anywhere but GB), he can get a fresh start.

I don't think the Packers should care about any of that. If King presents the best option at #4 cornerback and it makes sense financially the team should bring him back.

As far as STs, I don't know if King played STs or how effective he was. He's certainly not a gunner. I'm sure he can help, but to what extent I'm not sure.

King played 303 snaps on defense last season but has been on the field for only 176 snaps on special teams in his five seasons with the team.
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
3,701
Reaction score
559
I don't think the Packers should care about any of that. If King presents the best option at #4 cornerback and it makes sense financially the team should bring him back.



King played 303 snaps on defense last season but has been on the field for only 176 snaps on special teams in his five seasons with the team.
He's not well-liked IMO and the Packers should care about that. But if he's the best option at the right price, sign him.
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2014
Messages
8,588
Reaction score
2,189
Yeah it's great to have a solid team on paper - it will be proven on the field. What amazes me is how defenses have changed since the Packers last won the SB. Across the board, everyone is bigger AND faster. So it's not unrealistic to expect an ILB to slide over and rush the QB, or drop into coverage on a WR or TE.

The only area I see where the Packers might improve a little is S. But that's a minor complaint - Amos and Savage are talented. That's a nice problem to have, if it's a problem at all.
I said that same thing. If our weakest link is Savage? We’re sitting pretty
 

captainWIMM

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Messages
27,376
Reaction score
2,279
He's not well-liked IMO and the Packers should care about that.

The fans might not like King but I'm quite sure the front office and coaching staff would be excited about having him as the #4 cornerback.
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
3,701
Reaction score
559
I said that same thing. If our weakest link is Savage? We’re sitting pretty
Amen to that. And now I remember someone else saying that. And Savage isn't a bad safety by any means. And he has Amos back there to help him.
 
Last edited:

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
3,701
Reaction score
559
The fans might not like King but I'm quite sure the front office and coaching staff would be excited about having him as the #4 cornerback.
That's probably true. I'm guessing the only reason he hasn't signed with GB or anywhere else is money. I think he made $5 mil last year and wants at least that much. He'll eventually sign but I think it will be for around $3 mil. Then again maybe he wants a lot more than $5 mil. Can't tell.

One other thing - a lot of people blame King for allowing the TD just before the end of the first half against TB in the NFCCG. If I remember the situation, the Bucs were near or just past midfield with no time outs and needed a successful sideline pass of 10 yards or so to set up a field goal. Maybe Brady spotted it, or Arians, but the Packers were defending for just such a play. So instead of stopping and breaking to the sideline, the receiver blew past King who was slowing down and trying to protect a much shorter pass.

Maybe King shares some blame, but I'd say credit Brady and Arians for calling a brilliant play. Sometimes teams just get outcoached.

I do blame King for the pass interference call on the Packers' last possession. He should have known that the pass was uncatchable. Instead he grabbed the receiver's jersey, an automatic penalty. I know things happen fast, and Brady doesn't make a lot of errant throws, but King wasn't paying attention on that play.
 
Last edited:

captainWIMM

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Messages
27,376
Reaction score
2,279
One other thing - a lot of people blame King for allowing the TD just before the end of the first half against TB in the NFCCG. If I remember the situation, the Bucs were near or just past midfield with no time outs and needed a successful sideline pass of 10 yards or so to set up a field goal. Maybe Brady spotted it, or Arians, but the Packers were defending for just such a play. So instead of stopping and breaking to the sideline, the receiver blew past King who was slowing down and trying to protect a much shorter pass.

Maybe King shares some blame, but I'd say credit Brady and Arians for calling a brilliant play. Sometimes teams just get outcoached.

I agree, Pettine deserves the majority of the blame for giving up that touchdown.

I do blame King for the pass interference call on the Packers' last possession. He should have known that the pass was uncatchable. Instead he grabbed the receiver's jersey, an automatic penalty. I know things happen fast, and Brady doesn't make a lot of errant throws, but King wasn't paying attention on that play.

There's no doubt King grabbed the Bucs' receiver on that play. Unfortunately the refs decided to call it despite not throwing a flag on similar plays all game long.
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
3,701
Reaction score
559
I agree, Pettine deserves the majority of the blame for giving up that touchdown.



There's no doubt King grabbed the Bucs' receiver on that play. Unfortunately the refs decided to call it despite not throwing a flag on similar plays all game long.
I think the only reason the officials called that penalty is that it was so obvious on replay. King grabbed the bottom of the receiver's jersey and it probably came out a foot. The officials were letting both sides play and were not calling pass interference. I think the officials actually stopped to talk about it and seemed to want to call no foul. It was just too obvious.

And that TD pass by Brady reminded me of the fake field goal the Seahags executed for a TD against GB in the NFCCG in 2014. A great coaching call and just caught em sleeping. That was a STs coaching error. I think the Packers were up 16-0 at the time. Someone should have been spying for a fake.
 
Last edited:

captainWIMM

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Messages
27,376
Reaction score
2,279
I think the only reason the officials called that penalty is that it was so obvious on replay. King grabbed the bottom of the receiver's jersey and it probably came out a foot. The officials were letting both sides play and were not calling pass interference. I think the officials actually stopped to talk about it and seemed to want to call no foul. It was just too obvious.

There's no doubt it was pass interference but I was upset that the refs called it to end the game when they didn't throw a flag on similar plays all game long.

And that TD pass by Brady reminded me of the fake field goal the Seahags executed for a TD against GB in the NFCCG in 2014. A great coaching call and just caught em sleeping. That was a STs coaching error. I think the Packers were up 16-0 at the time. Someone should have been spying for a fake.

Here's a link to an article explaining what happened on that play.

 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
3,701
Reaction score
559
There's no doubt it was pass interference but I was upset that the refs called it to end the game when they didn't throw a flag on similar plays all game long.



Here's a link to an article explaining what happened on that play.

Hey I feel the same way about that TB game. King's problem is he just got too much of the receiver's jersey. I know they were letting PI calls go, but don't recall any that were so obvious. But I also thought that pass was uncatchable, thrown way too far outside. Given that, the penalty should not have been called.

Thanks for the article on that nightmare of a game against Seattle. Brad Jones was the LB's name I couldn't recall. But again, it was good coaching. They noticed how aggressive Jones was and no one on the Packers coaching staff thought to put a spy out for a fake.

That loss I put squarely on MM for playing not to lose once they had a lead.
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2014
Messages
8,588
Reaction score
2,189
I know they were letting PI calls go, but don't recall any that were so obvious. But I also thought that pass was uncatchable, thrown way too far outside. Given that, the penalty should not have been called.
I agreed specifically on this part. I watched each of the other playoff contests and they more often let them play. I’m the playoffs that has sorta been the rule more recently
On a penalty, if not a game changing play (that play was clearly nowhere near him) They let them play.

Had that ball been within a couple feet of the Receivers hands or an egregious tackling a player etc.. ?? totally different story.
 

Members online

Top