Damarious Randall partly blaming others for struggles

[Deleted member 6794]

After reading this story in the Press Gazette I'm disappointed in him not taking full responsibility for his struggles as well as even talking about being in perfect coverage against Jones on the touchdown allowed and overall playing pretty well against the Lions.

I think the Packers second year cornerback needs to get a reality check from Joe Whitt.

http://www.packersnews.com/story/sp...resilient-randall-ready-bounce-back/91479202/

 

[yooperpackfan]

Excuses, excuses.
Let's hope he bounces back like he says he will.
I hope he has a plan to get in Beckhams head like the Vikings did.

 

[Ogsponge]

Great, him and obj will be the perfect match up next week. Although I am sure we will let obj light us up for 200 yards and a couple of touchdowns.

 

[HardRightEdge]

At least he's embracing the perimeter corner mentality: high self esteem and a short memory. Maybe he's a corner and not a safety after all.

One may recall Shields coming under public criticism from a coach for lousy tackling. I can't recall which coach or precisely when, but I think it was after 2011 or 2012. Shields shot back with "there's nothing wrong with my tackling" when the problem was obvious. Of course, his tackling did improve.

Public admissions of guilt are limited and backhanded in the perimeter corner makeup.

In this case, the backhanded admissions are that he has not taken less-than-Pro-Bowl receivers seriously enough and the bum thumb took him out of press coverage. In other words, it's a statement to the affect, "when I'm on my game nobody beats me".

So, I would not put much emphasis on these quotes. The proof is in the putting...he needs to clean up what the coaches have identified in this bye week even if he's not going to advertise what that might be to the league.

He continues to have trouble with flip/run/track on the deep balls when the receiver gets off clean. It could be a matter of overplaying the jump on the short route. This is a guy who has not played much cornerback, being a converted college safety. It could take a little more time for the light to go on.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

This is a guy who has not played much cornerback, being a converted college safety. It could take a little more time for the light to go on.

Well, there's a lot of room between the light to go on and allowing two mediocre receivers to torch him for more than 180 receiving yards in consecutive weeks though.

 

[Mondio]

The kid has all the talent he needs. He needs to learn to trust the defense, and his technique and play every down. He needs to know to use his athleticism, but not think it's going to cover up a lack of technique or playing within the system. If he gets that, I think we have a great one. if not, well, I'd rather he just did.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Well, there's a lot of room between the light to go on and allowing two mediocre receivers to torch him for more than 180 receiving yards in consecutive weeks though.

No question, except the part about "mediocre receivers". Those are pretty good players. The difference between your run of the mill 1,000 yd. receiver, if one were to use that phrase, and an All Pro comes down to about 1 or 2 plays per game, and that's what Randall is giving away.

I mentioned him looking like he's overplaying the short routes, looking to jump the ball. If I were to isolate one specific problem, I'd say his eyes are on the QB too long after the snap looking for that jump. He would have fit right in with the 2011 secondary. He's reading the QB's eyes when he should be focused on the receiver. He needs to master coverage techniques first, go around the league a couple of times, and do the film study before he attempts advanced techniques.

Davis observed that Randall looked awfully relaxed in his pre-snap set on the stumbling TD giveaway. It looks like he's trying to sucker an inside option throw he can close on. If that's the case, he needs to realize he's not Charles Woodson after 10 years in the league.

 

[HardRightEdge]

The kid has all the talent he needs. He needs to learn to trust the defense, and his technique and play every down. He needs to know to use his athleticism, but not think it's going to cover up a lack of technique or playing within the system. If he gets that, I think we have a great one. if not, well, I'd rather he just did.

It has nothing to do with the system because when you play one-on-one on the island (which is where Randall's problems occur) there is no system. It's just you against him. What you need to know is the other team's system and what that guy and his QB can and can't do.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

No question, except the part about "mediocre receivers". Those are pretty good players. The difference between your run of the mill 1,000 yd. receiver, if one were to use that phrase, and an All Pro comes down to about 1 or 2 plays per game, and that's what Randall is giving away.

While I might have exaggerated a bit I don't consider Diggs or Jones elite receivers either.

 

[C-Lee]

I like the confidence. Prove it Sunday night, Randall.

 

[HardRightEdge]

While I might have exaggerated a bit I don't consider Diggs or Jones elite receivers either.

No, they are not. But you cannot roll out of bed thinking I'll just out play the guy on athleticism and instincts in this league. I believe Randall was right in thinking he may not have studied his opponents as closely as he should. At this point, I wouldn't jump to any conclusions beyond growing pains, even if I do think his natural position is free safety.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

But you cannot roll out of bed thinking I'll just out play the guy on athleticism and instincts in this league.

Absolutely agreed and another reason to be disappointed about Randall because of him not putting enough effort into covering receivers he doesn't consider to be Pro Bowl worthy.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Absolutely agreed and another reason to be disappointed about Randall because of him not putting enough effort into covering receivers he doesn't consider to be Pro Bowl worthy.

Lesson learned, one would hope.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Reminds me a bit of Terrell Buckley and how he responded to his up and down performances in Green Bay. The part that has me the most concerned with Randall and the rest of the Packers secondary is comparing what each team we have faced has done against other opponents. Both Diggs and Jones are good wide receivers, but Randall and Co. made them both look like future Hall of Famers, while other defenses have found a way to contain them for the most part. After 3 games, the Packers have given up an average of 3o7 yards passing/game (29th in NFL). This against some pretty average offenses.

While our run defense continues to impress, our secondary needs to get a lot better. If they don't, average WR's and QB's are going to continue to move down the field and not even have to worry about running the ball. While the Giants will be a stiff test for our secondary, we catch a break the following 2 weeks by going up against the Cowboys and Bears. However, if things in the secondary don't improve, I don't even want to know what will happen at the end of October when the Packers go into Atlanta and have to face Matt Ryan and Julio Jones.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Lesson learned, one would hope.

I prefer to wait until the proof is in the putting before declaring Randall has learned the lesson.

 

[HardRightEdge]

I prefer to wait until the proof is in the putting before declaring Randall has learned the lesson.

Of course. But it is entirely premature to bash the guy.

 

[rodell330]

His second year at corner. Safety and corner are two different beast. I think he can be a good player but he's got to play wayyyy better. Id actually feel more comfortable with Hyde at corner vs him.

 

[HardRightEdge]

His second year at corner. Safety and corner are two different beast. I think he can be a good player but he's got to play wayyyy better. Id actually feel more comfortable with Hyde at corner vs him.

Hyde is not athletically adequate for perimeter corner. Nickel/strong safety are where he plays and where he should play.

 

[rodell330]

Hyde is not athletically adequate for perimeter corner. Nickel/strong safety are where he plays and where he should play.

Disagree. The guy played corner in college, can play EVERY position in the secondary, and returns punts for goodness sakes. Id hardly call that not "athletic" enough to play in the perimeter.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Disagree. The guy played corner in college, can play EVERY position in the secondary, and returns punts for goodness sakes. Id hardly call that not "athletic" enough to play in the perimeter.

He's a little lacking in speed, length and technique. You can come up a little short on one or the other, but not all 3.

 

[El Guapo]

First of all, great post about Randall. I think that he's a typical talented pro athlete right now. He got a taste of early success and then figured that he could coast on his natural skills and athletics. Now he's realizing that the mental and student side of being a pro athlete is equally important. The test comes with how he responds. Some guys aren't smart enough to become students of their craft. Let's hope that Randall is.

I prefer to wait until the proof is in the putting before declaring Randall has learned the lesson.

Now, this caught me off guard so I did some research. Something about "proof is in the putting" seemed off so I looked it up. I'm posting the excerpt below as a public service message:

At first glance, “the proof is in the pudding” seems thoroughly mysterious. What proof, in what pudding? Does this have anything to do with Colonel Mustard in the study with a candlestick? But the key to the mystery lies in the fact that “the proof is in the pudding” is actually a mangled form of the original phrase, which was “the proof of the pudding is in the eating.” A dish may have been made from a good recipe with fresh ingredients and look delicious, but you can really only judge it by putting it in your mouth. The actual taste is the only true criterion of success.

“The proof of the pudding is in the eating” is a very old phrase, dating back to at least 1605, and “proof” in the adage is an antiquated use of the word in the sense of “test” (also found in “printer’s proof,” a preliminary “test” copy of a book printed to check for errors, etc., before commencing a large print run).

Just how and why “the proof of the pudding is in the eating” was shortened to the semi-nonsensical “the proof is in the pudding” remains a mystery, but it’s worth noting that most people now interpret “proof” in the sense of “conclusive evidence.” That’s probably just as well, since “the test is in the pudding” would make, if possible, even less sense. In any case, “the proof is in the pudding” is hardly the only English idiom that doesn’t make any sense if read literally, and it certainly serves a useful purpose, even if it does sound like a cryptic clue from a Sherlock Holmes story.

http://www.word-detective.com/2008/12/the-proof-is-in-the-pudding/

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Now, this caught me off guard so I did some research. Something about "proof is in the putting" seemed off so I looked it up. I'm posting the excerpt below as a public service message:

http://www.word-detective.com/2008/12/the-proof-is-in-the-pudding/

LOL.....I did the exact same thing!!

http://actioncoachchuckkocher.com/the-proof-is-not-in-the-pudding/

Personally, I have been a "pudding" guy forever......guess I need to start putting my knowledge to use.

 

[HardRightEdge]

First of all, great post about Randall. I think that he's a typical talented pro athlete right now. He got a taste of early success and then figured that he could coast on his natural skills and athletics. Now he's realizing that the mental and student side of being a pro athlete is equally important. The test comes with how he responds. Some guys aren't smart enough to become students of their craft. Let's hope that Randall is.

Now, this caught me off guard so I did some research. Something about "proof is in the putting" seemed off so I looked it up. I'm posting the excerpt below as a public service message:

http://www.word-detective.com/2008/12/the-proof-is-in-the-pudding/

"The proof of the pudding is in the eating" is the common usage. I prefer the less common "proof is in the putting", as in the "putting forth", which actually makes a lot more sense than the truncated "proof is in the pudding".

While I too like pudding, industrial chocolate out of that gallon can being a favorite, I stand by my usage.

Of course, this is a recycled debate I had some while back with the seemingly dearly departed TJV.

 

[PackerFanLV]

Is it true Randall left practice cause his thumb and he might not play Sunday? Or is he scared to give obj 200 yards? Capers the kid is asking for help in a manly way.

 

[C-Lee]

This is actually a huge opportunity for Damarious. He seems to be a bit of trash talker and he could rattle OBJ's cage, which seems to be very easy these days. Really hope this kid is on a mission Sunday night.