1. Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!

    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers. You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Sign Up or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!
    Dismiss Notice

Did we make the right choice on Sutton?

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by DILLIGAFF, Jan 22, 2010.

  1. DILLIGAFF

    DILLIGAFF Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2009
    Messages:
    603
    Ratings:
    +4
    Hard to tell but if go to the Panthers web site and look at his stats, when he got a chance he performed well.www.panthers.com/team/roster/Tyrell-Sutton/

    THE PANTHERS UNEARTHED A GEM from the rabble of players released at September's roster deadline when they claimed Tyrell Sutton off waivers from the Green Bay Packers.

    A tailback by trade, the Northwestern product's value proved to be his versatility, as he worked on special teams, returned kickoffs, pitched in as a relief runner when Williams was injured and, for one memorable afternoon inside the Louisiana Superdome, started at fullback when Brad Hoover and Tony Fiammetta were injured and inactive.

    "We all laughed about it initially. How's the smallest guy in the room going to play fullback?" the 5-foot-8, 213-pounder said. "As the week went on, we took it a lot more seriously."

    Serious enough that Sutton carried the football on the first snap of his first regular season game, in one moment crossing off most of the "firsts" of his career - start, snap, game and carry (for nine yards), not to mention being at a new position.

    "It wasn't so much being out of position. The only thing that was out of position was the title," Sutton said a few days after the starting assignment. "Playing fullback is basically the same as playing running back. The only difference is that you're blocking all the time."

    I thought Wynn would have had a better year than he did, yet I was upset when they cut Sutton in favor of the 3 full backs. I thought at the time he was worth a roster spot and would make a good change of pace running back giving Grant a breather.

    I think Sutton has good field of vision which works well with our zone blocking scheme. The biggest knock on Sutton was his blocking, or was more of a question mark due to his size. He was able to play full back as a rookie.

    If I recall the reasons given that Sutton had not earned a roster spot were his lack of special teams ability and question marks on his blocking. The Pack ends up at the bootom of the league in special teams and Sutton was able to play full back for a game and did it well and played on special teams.
     
  2. PackersRS

    PackersRS Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2008
    Messages:
    8,471
    Ratings:
    +980
    I wanted us to keep Sutton, so my vote is no.

    Though I don't know if he would be playing with Ahmad Green and Brandon Jackson, who did a terrific job late in the season as a 3rd down back, really good. He's great at picking up the blitz, and is a nice catcher out of the backfield, specially in screens.

    I think, for next year, if we can add a speedy guy, we'll be complete at running back. We got a nice power runner, when he's 100%, and a very good 3rd down back.
     
  3. DILLIGAFF

    DILLIGAFF Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2009
    Messages:
    603
    Ratings:
    +4
    I guess I am not seeing it with Jackson, I wish he was a more complete player. When he is in the game we look so predictable. A number of times I wished Green was used more, he made a number of big blocks and has more of a running threat.

    With the way we use Jackson, we could just as well us a full back in those situations. Maybe I am missing something?
     
  4. NYPacker

    NYPacker Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2009
    Messages:
    1,582
    Ratings:
    +38
    Well the packers did try to keep sutton by offering him a practice squad spot but all in all I didn't like any of the decisions made after the preseason. In fact I think our preseason roster would have been in the superbowl right now. Here are the decisions that I thought was completely unacceptable:

    1) Cutting Tyrell Sutton: Exactly as dilligaff said, would have been nice to keep him.
    2) Cutting Ruvell Martin: Look I understand the guy was nothing but a 4th or 5th string receiver but is that so bad? When Nelson and Driver where out for one game we started to panic with who our slot receiver would be. Well there WAS your answer.
    3) Cutting Anthony Smith: Like Charles Woodson said "Why would you cut a guy that helps your new defense?"
    4) Trading away Tony Moll: This move was actually the most arrogant by TT so far besides you know who. TT thought that we did such a stellar job at protecting A-Rod that he thought "hey our preseason performance is so good we can risk giving lineman away." Wrong. We went into the regular season with absolutely 0 depth at Tackle and we paid the price. I know many fans don't like Moll but he does add depth and he was decent after Tauscher got injured last season.
    5) Not retaining Jamon Meredith: I'm not sure why he was cut but I've been hearing that he doesn't really have that mindset in for the game. But it still would have been nice to have some depth at tackle. Dilligaff if you have time to go to bills website try to find something about him, I heard he's contributed well to the team.
     
  5. DILLIGAFF

    DILLIGAFF Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2009
    Messages:
    603
    Ratings:
    +4
    I guess when you look at the players who were cut, you have to ask the question which players that made it should have been cut.

    For me Rouse was a mistake and keeping Smith made more sense.

    The idea of keeping 3 full backs when most teams carry only one really made no sense at all, especially when Jackson/Havner could have filled in if an injury were to occur to the one full back or had a full back on the practice squad. This would have opened up 2 roster spots. Putting all that depth into the full back position came back to hunt the packers at the Safety positions, O-line, receiving, Running back, and corner positions.

    Next year we should keep one, Quin Johnson.
     
  6. Jess

    Jess Movement!

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2009
    Messages:
    3,118
    Ratings:
    +473
    Meredith was a starter for Buffalo.

    I'd rather we kept Sutton, but i'm not sure what we would have done with him. McCarthy wouldn't have had the balls to give some unheard of guy the 8 to 10 carries a game he probably would've deserved, so he probably would've rotted on the bench.

    I guess i'm glad to see the kid go somewhere where he was given a chance.
     
  7. PackersRS

    PackersRS Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2008
    Messages:
    8,471
    Ratings:
    +980
    First of all, Sutton is all but impredictable.

    About Jackson, a FB, though he might've been good at picking up the blitz, which is different from run blocking, wouldn't provide the same running ability in screens, draws and catching passes.

    I think Jackson is a gear 3rd down back. And I think later in the season he turned into a fine running back. He lacks the elite physical skills, speed, power and elusiveness.

    That's why we still need a change of pace back. But as a 3rd down back, I only see Taylor as a better guy in the league, one that can pick up blitzes and catch out of the backfield.
     
  8. JamesCA

    JamesCA Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2010
    Messages:
    63
    Ratings:
    +4
    I liked Sutton because he had a real drive and determination to make the most of probably limited talent. Guys like that are really valuable although not necessarily game changers like a Darren Sproles.
     

Share This Page