How should Packers address CB

[Deleted member 6794]

If that's the case. You would have to run a 2-4-5. Randall, Burnett, and Clinton-Dix along with Rollins and probably House, Four LB's, and 2 DT's. That's a recipe for disaster. Keep Randall at CB, let it play out. Solidify CB corp with draft or late FA.

The Packers line up in subpackages on more than 70% of the snaps anyway therefore their base defense is actually a 2-4-5. I wouldn't mind playing Burnett closer to the LOS, Clinton- Dix at strong and Randall at free safety. The team has to add a talented cornerback capable of playing outside for it to work though.

 

[OldSchool101]

Most likely it's the only chance the Packers have left at acquiring a #1 cornerback. Although I don't expect a rookie to be able to fill that role.

If we don't go CB in the 1st round we will probably need to trade up for one in the second round, or your hypothesis about not getting a starter will most likely be correct

 

[Deleted member 6794]

If we don't go CB in the 1st round we will probably need to trade up for one in the second round, or your hypothesis about not getting a starter will most likely be correct

It's even difficult to find a cornerback capable of immediately performing at a decent level at the end of the first round.

 

[PikeBadger]

It's extremely difficult to draft a cornerback making an immediate impact at the end of the first round. That's why the position should have been addressed in free agency.

House.

 

[Half Empty]

I think the general opinion is that House was a good signing but that he's not the impact, #1 cover corner being discussed.

 

[McKnowledge]

The Packers line up in subpackages on more than 70% of the snaps anyway therefore their base defense is actually a 2-4-5. I wouldn't mind playing Burnett closer to the LOS, Clinton- Dix at strong and Randall at free safety. The team has to add a talented cornerback capable of playing outside for it to work though.

Just because they line up in subpackages 70% of defenses snaps doesn't necessarily mean their base is a 2-4-5. There are other subpackage formations. It also doesn't mean they should use it this year. They got killed last year. Packers D got fancy when they didn't have the personnel.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

House.

House doesn't address the need for a #1 cornerback.

Just because they line up in subpackages 70% of defenses snaps doesn't necessarily mean their base is a 2-4-5. There are other subpackage formations. It also doesn't mean they should use it this year. They got killed last year. Packers D got fancy when they didn't have the personnel.

The Packers predominantly lined up in nickel defense over the past few seasons. The scheme isn't the problem as opponents force teams to have five defensive backs on the field by using a lot of three receiver sets. The team lacking talent at cornerback resulted in the unit struggling.

 

[McKnowledge]

The Packers predominantly lined up in nickel defense over the past few seasons. The scheme isn't the problem as opponents force teams to have five defensive backs on the field by using a lot of three receiver sets. The team lacking talent at cornerback resulted in the unit struggling.

My point exactly. Packers did not and still don't have the personnel for the scheme.

 

[sschind]

It's even difficult to find a cornerback capable of immediately performing at a decent level at the end of the first round.

So why reach for one if there is a player at another position who might be able to step in and start right away?

We all know that you feel Ted dropped the ball by not getting a #1 corner during free agency. I just don't see how that automatically translates into reaching for a player to address the need during the draft. If a CB is the best player available then by all means take him or even if he is close to the best player but we do need help at other positions as well. If we reach for a CB we may be forced to reach for a pass rusher or a guard or some other player to address those areas as well later on. I say draft a player capable of contributing right away at one of those positions in the first and take a CB later when the value fits the pick. No, he won't be out shut down corner from day one but he won't be a reach that leaves us wanting at other positions while still not fulfilling our needs at CB.

 

[DoURant]

So why reach for one if there is a player at another position who might be able to step in and start right away?

We all know that you feel Ted dropped the ball by not getting a #1 corner during free agency. I just don't see how that automatically translates into reaching for a player to address the need during the draft. If a CB is the best player available then by all means take him or even if he is close to the best player but we do need help at other positions as well. If we reach for a CB we may be forced to reach for a pass rusher or a guard or some other player to address those areas as well later on. I say draft a player capable of contributing right away at one of those positions in the first and take a CB later when the value fits the pick. No, he won't be out shut down corner from day one but he won't be a reach that leaves us wanting at other positions while still not fulfilling our needs at CB.

One thing I have learned by following the draft the past 25 yrs is " There is no for sure thing" when drafting. 1st rd picks bust and UDFA make pro bowls. When you have a choice between a position of need, and maybe a player that is rated a little better that isn't, take the position of need. All teams have 2 or 3 positions of need, take the highest player rated on your board at any of them positions. Richard Sherman was drafted in the 5th rd, Tom Brady was drafted in the 6th...you never know who the next great player is going to be, if we did, they both would have been top 5 picks in their prospective drafts

 

[rodell330]

Just to be clear you are advocating Ted should reach for a CB in the first round rather than taking a superior player at another position if one is available.

You mean like he did when he took Randall in the 1st? Or how about Rollins in the second? I'm definitely not advocating taking a freakin RB or TE when the glaring need on this team is on defense at corner. It's hard to find good cover corners. Cannot pass on one in the first.

 

[sschind]

You mean like he did when he took Randall in the 1st? Or how about Rollins in the second? I'm definitely not advocating taking a freakin RB or TE when the glaring need on this team is on defense at corner. It's hard to find good cover corners. Cannot pass on one in the first.

If you are saying that Ted reached with the Randall and Rollins picks then yes I guess I am saying that. We needed a CB and Ted addressed the situation and drafted two of them. Were you fine with the R&R picks because now you want him to do the same thing all over again, take a CB no matter what because that's our biggest need. I just don't see the wisdom in drafting a CB with a mid 2nd round grade if there is another player available with a mid first round grade.

One thing I have learned by following the draft the past 25 yrs is " There is no for sure thing" when drafting. 1st rd picks bust and UDFA make pro bowls. When you have a choice between a position of need, and maybe a player that is rated a little better that isn't, take the position of need. All teams have 2 or 3 positions of need, take the highest player rated on your board at any of them positions. Richard Sherman was drafted in the 5th rd, Tom Brady was drafted in the 6th...you never know who the next great player is going to be, if we did, they both would have been top 5 picks in their prospective drafts

Exactly, if you have several players rated more or less equally you take the position of need. As you said if you have several areas of need take the best player. This team has more needs than just CB but what I'm hearing from a lot of people is that no matter what we have to take a CB in the first round. I think that is a very foolish way to approach a draft and could lead to severely over drafting. As rodell pointed out we did that two years ago and look where it got us, back in the exact same position two drafts later and you have fans wanting Ted to do the exact same thing. I think you would be hard pressed to find many people who thought Randall was the best player available at the time.

Its getting to the point where I am almost hoping Ted doesn't draft a CB just to see the reaction.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

My point exactly. Packers did not and still don't have the personnel for the scheme.

That doesn't change the fact that Capers has to predominantly line up in the nickel defense as opponents force him to. Unfortunately Thompson hasn't provided enough talent to make it work.

So why reach for one if there is a player at another position who might be able to step in and start right away?

We all know that you feel Ted dropped the ball by not getting a #1 corner during free agency. I just don't see how that automatically translates into reaching for a player to address the need during the draft. If a CB is the best player available then by all means take him or even if he is close to the best player but we do need help at other positions as well. If we reach for a CB we may be forced to reach for a pass rusher or a guard or some other player to address those areas as well later on. I say draft a player capable of contributing right away at one of those positions in the first and take a CB later when the value fits the pick. No, he won't be out shut down corner from day one but he won't be a reach that leaves us wanting at other positions while still not fulfilling our needs at CB.

Actually I'm advocating for Thompson to trade up and select Marshon Lattimore, but of course don't see it happening. While it's far from perfect Thompson might be forced to reach for the best cornerback available as aside of right guard it's the only position in need of a starter.

If you are saying that Ted reached with the Randall and Rollins picks then yes I guess I am saying that. We needed a CB and Ted addressed the situation and drafted two of them. Were you fine with the R&R picks because now you want him to do the same thing all over again, take a CB no matter what because that's our biggest need.



Exactly, if you have several players rated more or less equally you take the position of need. As you said if you have several areas of need take the best player. This team has more needs than just CB but what I'm hearing from a lot of people is that no matter what we have to take a CB in the first round. I think that is a very foolish way to approach a draft and could lead to severely over drafting. As rodell pointed out we did that two years ago and look where it got us, back in the exact same position two drafts later and you have fans wanting Ted to do the exact same thing. I think you would be hard pressed to find many people who thought Randall was the best player available at the time.

The Packers depth chart at cornerback included Shields, Hayward and Hyde at the time Thompson drafted Randall and Rollins. While the team was in need of depth at that point there was no reason to select CBs with the team's first two picks, therefore I believe TT selected the prospects presenting the best value. That didn't work out as planned either.

 

[McKnowledge]

The Packers depth chart at cornerback included Shields, Hayward and Hyde at the time Thompson drafted Randall and Rollins. While the team was in need of depth at that point there was no reason to select CBs with the team's first two picks, therefore I believe TT selected the prospects presenting the best value. That didn't work out as planned either.

The focus should be on this upcoming season. Hindsight is always 20/20. TT was hedging his bets with those picks, hoping one would step up. Hayward's impending free agency was coming are the end of that season. TT probably knew he was leaving, thus grabbing Rollins and Randle. As for Shields, no one foresaw his injuries piling up they way they did. Not a TT fan, but any GM is gonna consider which players on their roster wants a big money contract. This upcoming 2017 season? Why trade up? Offer the 29th pick to NE for Butler and their 3rd or 4th round pick. Or even better, the 29th pick straight up for Richard Sherman. I would rather have an established veteran than a rookie that hasn't proven anything on the pro level. Hmm. A rookie? Or a SB winning CB?

 

[Deleted member 6794]

The focus should be on this upcoming season. Hindsight is always 20/20. TT was hedging his bets with those picks, hoping one would step up. Hayward's impending free agency was coming are the end of that season. TT probably knew he was leaving, thus grabbing Rollins and Randle. As for Shields, no one foresaw his injuries piling up they way they did. Not a TT fan, but any GM is gonna consider which players on their roster wants a big money contract. This upcoming 2017 season? Why trade up? Offer the 29th pick to NE for Butler and their 3rd or 4th round pick. Or even better, the 29th pick straight up for Richard Sherman. I would rather have an established veteran than a rookie that hasn't proven anything on the pro level. Hmm. A rookie? Or a SB winning CB?

There's no doubt I would prefer a veteran cornerback over a rookie. It would most likely take significantly more than the 29th pick to acquire Sherman and the Patriots wouldn't offer a third and fourth rounder in return for Butler.

With Thompson being extremely reluctant to trade picks I don't expect him to either trade for a veteran or move up to select Lattimore.

 

[Pkrjones]

I think some teams are going to panic and there'll be a run on QB's in the 1st round, dropping some good players down. Have to imagine CB's Conley, Wilson, T. White, Tabor and/or K. King will be available at 29. Depends if they're significantly higher on TT's board than an edge rusher like Watt, McKinley, Harris or Williams.

Would love for TT to wheel & deal and end-up with 2 top-45 picks to grab one of each CB & OLB.

 

[brandon2348]

House.

House wasn't even a no.1 corner last time he played for Packers. What makes you think he is now after a dissapointing season in Jacksonville?

 

[Deleted member 6794]

House wasn't even a no.1 corner last time he played for Packers. What makes you think he is now after a dissapointing season in Jacksonville?

House was actually only fourth on the cornerback depth chart when he last played in Green Bay in 2014.

 

[brandon2348]

House was actually only fourth on the cornerback depth chart when he last played in Green Bay in 2014.

Some experts are saying we don't even have a "CFL worthy secondary" but somehow some people believe Devon House is gonna come in and be the "stop gap".

It's "amazing". That's all I can say.

 

[Poppa San]

Some experts are saying we don't even have a "CFL worthy secondary" but somehow some people believe Devon House is gonna come in and be the "stop gap".

It's "amazing". That's all I can say.

A year ago those same experts were giving the Packers defensive backfield a top ten rating. And the WR corps middling to poor reviews.

 

[PikeBadger]

House wasn't even a no.1 corner last time he played for Packers. What makes you think he is now after a dissapointing season in Jacksonville?

I expect that House, Randall, Rollins, Gunter, a draft pick and the rest of Goodson, Hawkins, Waters will improve and continue their development. I don't think Joe Whitt turned into a bad coach over night.

Whether that is good enough remains to be seen as well as whether any other vet free agents join that group.

I'm more worried whether our defense can generate a consistently good pass rush this season. Just my opinion.

 

[Half Empty]

Or, Whitt is indeed a really good coach and has already gotten the best he can out of a bunch of JAGs.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I expect that House, Randall, Rollins, Gunter, a draft pick and the rest of Goodson, Hawkins, Waters will improve and continue their development. I don't think Joe Whitt turned into a bad coach over night.

Whether that is good enough remains to be seen as well as whether any other vet free agents join that group.

I'm more worried whether our defense can generate a consistently good pass rush this season. Just my opinion.

Do you truly expect all of the cornerbacks you mentioned to progress significantly or is it just hope??? Remember the numbers I posted a while ago.

In addition you continue to ignore that it's impossible for the pass rush to put any pressure on opposing quarterbacks with the CBs struggling to stay within five yards of receivers for at least two seconds.

 

[PackerDNA]

Or, Whitt is indeed a really good coach and has already gotten the best he can out of a bunch of JAGs.

I don't know where I stand on the assistants. Although it doesn't seem- that I'm aware of at least- that they're highly thought of or sought after around the league.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I don't know where I stand on the assistants. Although it doesn't seem- that I'm aware of at least- that they're highly thought of or sought after around the league.

I guess the Packers making the playoffs for eight consecutive seasons and assistants not being allowed to interview with other teams has factored into most of the team's assistants not being highly sought after.