Jamal Rolle Signed Off Practice Squad

OP
OP
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
He looked a natural last night.

He's athletic for a big man, unlike the mauler Pennel who's stiff in the hips and tends to play high. For his faults, Pennel is the only NT on this squad; there's some room for technique improvement.

Robinson's more a 3/5 tech unless and until he puts on more bulk.

Guion gave us what I think will prove to be his best and signature performance against MIN...he's no nose tackle and gets pushed around in the run game but can make some plays in the pass rush.
 

El Guapo

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 7, 2011
Messages
6,111
Reaction score
1,590
Location
Land 'O Lakes
Guion gave us what I think will prove to be his best and signature performance against MIN...he's no nose tackle and gets pushed around in the run game but can make some plays in the pass rush.
Guion played well last night, but he was motivated. He's been atrocious thus far and has shown why Minnesota gave him a low-ball offer. Maybe last night will ignite one season of passionate play. We need that.
 
OP
OP
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
Guion played well last night, but he was motivated. He's been atrocious thus far and has shown why Minnesota gave him a low-ball offer. Maybe last night will ignite one season of passionate play. We need that.
Well, he's still made no argument whatsoever for being able to play consistently against the run.

In general, the deficiencies in the run defense were papered over by the blowout.

As good as the front 7 might have looked in the MIN game and for about a half against the Jets, I'm reminded of the fact those efforts were against Geno Smith and Christian Ponder.

It might be early to consign Smith to a bench career, but there is evidence that will be the case. Ponder does not have the management, clubhouse or huddle behind him...he should have been let go to seek a fresh start elsewhere on somebody's bench. It's not just a matter of how the QB throws the ball; it is largely a matter of how confident the players around him feel (and it is a matter of emotion) that he gives them a good chance to win.

MIN came out flat and stayed flat. And despite that, they managed 4.4 yds. per carry with none more than 11 yds. to pad the average. Granted, for most of the game the D was teeing off on the pass as MIN had to play catch-up. On the other hand, there is no evidence yet that this D can defend the run when it matters.

Harshly put, I would be concerned that the front 7 played a "bald eagle" game against MIN...a big, beautiful bird who's main diet is carrion.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

PikeBadger

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jan 19, 2013
Messages
6,287
Reaction score
1,700
Guion played well last night, but he was motivated. He's been atrocious thus far and has shown why Minnesota gave him a low-ball offer. Maybe last night will ignite one season of passionate play. We need that.
Interesting take from a Packer perspective. I bet the review this morning is far different on the other side of the border. It probably is similar to the Cullen Jenkins narrative here.

Ole & Sven say: how could our gm have been so stupid to let Guion go like that!
 

PikeBadger

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jan 19, 2013
Messages
6,287
Reaction score
1,700
Well, he's still made no argument whatsoever for being able to play consistently against the run.

In general, the deficiencies in the run defense were papered over by the blowout.

As good as the front 7 might have looked in the MIN game and for about a half against the Jets, I'm reminded of the fact those efforts were against Geno Smith and Christian Ponder.

It might be early to consign Smith to a bench career, there is evidence that will be the case. Ponder does not have the management, clubhouse or huddle behind him...he should have been let go to seek a fresh start elsewhere on somebody's bench. It's not just a matter of how the QB throws the ball; it is largely a matter of how confident the players around him feel (and it is a matter of emotion) that he's gives them a good chance to win.

MIN came out flat and stayed flat. And despite that, they managed 4.4 yds. per carry with none more than 11 yds. to pad the average. Granted, for most of the game the D was teeing off on the pass as MIN had to play catch-up. On the other hand, there is no evidence yet that this D can defend the run when it matters.

Harshly put, I would be concerned that the front 7 played a "bald eagle" game against MIN...a big, beautiful bird who's main diet is carrion.
I agree to a certain extent. Minnesota's o-line is built to run block. Loadholt especially is terrible in pass protection. I think our d-line was just much quicker than their o-line last night. Backfield disruption on most plays both run and pass. Ponder isn't good enough to overcome that. I also think Minnesota's wide receiver corp is inferior. Wright and Patterson have only one attribute. Straight line speed. Neither are good,instinctive receivers or ball-catchers.
 
OP
OP
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
I agree to a certain extent. Minnesota's o-line is built to run block. Loadholt especially is terrible in pass protection. I think our d-line was just much quicker than their o-line last night. Backfield disruption on most plays both run and pass. Ponder isn't good enough to overcome that. I also think Minnesota's wide receiver corp is inferior. Wright and Patterson have only one attribute. Straight line speed. Neither are good,instinctive receivers or ball-catchers.
I buy that. However, my stated point was there is no evidence from this game that this front 7 can stop the run when it matters. The score does nothing more than paper over the issue for the time being.
 

Members online

No members online now.

Latest posts

Top