Kevin King & Quentin Rollins

[bigbubbatd]

And another thread turns in a debate of why Belichick is better than TT. And why TT should trade more and sign more free agents. What does this have to do with King and Rollins anymore?

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

And another thread turns in a debate of why Belichick is better than TT. And why TT should trade more and sign more free agents. What does this have to do with King and Rollins anymore?

2 draft picks that are expected to fix the issues at CB?

I understand what you are saying....many posts veer off into a discussion about TT, Capers, MM, Janis or pad level.....but for the most part they find their way back. Let's face it, any topic about the Packers players has a common thread.....TT was involved in them becoming a Packer.

 

[Dantés]

While I agree with you on most of that, it is GM's like Belichick that are able to dispel the myth of "can't get needed players at the right moment or from other teams who don't want us to get better". BB has a knack of finding guys when needed, using various sources and ways to acquire players, as well as recognizing that need earlier than most.

I think the issue some of us have with TT is that he seems to lock in on his draft picks/UDFA's and is so confidant that he was correct on them, he holds on to and relies on them too long. I am hoping that TT's moves in Free Agency this year was a sign of change, maybe he has loosened up his way of thinking a bit.

It cannot be disputed that BB is better at using trades to improve his roster. That's kind of a separate issue that no one is challenging.

What I'm saying is that in hindsight I don't see where TT was supposed to find a veteran corner to replace Shields. So I'm challenging the "TT is dumb for not going and getting what we needed even though I have no idea if that was even an option" argument. Not speaking of you, but if someone is going to be absolutely "convinced" that TT could have found a good option to replace Shields, surely they can offer some names no? But the only name I've seen is a guy who couldn't hack it in two pretty average secondaries and was actually cut by the team that traded for him a month after the move was made. Somehow that doesn't seem like it would have been the answer.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

It cannot be disputed that BB is better at using trades to improve his roster. That's kind of a separate issue that no one is challenging.

What I'm saying is that in hindsight I don't see where TT was supposed to find a veteran corner to replace Shields. So I'm challenging the "TT is dumb for not going and getting what we needed even though I have no idea if that was even an option" argument. Not speaking of you, but if someone is going to be absolutely "convinced" that TT could have found a good option to replace Shields, surely they can offer some names no? But the only name I've seen is a guy who couldn't hack it in two pretty average secondaries and was actually cut by the team that traded for them a month after the move was made. Somehow that doesn't seem like it would have been the answer.

I guess the counter argument, not that I am making it , would be...."Are you absolutely convinced that TT was looking for other players to try and fix the problem at CB?" or "Are you even convinced that TT thought there was a problem at CB, that couldn't be resolved with the roster as it stood?"

Just because nothing was done, isn't proof that nothing could be done, nor is it proof something was being attempted to get done.

I would say his signing of House and his drafting of King is evidence that the problem was recognized, at some point.

Only TT has the answers to "was he trying to find a player and if so, what options were out there". Everything else is just speculation on fans part, most of which is based on TT's MO in the past.

 

[Dantés]

I guess the counter argument, not that I am making it , would be...."Are you absolutely convinced that TT was looking for other players to try and fix the problem at CB?" or "Are you even convinced that TT thought there was a problem at CB, that couldn't be resolved with the roster as it stood?"

Just because nothing was done, isn't proof that nothing could be done, nor is it proof something was being attempted to get done.

I would say his signing of House and his drafting of King is evidence that the problem was recognized, at some point.

Only TT has the answers to "was he trying to find a player and if so, what options were out there". Everything else is just speculation on fans part, most of which is based on TT's MO in the past.

Not at all. I have no idea. And I'm pretty up front about that. But that's why I'm not saying "I'm absolutely convinced that TT sought out every avenue and there just wasn't an answer."

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Not at all. I have no idea. And I'm pretty up front about that. But that's why I'm not saying "I'm absolutely convinced that TT sought out every avenue and there just wasn't an answer."

I'm not fully convinced that he thought there was an issue, until possibly it was too late (past the trade deadline). I guess we will have our answers when TT writes his scintillating memoirs "I Am Ted, Ted I Am".

 

[Sky King]

And another thread turns in a debate of why Belichick is better than TT. And why TT should trade more and sign more free agents. What does this have to do with King and Rollins anymore?

Last season TT rolled the dice on a guy with a long history of concussions, potentially promising second-year guys (including Rollins), plus a slew of undrafted and undeveloped FAs. It turned out to be an ugly dog contest, unfortunately.

This year TT is rolling the dice on the unproven rookie King and the two formerly promising second-year DBs, Rollins included, who flopped miserably last season along with their not-at-all-ready backups. Add a once-again Packer who was not even considered to be a keeper by TT in the past, plus even more UDFA projects for the coaching staff to toy with and you have 2017.

Breaking that down, after falling seriously behind the power curve at CB last season TT is building on last year's "success" by adding a rookie, a retread, and (again) the all-to-familiar pattern of unproven UDFA projects to inevitably fill the back-end of his rosters. Last season they couldn't be counted on to deliver the kind of performances that earn championships. Was this a result of so-so talent evaluation or of a flawed basic team-building concept that may be in need of some fine-tuning? Maybe both? Either way the accountability for them belongs to TT and the measure of his success deserves to be compared to the current leader in the GM category. I suppose coaching could also be held accountable but few former Packers excel in other places, so that's probably not something to hang one's hat on.

Maybe TT gets luckier and the DB group turns things around relatively quickly -- like this season, hopefully. Plus, a few of those UDFA projects and once promising draft picks could play well enough for this team to finish with a championship. Maybe one or two will seemingly come out of nowhere and play at a very unexpectedly high level.

Despite all that I've stated above, and until proven otherwise, I am optimistic that the team can succeed, including the CB group. But based upon TT's history of relying heavily -- maybe too heavily -- on unproven, non-veteran players to backfill the roster it's a guarded optimism on my part.

And then there's also the pass rush, long-snapper, punter/holder, and RBs to consider.

 

[PikeBadger]

I'm not fully convinced that he thought there was an issue, until possibly it was too late (past the trade deadline). I guess we will have our answers when TT writes his scintillating memoirs "I Am Ted, Ted I Am".

Lol, don't hold your breath. Thompson doesn't strike me as the type of guy who would write his memoirs or ever be quick to divulge those things.

 

[PikeBadger]

While I agree with you on most of that, it is GM's like Belichick that are able to dispel the myth of "can't get needed players at the right moment or from other teams who don't want us to get better". BB has a knack of finding guys when needed, using various sources and ways to acquire players, as well as recognizing that need earlier than most.

I think the issue some of us have with TT is that he seems to lock in on his draft picks/UDFA's and is so confidant that he was correct on them, he holds on to and relies on them too long. I am hoping that TT's moves in Free Agency this year was a sign of change, maybe he has loosened up his way of thinking a bit.

I think his moves in free agency this year were the result of losing a large number of previous players to free agency and having a large amount of money under the cap and many open roster spots. I think it's unlikely we will lose as many current players on the roster after the 17 season and I suspect we will sign fewer free agents next year especially seeing that we will have 11 draft picks to enter the 18 draft.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Last season TT rolled the dice on a guy with a long history of concussions, potentially promising second-year guys (including Rollins), plus a slew of undrafted and undeveloped FAs. It turned out to be an ugly dog contest, unfortunately.

This year TT is rolling the dice on the unproven rookie King and the two formerly promising second-year DBs, Rollins included, who flopped miserably last season along with their not-at-all-ready backups. Add a once-again Packer who was not even considered to be a keeper by TT in the past, plus even more UDFA projects for the coaching staff to toy with and you have 2017.

Breaking that down, after falling seriously behind the power curve at CB last season TT is building on last year's "success" by adding a rookie, a retread, and (again) the all-to-familiar pattern of unproven UDFA projects to inevitably fill the back-end of his rosters. Last season they couldn't be counted on to deliver the kind of performances that earn championships. Was this a result of so-so talent evaluation or of a flawed basic team-building concept that may be in need of some fine-tuning? Maybe both? Either way the accountability for them belongs to TT and the measure of his success deserves to be compared to the current leader in the GM category. I suppose coaching could also be held accountable but few former Packers excel in other places, so that's probably not something to hang one's hat on.

Maybe TT gets luckier and the DB group turns things around relatively quickly -- like this season, hopefully. Plus, a few of those UDFA projects and once promising draft picks could play well enough for this team to finish with a championship. Maybe one or two will seemingly come out of nowhere and play at a very unexpectedly high level.

Despite all that I've stated above, and until proven otherwise, I am optimistic that the team can succeed, including the CB group. But based upon TT's history of relying heavily -- maybe too heavily -- on unproven, non-veteran players to backfill the roster it's a guarded optimism on my part.

And then there's also the pass rush, long-snapper, punter/holder, and RBs to consider.

well said.

In a nutshell....this part.....is TT's albatross throughout his tenure IMO....

But based upon TT's history of relying heavily -- maybe too heavily -- on unproven, non-veteran players to backfill the roster it's a guarded optimism on my part.

I get the strategy, stay young and cheap and hope injuries don't expose the bottom part of your roster, so that you maintain a steadily improving roster every year with those young guys. But how many years in a row have the Packers been over exposed by injuries to starters and inexperienced young guys being forced to step up? This isn't using injuries as an excuse, actually the contrary, injuries are a normal part of an NFL season and if you aren't prepared for them, we have seen far too many times what happens at any given position.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Lol, don't hold your breath. Thompson doesn't strike me as the type of guy who would write his memoirs or ever be quick to divulge those things.

I'm not holding my breath that TT will write one either, nor remember it. Now I don't know if he was playing dumb right before this years draft, but he was asked about the release of Sitton last fall and he couldn't remember (intentional or unintentional) right away who Sitton was.

Anyway.....Can't wait to see King Thursday night and see if he is starter material his rookie year (in getting us back to the thread)

 

[Sky King]

I get the strategy, stay young and cheap and hope injuries don't expose the bottom part of your roster, so that you maintain a steadily improving roster every year with those young guys. But how many years in a row have the Packers been over exposed by injuries to starters and inexperienced young guys being forced to step up? This isn't using injuries as an excuse, actually the contrary, injuries are a normal part of an NFL season and if you aren't prepared for them, we have seen far too many times what happens at any given position.

Agreed. For example, the early returns the team is getting for going "young and cheap" in the kicking game were not pretty at the Family Night practice. When two-thirds of the group is replaced in one fell swoop it could lead to some bitter disappointments down the road, especially with games on the line. Chances are that a game winning attempt will be a long one, like it was in Dallas last season. Saturday's closing results were downright disastrous. It got my attention.

If the team was tight against the cap and paying more for Goode would put them over, then I can see a need to replace the long-snapper. But that's not the case and there's no known reason that the team would need to part with him other than to favor younger and cheaper. The new fellow has not been as consistent as Goode, per the beat writers' observations and also some comments Crosby has made to them, as well. Goode was virtually automatic and he's not that old at 32 for that position. Rob Davis remained effective through his mid 30's. If Goode is still healthy then I don't understand the urgency to replace him with a guy having no meaningful NFL experience and who also happened to be working as an engineer for Harley-Davidson until the Packers came-a-callin'. Maybe he's just rusty, maybe not.

Replacing the punter I can understand. Schum came on strong at season's end but the new punter already looks better now than Schum looked at the end of last season. Plus, this is one player who's standing as the #1 punter available from the last graduating class actually gives some credence to choosing upside over a steady but average vet.

That may not be the case with the other change. Instead of the consistent hand of Goode delivering the ball to the punter/holder -- giving him less to worry about in his rookie season in either of his roles -- TT opts to give Vogel and Crosby somebody that could needlessly end-up making both players jobs even more challenging all season long. For what, the difference in pay between a low-cost veteran and a low-cost rookie? If the team was tight against the cap maybe it would be necessary to make such moves. That doesn't appear to be the case here.

If Crosby misses an extra point or FG due to a bad snap and that costs the team a playoff spot, home field advantage, or further advancement in the playoffs in 2017 then the the pitchfork, torches, tar and feather-carrying crowd marching on Lambeau afterwards may not be looking for the long-snapper but rather the guy who preferred signing him rather than the proven vet.

If TT replaced the punter this season and the long-snapper in a subsequent season then it would seem to make more sense. What's the hurry, anyway? Is he relying too much on yet another unproven UDFA to come through when a vet may be the surer option? I sincerely hope not.

And can anybody light a fire under an under-performing, unimproving Fackrell? The team is counting heavily on him and a few others, as well.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Agreed. For example, the early returns the team is getting for going "young and cheap" in the kicking game were not pretty at the Family Night practice. When two-thirds of the group is replaced in one fell swoop it could lead to some bitter disappointments down the road, especially with games on the line. Chances are that a game winning attempt will be a long one, like it was in Dallas last season. Saturday's closing results were downright disastrous. It got my attention.

If the team was tight against the cap and paying more for Goode would put them over, then I can see a need to replace the long-snapper. But that's not the case and there's no known reason that the team would need to part with him other than to favor younger and cheaper. The new fellow has not been as consistent as Goode, per the beat writers' observations and also some comments Crosby has made to them, as well. Goode was virtually automatic and he's not that old at 32 for that position. Rob Davis remained effective through his mid 30's. If Goode is still healthy then I don't understand the urgency to replace him with a guy having no meaningful NFL experience and who also happened to be working as an engineer for Harley-Davidson until the Packers came-a-callin'. Maybe he's just rusty, maybe not.

Replacing the punter I can understand. Schum came on strong at season's end but the new punter already looks better now than Schum looked at the end of last season. Plus, this is one player who's standing as the #1 punter available from the last graduating class actually gives some credence to choosing upside over a steady but average vet.

That may not be the case with the other change. Instead of the consistent hand of Goode delivering the ball to the punter/holder -- giving him less to worry about in his rookie season in either of his roles -- TT opts to give Vogel and Crosby somebody that could needlessly end-up making both players jobs even more challenging all season long. For what, the difference in pay between a low-cost veteran and a low-cost rookie? If the team was tight against the cap maybe it would be necessary to make such moves. That doesn't appear to be the case here.

If Crosby misses an extra point or FG due to a bad snap and that costs the team a playoff spot, home field advantage, or further advancement in the playoffs in 2017 then the the pitchfork, torches, tar and feather-carrying crowd marching on Lambeau afterwards may not be looking for the long-snapper but rather the guy who preferred signing him rather than the proven vet.

If TT replaced the punter this season and the long-snapper in a subsequent season then it would seem to make more sense. What's the hurry, anyway? Is he relying too much on yet another unproven UDFA to come through when a vet may be the surer option? I sincerely hope not.

And can anybody light a fire under an under-performing, unimproving Fackrell? The team is counting heavily on him and a few others, as well.

Well the "good news" with Hart-Vogel-Crosby.....they have another month to work out the kinks and I think they will. I doubt that it is the ability of any of the 3, more than it is just their timing. I am actually excited about Vogel. I was relieved when Masthay was let go and Schum was much more effective with flipping the field, but was inconsistent with hang time and distance.

The Packers paid Goode $885K last year, Hart is playing for $465K. Schum would have made $615K and Vogel $465K. So the Packers are saving $570K with the new combo. Hopefully, as you implied, they aren't pinching "pennies", which that amount is in the NFL, that could cost them a game.

I understand the change from Schum to Vogel, I don't know enough about why Goode was dumped. My best guess, they were disappointed in something Goode was doing and were willing to take a chance on on Hart, who was last playing football at the college level in 2015, before working for Harley Davidson.

But the underlying theme of your post is my underlying worry about the Packers, do they rely too much on younger, cheaper talent, when according to the current cap, they don't have to.

Edit: Should have read "rely too much on younger, cheaper, more inexperienced/unproven talent...."

 

[Sky King]

But the underlying theme of your post is my underlying worry about the Packers, do they rely too much on younger, cheaper talent, when according to the current cap, they don't have to.

Amen.

 

[PikeBadger]

Agreed. For example, the early returns the team is getting for going "young and cheap" in the kicking game were not pretty at the Family Night practice. When two-thirds of the group is replaced in one fell swoop it could lead to some bitter disappointments down the road, especially with games on the line. Chances are that a game winning attempt will be a long one, like it was in Dallas last season. Saturday's closing results were downright disastrous. It got my attention.

If the team was tight against the cap and paying more for Goode would put them over, then I can see a need to replace the long-snapper. But that's not the case and there's no known reason that the team would need to part with him other than to favor younger and cheaper. The new fellow has not been as consistent as Goode, per the beat writers' observations and also some comments Crosby has made to them, as well. Goode was virtually automatic and he's not that old at 32 for that position. Rob Davis remained effective through his mid 30's. If Goode is still healthy then I don't understand the urgency to replace him with a guy having no meaningful NFL experience and who also happened to be working as an engineer for Harley-Davidson until the Packers came-a-callin'. Maybe he's just rusty, maybe not.

Replacing the punter I can understand. Schum came on strong at season's end but the new punter already looks better now than Schum looked at the end of last season. Plus, this is one player who's standing as the #1 punter available from the last graduating class actually gives some credence to choosing upside over a steady but average vet.

That may not be the case with the other change. Instead of the consistent hand of Goode delivering the ball to the punter/holder -- giving him less to worry about in his rookie season in either of his roles -- TT opts to give Vogel and Crosby somebody that could needlessly end-up making both players jobs even more challenging all season long. For what, the difference in pay between a low-cost veteran and a low-cost rookie? If the team was tight against the cap maybe it would be necessary to make such moves. That doesn't appear to be the case here.

If Crosby misses an extra point or FG due to a bad snap and that costs the team a playoff spot, home field advantage, or further advancement in the playoffs in 2017 then the the pitchfork, torches, tar and feather-carrying crowd marching on Lambeau afterwards may not be looking for the long-snapper but rather the guy who preferred signing him rather than the proven vet.

If TT replaced the punter this season and the long-snapper in a subsequent season then it would seem to make more sense. What's the hurry, anyway? Is he relying too much on yet another unproven UDFA to come through when a vet may be the surer option? I sincerely hope not.

And can anybody light a fire under an under-performing, unimproving Fackrell? The team is counting heavily on him and a few others, as well.

Is Goode on another roster right now? Any injury issues?

Maybe longtimefan knows more about the background story with Goode.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Is Goode on another roster right now? Any injury issues?

Maybe longtimefan knows more about the background story with Goode.

Brett Goode is still a FA. He did tear his ACL in Dec. of 2015. Packers put him on IR, cut him and then resigned him last September. Guessing TT still has his phone # if things don't work out with Hart. I didn't hear anything about Goode being injured, just that he wasn't offered another contract.

 

[Alex42152]

Earlier on, maybe 3 weeks ago I recall making some comments somewhere about how IMO, I didn't think King would be a Day 1 starter on the defense and that we needed to keep our faith in Rollins and especially Randall that they would get back to their rookie season form.

After the first few padded practices, my tune on half of this has been changed. Specifically with Kevin King. I can't recall which reporter tweeted the clip out, maybe Aaron Nagler, but it was Malachi Dupre in 1-on-1's with Kevin King. Dupre ran an incredbile route, a post-and-go that even sold me watching it, and King's movement for his size, the way he transitioned from back pedalling to running, was pretty amazing, athletically. I realize it was only one play, but a CB with his size able to move so fluidly like that, at speed, isn't something you need to see more than one or two times to know he might be the real deal.

Even if he's still a little "raw" as people say, I'm beginning to take to the idea of King being a starter as a boundary corner and just see what happens. It makes sense now, after seeing it, that that's the type of athlete that you need in today's NFL at the CB position to really flourish on defense, so it makes sense to have him out there.

Secondly, as I was scrolling through my Twitter feed during Saturdays practice for updates I read from one of the reporters covering camp (who I also forget) that Quentin Rollins was the sole slot corner with the 1's and he was "dominating" Randall Cobb all day long in the Move The Ball period(s) of practice.

I think it's appropriate that we give Rollins some love considering how much of the opposite he was getting for almost all of last year. I remember in 2015 when he was playing inside when Hayward went down, he had a few games where he reminded me of Chris Harris in the slot, just blanketing guys. Good to see him bounce back and be the guy he showed he was before the injuries and subsequent from last season.

Both of them are great secondary players, I´m sure the CB position will be really covered, as there´s a lot of internal competition for getting inside the 53-man roster

 

[RepStar15]

If our issues at CB are NOT fixed...what is the next step? I am not going to start a fire TT or Dom Capers discussion, but I saw an interesting stat yesterday. It lined up all the best QB's playing right now and how many championships they have and how their defenses stacked up. Rodgers has only had two seasons with a top 10 defense, 1 championship. Brady has 4 championships with 6 years of a top 10 defense. Big Ben has two championships with 6 top 10 defenses. We will NOT see another championship with the trash we continue to produce on defense. We need to go for a big time CB in FA or a top 10 pick for next years draft best CB.

 

[Candidate for Deletion]

If our issues at CB are NOT fixed...what is the next step? I am not going to start a fire TT or Dom Capers discussion, but I saw an interesting stat yesterday. It lined up all the best QB's playing right now and how many championships they have and how their defenses stacked up. Rodgers has only had two seasons with a top 10 defense, 1 championship. Brady has 4 championships with 6 years of a top 10 defense. Big Ben has two championships with 6 top 10 defenses. We will NOT see another championship with the trash we continue to produce on defense. We need to go for a big time CB in FA or a top 10 pick for next years draft best CB.

I agree with the sentiment, though it is not just CB but LB as well (though possibly only EDGE, if these nitro packages work out). One of the limitations of the Draft and Develop ethos is that you are pretty much unable to dig into early round picks unless you have a bad season. We can't put the draft capital into a top 10 draft pick, given that it would likely cost us a few firsts plus some, when we have to have all of those picks going towards the churn of personnel that it takes to keep a team stocked well without hitting FA heavily.

Thus, our options are threefold: First, keep doing what we have been doing and hope we get luckier than we have been. This will allow us to keep up the higher-than-average number of yearly picks and keep the team stocked at its current better-than-average level, ideally. We have not been very lucky for several years, though, on the defensive side of the ball with this method. Second, take a swing on top ten picks and hope they don't bust and waste the draft capital going into securing them. If it works, as it did with CM3, we have a facet on the team which contributes at a level well beyond the capital spent for them. If not, we lose not only on that player but on all of the other missed players the other picks could have given. Third, taking a swing at FA and spending big one somebody who adds to the team while hoping they don't flame out and hurt our cap for a few years to come. Given the health of our cap, many people crave this, and I have to admit that with the years I've come more along with it as well. I'd like to see not huge name big money guys, but three or four second tier guys. This has been happening more and more with guys like Peppers and Cook, and now Bennett and Kendricks, and I'd love to see more - especially focused on the D.

 

[RepStar15]

I am pretty sure we have the Jay Cutlers of cornerbacks filling up our roster...At least our pass rush looked decent.

 

[Dirty Sanchez]

By what metric are they considered the best medical/training staff in the league?

They hand out suckers.................

 

[HardRightEdge]

I liked what I saw of King last night. Sure, he let one get past him, but he followed that up immediately with two big hits on outstanding play recognition. And they didn't throw at him much so he must be doing something right off screen. Brice had a real nice game. Yeah, he missed 3 tackles, but on two of them he blew up the play. Evans had a nice game. I liked Jones' anticipation and speed. Philly threw a series of short outs to their good looking rookie against Hawkins, but he didn't give up much separation. He was doing a decent job; if teams want to make that a staple of the offence they'd be kicking a lot of field goals.

I'm more worried about an injury to Bakhtiari or Bulaga. Spriggs and Murphy at OT looked dreadful; no progress from a year ago.

 

[rmontro]

I liked what I saw of King last night.

I have a good feeling about King. I don't mind seeing him get burned in a preseason game, as long as he learns from it. Better to watch him fail now than later.

 

[HardRightEdge]

I have a good feeling about King. I don't mind seeing him get burned in a preseason game, as long as he learns from it. Better to watch him fail now than later.

Even the best get burned now and again. What matters is how they respond.

 

[JK64]

I have a good feeling about King. I don't mind seeing him get burned in a preseason game, as long as he learns from it. Better to watch him fail now than later.

Even the best get burned now and again. What matters is how they respond.

A lot of wishful thinking here. I did like King's tackling, but I'm not convinced he is ready to go against the likes of Atlanta. The kid looks green to me.