No Perry this weekend

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
31,986
Reaction score
7,829
Location
Madison, WI
So let me get this right.. CM3 is battling a separated AC joint, Martinez is recovering from a knee injury, Fackrell pulled a Hammy, Jake has a bum ankle and Perry is out with a broken hand?

Jayrone And Datone better step it up a notch This Sunday. Losing this game is not an option
Yup, sounds like we will have to rely on our solid secondary to win on the defensive side of the ball on Sunday. ;)
 

C-Lee

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 9, 2015
Messages
2,144
Reaction score
420
So let me get this right.. CM3 is battling a separated AC joint, Martinez is recovering from a knee injury, Fackrell pulled a Hammy, Jake has a bum ankle and Perry is out with a broken hand?

Jayrone And Datone better step it up a notch This Sunday. Losing this game is not an option
Jayrone did have the best game of his career so far last year against the Seahawks....

:sneaky:
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
I doubt we see Perry for a few games. He had surgery to repair "several" broken fingers and when he comes back will have to play with a large club. Will be interesting to see how he plays "one handed".

Perry might return to play with a huge club next week I'm afraid he would be ineffective as most players have struggled in a situation like that.

I was a bit surprised when he and Perry were both resigned and I actually thought if one was going to step it up, it would be Jones.

I agree that Jones has been a disappointment this season. He wasn't re-signed though but is in the last year of his rookie contract.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
31,986
Reaction score
7,829
Location
Madison, WI
I agree that Jones has been a disappointment this season. He wasn't re-signed though but is in the last year of his rookie contract.

Thanks for the correction. I think I was thinking about Mike Neal, who the Packers did not resign and is still currently unemployed. The Packers declined to pick up Datone's 5th year option at $6.75 M, which now looks like a good move.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
The Packers declined to pick up Datone's 5th year option at $6.75 M, which now looks like a good move.

True, it will be interesting to see if the Packers pick up the option for Clinton-Dix after this season. The team not having exercised it even once since its introduction is an indication of the lack of success in the first round of the draft over the last few years.
 

PackerDNA

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 8, 2014
Messages
6,428
Reaction score
1,498
True, it will be interesting to see if the Packers pick up the option for Clinton-Dix after this season. The team not having exercised it even once since its introduction is an indication of the lack of success in the first round of the draft over the last few years.

I think they will with Dix, or at least extend him later.
As to Jones, time to say goodbye to all the dead weight.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
31,986
Reaction score
7,829
Location
Madison, WI
True, it will be interesting to see if the Packers pick up the option for Clinton-Dix after this season. The team not having exercised it even once since its introduction is an indication of the lack of success in the first round of the draft over the last few years.

Not sure what that number will be with Dix, I am seeing "fifth-year salary would be equivalent to the average of the third-highest-paid through the 25th-highest-paid players at the safety position". As with other Packer players, might price him out of their comfort zone and be more reasonable to try and resign him after next year.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
Not sure what that number will be with Dix, I am seeing "fifth-year salary would be equivalent to the average of the third-highest-paid through the 25th-highest-paid players at the safety position".

Last season it took a one year, $5.676 million deal to pick up the option for a safety being drafted after the 10th overall pick.
 
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
True, it will be interesting to see if the Packers pick up the option for Clinton-Dix after this season. The team not having exercised it even once since its introduction is an indication of the lack of success in the first round of the draft over the last few years.
Last year, the option price for a player in Clinton-Dix's category was $5.676 mil. Let's say $6 mil this time around.

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/agents-take-a-team-by-team-guide-to-fifth-year-option-decisions/

I doubt that option will be exercised.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
Last year, the option price for a player in Clinton-Dix's category was $5.676 mil. Let's say $6 mil this time around.

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/agents-take-a-team-by-team-guide-to-fifth-year-option-decisions/

I doubt that option will be exercised.

I would be surprised if the Packers decide not to pick up the fifth year option for Clinton-Dix as signing him to a long-term deal next offseason would most likely result in a higher average salary per season.
 
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
I would be surprised if the Packers decide not to pick up the fifth year option for Clinton-Dix as signing him to a long-term deal next offseason would most likely result in a higher average salary per season.
You probably like him better as a player than I do.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
You probably like him better as a player than I do.

Clinton-Dix is an above average player although he's probably better suited to play strong safety just like Burnett. I for sure don't want the Packers to get back to the days of having to line up McMillian or Jennings there.
 
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
Clinton-Dix is an above average player although he's probably better suited to play strong safety just like Burnett. I for sure don't want the Packers to get back to the days of having to line up McMillian or Jennings there.
I agree he's better suited to SS or slot corner, variations within the same species. When the assignment is specific...deep 1/3 of the field in low/high zone coverage, blitz, coming up to fill a run hole...he looks pretty good. My problem is that when he's in single high safety free to read and react to what he sees, which is why they're called "free safety" in the first place, he just doesn't seem to be consistently around the ball.

This is evidenced in his 4 passes defended this year, a low count. And that's not a one-off...it's 13 over nearly 3 full seasons of about a 95% snap counts in the aggregate.

I'm not saying he isn't a decent player. What I am saying is shelling out the kind of money we're talking about for a guy playing out of position should be questioned. If the Packers were a consistent 2-high safety zone team I might have a somewhat different view, but when the CB crew isn't decimated, the Capers D is primarily a man/blitz team which calls for a natural free safety.

While Clinton-Dix is due a very favorable comparison to Jennings, that's about as low a bar to hurdle and you can get. McMillian was never going to be more than a zone/box SS so that's not a valid point of comparison.

There is always the question, "who else ya got?" and with plenty of other holes to fill there is the temptation to go with the know quantity and not create yet another problem. But that's a question for 2018. From my perspective, Randall is the natural free safety on this roster, a guy who looks way better facing the ball than with his back to it, though the realization of this fact is unknown. Without a better perimeter corner group, such a move can't be contemplated.

But from this viewpoint, then, the need is in the perimeter corner area, not a panic signing of an out-of-position safety.
I would be surprised if the Packers decide not to pick up the fifth year option for Clinton-Dix as signing him to a long-term deal next offseason would most likely result in a higher average salary per season.
If it were to be a higher average per season, it should not be materially so. Waiting also provides a one-year insurance policy against injury or regression. Sure, if he blossomed into a Pro Bowl player in year 4, then you'd have a point. But when you consider he's essentially the same player now that he was in his rookie season, you'd figure he's fully formed.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
I agree he's better suited to SS or slot corner, variations within the same species. When the assignment is specific...deep 1/3 of the field in low/high zone coverage, blitz, coming up to fill a run hole...he looks pretty good. My problem is that when he's in single high safety free to read and react to what he sees, which is why they're called "free safety" in the first place, he just doesn't seem to be consistently around the ball.

This is evidenced in his 4 passes defended this year, a low count. And that's not a one-off...it's 13 over nearly 3 full seasons of about a 95% snap counts in the aggregate.

I'm not saying he isn't a decent player. What I am saying is shelling out the kind of money we're talking about for a guy playing out of position should be questioned. If the Packers were a consistent 2-high safety zone team I might have a somewhat different view, but when the CB crew isn't decimated, the Capers D is primarily a man/blitz team which calls for a natural free safety.

While Clinton-Dix is due a very favorable comparison to Jennings, that's about as low a bar to hurdle and you can get. McMillian was never going to be more than a zone/box SS so that's not a valid point of comparison.

There is always the question, "who else ya got?" and with plenty of other holes to fill there is the temptation to go with the know quantity and not create yet another problem. But that's a question for 2018. From my perspective, Randall is the natural free safety on this roster, a guy who looks way better facing the ball than with his back to it, though the realization of this fact is unknown. Without a better perimeter corner group, such a move can't be contemplated.

But from this viewpoint, then, the need is in the perimeter corner area, not a panic signing of an out-of-position safety.

If it were to be a higher average per season, it should not be materially so. Waiting also provides a one-year insurance policy against injury or regression. Sure, if he blossomed into a Pro Bowl player in year 4, then you'd have a point. But when you consider he's essentially the same player now that he was in his rookie season, you'd figure he's fully formed.

I don't necessarily disagree with anything you posted.

But there's no doubt in my mind he stabilized the safety position which had been in dire need of an upgrade since Collins went down early in the 2011 season. In addition while he hasn't put up huge numbers during the regular season his three interceptions and seven passes defensed in only four playoff games are pretty impressive (I hope it's fine we agree not to talk about the two point conversion in Seattle anymore).

In my opinion picking up the fifth year option for him would be a smart move, especially with Burnett set to become a free agent after the 2017 season.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
31,986
Reaction score
7,829
Location
Madison, WI
I can't see the Packers letting HaHa walk away after next year, I can see them using his 5th year option as a roll into a new contract. While Dix isn't a Pro Bowl safety at this point in his career, I think he continues to get better and it sounds like he is starting to get more vocal and become a leader, we need more guys like that.
 
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
(I hope it's fine we agree not to talk about the two point conversion in Seattle anymore).
Actually, I had completely forgotten about that. I'm not much for anecdotal single plays anyway, good or bad.
In my opinion picking up the fifth year option for him would be a smart move, especially with Burnett set to become a free agent after the 2017 season.
Given the choice, I would sign Burnett at age 29 over Clinton-Dix. He's simply the better football player and the better strong safety. I could see Clinton-Dix in that slot/safety swing role that Hyde currently occupies, but that role does no justify that kind of money.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
Given the choice, I would sign Burnett at age 29 over Clinton-Dix. He's simply the better football player and the better strong safety.

You're right that Burnett currently is the better strong safety but with Clinton-Dix being four years younger that might not hold true for the length of the contract one of them will be signed to after the 2017 season.
 

Members online

No members online now.

Latest posts

Top