Packers and Raiders: Studs and Duds

[gbgary]

Sorry, in my head I was thinking more "torn ACL, Achilles, etc."

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I made the bold prediction that Boyle might beat out Kizer and I will proudly thump my chest when I'm right. His current stat line per Wes Hodkiewicz: 31 of 51 for 338 yds, 5 TDs for a passer rating of....wait for it....:

113.0

Doesn't look like it, and yes it's primarily against backups(although NOBODY on the Ravens should be discounted), gotta give credit where credit is due. I would fully support cutting Kizer to allow Boyle to continue to trend upward. I'd also support signing a veteran backup, such as Fitzpatrick, Henne, Beathard, and Mullens.

I wouldn't put any stock into Boyle's passer rating vs. players who most likely won't end up making their respective teams roster.

As far as who can play the slot? I think pretty much anyone of the Packer WR's can. GA is slotted to start there, with Adams probably seeing snaps from there, as well as JK and TD. I actually think that is a good fit for TD. So keeping Shepherd just because he is a "natural" slot receiver, isn't convincing enough for me.

There have been reports that Allison doesn't actually excel primarily lining up in the slot. Shepherd most likely presents the best option lining up there.

Trevor Davis: Great game last night, and while I still don't think he makes the team I think now he may be the last WR cut instead of the first.

I'm quite sure Davis will make the team after reports about him having a great offseason as well as his performance vs. the Raiders.

I could be wrong too....lol

But....I think once a player is cut from the 90 and clears waivers (not added to a 53), he is free to sign a deal with any other team and that deal can be to go on their 53 or their practice squad. Once a player signs to a teams practice squad, he can't be plucked off it to be on another teams PS, they have to sign him to their 53.

So whomever gets cut from the 90, from whatever team, once they clear waivers, they are free to sign with any other team, whether its to be on their 53 or their PS. Most choose to stay with the same team due to familiarity, but some just need a change of scenery or get signed to a 53.

So if Boyle is cut, he must clear waivers (a team doesn't put him on their 53), at that point he can sign with any team, including the Packers.

As an additional info, vested veterans with at least four accrued season don't have to clear waivers.

It also wouldn’t be a bad idea to have 2 return specialists.

There's no reason to keep two return specialists unless both of them can contribute on offense as well.

 

[sschind]

Sorry, in my head I was thinking more "torn ACL, Achilles, etc."

That's your problem Poker, you are using your head. Don't you know you are supposed to switch that off before you post.

 

[GleefulGary]

I was one who criticized it, so I will comment on it. Even when the starters played against the Ravens there wasn't much of a pass rush. Those non-starters who also haven't created a pass rush have been playing against other non-starters, so them not getting to the QB is concerning to me. How many times have the Packers backup QB's been sacked or hit in preseason? How many sacks or hits do the Packers have on opposing QB's?

I understand that this could all change when the starters play, but not seeing much of a pass rush from the Packer starters or the backups is a bit concerning to me. Let's just hope Pettine is holding back a bit until the regular season starts.

Also, since most of the preseason is just backups playing against backups, should we just hold off on any comments? I mean these aren't the starters right?

The Ravens practically run an option offense with a passing offense designed to get the ball out quick, plus their QB is, ya know, decently mobile. I can think of at least one play where Z Smith has a sack against any other QB.

But yeah, it's pre-season, mainly backups, and mainly vanilla scheming from the offense and defense. There's not a lot we can, or should, take away from the games. Otherwise Nate Peterman and Tim Boyle would be stars.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

The Ravens practically run an option offense with a passing offense designed to get the ball out quick, plus their QB is, ya know, decently mobile. I can think of at least one play where Z Smith has a sack against any other QB.

But yeah, it's pre-season, mainly backups, and mainly vanilla scheming from the offense and defense. There's not a lot we can, or should, take away from the games. Otherwise Nate Peterman and Tim Boyle would be stars.

Yes, I curb my concerns about the lack of a pass rush in the preseason with all the things you said. However, given that its been lacking in past seasons, it was something I was hoping showed some improvement, even in the preseason. The Packers have 4 sacks in 3 games, the Patriots have 15.

I guess I will have to wait until the Bears game when the Packers rack up 10 sacks .

 

[OldSchool101]

So if Boyle is cut, he must clear waivers (a team doesn't put him on their 53), at that point he can sign with any team, including the Packers.

Gotcha. Makes sense.
Just so I’m clear. If he clears waivers the Pack can already have prearranged an offer of our PS right? Kinda a first right of refusal?
I guess he could also tell us to **** off, then go PS elsewhere, but that would’ve be very nice.

I think Boyle clears waivers, I don’t see anything but a project in the making thus far. We should still always keep a 3rd QB in development stages in my opinion. Either active 53 or PS idk.

 

[Mondio]

he could sign with any PS team he'd like if he doesn't get picked up for a 53

 

[Heyjoe4]

DUDS:

• The field. Never play in Canada again! This cost both teams the opportunity to get reps in for their starters and for all we know, cost some injuries as well. Just shaking my head that this happens in the NFL.
• Injuries to Bolton, EQB and possibly Gary. ILB was paper thin as it was. Now its on life support. If EQ's injury is significant, Lazard probably just made the team.
• Kizer: Writing this before the game is over. But once again, the guy looks way too indecisive.
• Pass Rush: Do we have one? Hope the starters can produce one.
• Penalties

STUDS:

• Trevor Davis: Silenced me, he made the Roster and Shepherd probably didn't.
• Boyle: Actually looked good for most of the game.
• JK Scott

Agreed. What a colossal mistake - not to play in Canada - but to not make sure the field was NFL-ready. That game was an embarrassment to the league, or whoever made the decision to play there.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Gotcha. Makes sense.
Just so I’m clear. If he clears waivers the Pack can already have prearranged an offer of our PS right? Kinda a first right of refusal?
I guess he could also tell us to **** off, then go PS elsewhere, but that would’ve be very nice.

I think Boyle clears waivers, I don’t see anything but a project in the making thus far. We should still always keep a 3rd QB in development stages in my opinion. Either active 53 or PS idk.

I agree with your last point. Two roster QBs and one on the PS.

But I think Boyle will make the roster as the #2 QB. Kizer, after all these years, still shows nothing.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Based on what I've seen from his this preseason, it's probably for the best. He's been out there with Lazard, Shepherd, Kumerow, Davis, and Moore but I don't think I've seen him record more than 2 catches total...and that's with his old college QB throwing to him as well. Him being on IR with a chance to rebound next year would be preferable to keeping him on the 53 right now. With Davis coming on we can dump Moore as well. Adams, MVS, GMO, Davis, Kumerow, Shepherd, and Lazard should work out fine for us moving forward.

I made the bold prediction that Boyle might beat out Kizer and I will proudly thump my chest when I'm right. His current stat line per Wes Hodkiewicz: 31 of 51 for 338 yds, 5 TDs for a passer rating of....wait for it....:

113.0

Doesn't look like it, and yes it's primarily against backups(although NOBODY on the Ravens should be discounted), gotta give credit where credit is due. I would fully support cutting Kizer to allow Boyle to continue to trend upward. I'd also support signing a veteran backup, such as Fitzpatrick, Henne, Beathard, and Mullens.

Boyle has earned the #2 spot.

As for EQ, hey I feel bad for the guy if he did indeed break his ankle (or worse). He hadn’t played that well anyway, and the Packers are deep at WR. The big decision is Shepherd versus Davis. While Davis played lights out Thursday, I still like Shepherd.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Was going to go with winners losers.

Winners:
Davis - the fuy looks really good. He has extraordinary physical skills, why hasnt he done anything up to now? I would be leary of extending him. May be a "contract year deal".
Boyle. Sucked early, not sure what the problem, but git his **** together and looked the part.
Jk Scott. Wow! Pinning raiders on the 1 Yard line - perfect punt
Sullivan - 2 very nice pass breakups.
EQ - the only way he makes the team was on the IR
Dexter Williams, Ford, and carson all had some nice runs.
Elgton Jenkins - looks really good. Should start.
Lazard and Shepard made this team. Both should get some playing time this season.
Josh Jackson had some nice coverage. Played better than previous games.
Ty Summers. Showed more improvement and seemed to be one of our better tacklers last night.
Keke did well as well. Looks like an impressive sophmore draft effort by Gute.


Losers
Rashan Gary. Against a mediocre OL, he did very little that caught my eye. Injured twice. Hope he is okay.
Aaron Rodgers and 1st string offense: they can say they dont need preseason reps but i dont know. Its a new offense and it would be good to get some reps in.
Backup OLs. Did not do so well.
Lane Taylor - see Elgton above
Tackling, good grief. Isnt there a drill to teach this?

OK I LOL at the tackling comment. They teach that in high school. “Wrap up, don’t arm tackle, don’t try to trip anyone.” Man, this has been three games against PS opponents. Spend a day on tackling before playing Da Bears.

And what is up with Gary? No sacks, no pressures I saw against 2nd and 3rd stringers. I hope Gluten and MLF know something we don’t.....

 

[Heyjoe4]

Easy trap to fall into when you watch Preseason games. Boyle has stunk it up just as much as Kizer has in other games. I think you still have Kizer as your #2 and that is mainly due to real game experience VS. starters. Neither of them are talented enough to make me feel comfortable with our #2.

If #12 goes down, neither Boyle or Kizer can keep this team at .500. That’s a problem.....

 

[sschind]

OK I LOL at the tackling comment. They teach that in high school. “Wrap up, don’t arm tackle, don’t try to trip anyone.” Man, this has been three games against PS opponents. Spend a day on tackling before playing Da Bears.

And what is up with Gary? No sacks, no pressures I saw against 2nd and 3rd stringers. I hope Gluten and MLF know something we don’t.....

They may teach it in high school but that doesn't mean the players learn it. I saw some pretty bad tackling last night including a whiff from my nephew on a kickoff return. Luckily he recovered and by the time the returner had juked around enough to make at least 4 others miss my nephew recovered and pulled him down from behind saving the TD.

 

[gopkrs]

OK I LOL at the tackling comment. They teach that in high school. “Wrap up, don’t arm tackle, don’t try to trip anyone.” Man, this has been three games against PS opponents. Spend a day on tackling before playing Da Bears.

And what is up with Gary? No sacks, no pressures I saw against 2nd and 3rd stringers. I hope Gluten and MLF know something we don’t.....

Maybe Gary will end up being our middle linebacker. (Half joking) Though I am a bit concerned (wherever he plays) that he needs to obtain some mean. At least during the games.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Maybe Gary will end up being our middle linebacker. (Half joking) Though I am a bit concerned (wherever he plays) that he needs to obtain some mean. At least during the games.

From what I saw he was getting off the line well, showed strength and speed, and then didn’t finish plays. Maybe that’s all they want from him at this point. He can play more than just OLB.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Chuckie trying to lay the ground work for the Oct. 20th meeting at Lambeau and trying to get in MLF's head.

Jon Gruden to Matt LaFleur on #HardKnocks amid questions about the field in Winnipeg: "(It's) fine with us. It's not Lambeau Field quality, I know, but we're playing. you guys don't want to play, or what?"

 

[HardRightEdge]

Chuckie trying to lay the ground work for the Oct. 20th meeting at Lambeau and trying to get in MLF's head.

Jon Gruden to Matt LaFleur on #HardKnocks amid questions about the field in Winnipeg: "(It's) fine with us. It's not Lambeau Field quality, I know, but we're playing. you guys don't want to play, or what?"

Are we all clear on what was wrong with the field? The goal posts were moved from the CFL location to the NFL location. That left holes at the backs of the end zones. They filled them in and patched them over. It was about a 2' x 2' patch. That's why the Packers objected and the game was played on an 80 yard field.

I don't think Gruden was getting in anybody's head. I think he was being genuine in calling some folks p*ssies.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I don't think Gruden was getting in anybody's head. I think he was being genuine in calling some folks p*ssies.

Yet, he didn't play any of his starters.

There was more to it then just the one quote:

"on the sideline, Gruden to Derek Carr: "Unbelievable. People **** me off, Derek. Been planning this game for a long time, man. To have some guy get off the bus and say we can't play here ... what?"

after the game as he walked off the field he turned to what appeared to be #Packers team physician Dr. Pat McKenzie and said with a smile, "Ain't nothing wrong with that field, man."

I get it, Gruden is a camera guy, loves to be in front of it and try to be funny.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Yet, he didn't play any of his starters.

That might have been the plan anyway. It's the way the league is going these days. Besides, I wouldn't play them either if they were not going to get work against the opposing starters. Move those few snaps to preseason week 4. The bottom line is the Packers made an issue of it and had the field shortened, not Gruden.

Like I said before, either the Packers were being overly fussy or Murphy wanted to send a message to the league about playing preseason games in a small off-the-grid stadium, games he's on the record as favoring eliminating.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I definitely agree that it wasn't just the goalpost damage that factored into the decisions made by the Packers that night, but I also think that Gruden, who I actually like, was out of line with some of his comments, but all a part of the game.

 

[gopkrs]

I think winning that game was really important to Gruden...which is kind of ridiculous.

 

[rmontro]

I think winning that game was really important to Gruden...which is kind of ridiculous.

I don't think it's ridiculous. It's been explained that Gruden wants to establish a winning tradition with the team, he wants it to become a habit. Yeah, it's just preseason, but it's a relatively easy way to get the ball rolling.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I don't think it's ridiculous. It's been explained that Gruden wants to establish a winning tradition with the team, he wants it to become a habit. Yeah, it's just preseason, but it's a relatively easy way to get the ball rolling.

The Packers basically served him up the win by not playing their starters. If the win was THAT important to Gruden, all he had to do was play his starters for a Q or two and it would have probably assured him of the W. As it turns out he didn't need to, but while winning is always nice, in Preseason, if a coach sacrifices the other purposes (evaluation and experience) just to put up a W, I doubt he is in the league long.