Packers notes

[tynimiller]

with as little activity at ILB as we've had this offseason, whether it be FA, the draft or now being able to sign UDFA's, it means either the linebackers available to them this year just suck, or they have a good idea of what's on the team currently and they like them. It makes me nervous, no doubt, because it wasn't exactly a position of strength and not seeing any change is a bit worrisome. but, we have options and one is the option of moving clay inside makes this all much more tolerable, for me at least.

The sad fact is with Sam there the cutting of Jones and Hawk both made us better at the position. I foresee someone hungry enough to prove themselves that this year they do well....the question is if one takes hold will they keep that fire long term or will it die out.

 

[Sky King]

In recent years they haven't gotten a shot at any existing blue-chippers. (I vomit in my mouth when I say that because I can't help but be haunted by the memory of Tony Mandarich.) Hawk was the most recent shot at an alleged blue-chipper at #5 and Raji the next closest at #10. Otherwise, its pick in the 20's or later. Yet, we remain amongst the league's elite teams. Whatever he's doing it seems to be working. And having that Rodgers guy around hasn't hurt the team, either. And he was a mere #24.

 

[TJV]

In recent years they haven't gotten a shot at any existing blue-chippers.

Raji was picked at #9 and Harrell was picked at #16 but your point stands.

 

[Sky King]

Raji was picked at #9 and Harrell was picked at #16 but your point stands.

My rote memory is not what it used to be, and it doesn't stop there.

 

[Half Empty]

In recent years they haven't gotten a shot at any existing blue-chippers. (I vomit in my mouth when I say that because I can't help but be haunted by the memory of Tony Mandarich.) Hawk was the most recent shot at an alleged blue-chipper at #5 and Raji the next closest at #10. Otherwise, its pick in the 20's or later. Yet, we remain amongst the league's elite teams. Whatever he's doing it seems to be working. And having that Rodgers guy around hasn't hurt the team, either. And he was a mere #24.

Oh, brother. A very matter-of-fact post, and then the two biggest TT conflict topics ever - (1) If we didn't have Rodgers, would any of the rest matter? and (2) Was TT lucky or smart in drafting him? Ain't touchin' that one with a yardstick.

 

[Sky King]

Oh, brother. A very matter-of-fact post, and then the two biggest TT conflict topics ever - (1) If we didn't have Rodgers, would any of the rest matter? and (2) Was TT lucky or smart in drafting him? Ain't touchin' that one with a yardstick.

It will test the mettle of some folks around here, for sure. I have a gut feeling that we'll only know the true answer until we read the post-career book that TT is probably never going to write.

TT, Man of Mystery and master provocateur of vigorous forum debates.

 

[7thFloorRA]

I am stoked about TT getting Gunter from The U!!!! I don't understand why his stock fell.....but I'm glad it did. I think he could be the next Shields. He is the big, physical corner they do not have on the roster. He could be used as a safety though. He kind of lurks the field like a ball hawk instead of playing tight man coverage.

 

[TeamTundra]

Love the Gunter signing. FWIW, NFL draft scout had a 4th to 6th round grade on him.

I'm thinking he fell because his makeup speed is marginal, but as you said he has ideal size
And press skills.

 

[thisisnate]

yeah, love that pick up thought we might grab a bigger cover corner type like gunter or thomas in a late round, but then we got the two early and both those guys went undrafted. looks good on special teams and around the ball. dunno how big a deal his track speed is, but it's not very good. first udfa of any interest to me lol

 

[Deleted member 6794]

with as little activity at ILB as we've had this offseason, whether it be FA, the draft or now being able to sign UDFA's, it means either the linebackers available to them this year just suck, or they have a good idea of what's on the team currently and they like them. It makes me nervous, no doubt, because it wasn't exactly a position of strength and not seeing any change is a bit worrisome. but, we have options and one is the option of moving clay inside makes this all much more tolerable, for me at least.

I really would like to share the optimism of some on the ILB position but I truly can´t. Thompson and some of you seem to think that guys like Bradford, Thomas and Palmer (who was injured last year) will be able to provide the upgrade at WLB we´re in dire need of although none of them was capable of moving past either Hawk, Jones or Lattimore on the depth chart all of last season while the play at the position was atrocious. In addition Barrington is a marginal starter at SLB at best.

 

[Mondio]

I don't think it's been addressed adequately, but i'm not freaking out about it either. We have options. Moving Clay and using our other OLB's keep the defense at an above average level. I can live with it. Of course we're thin then and having Ray Lewis in his prime in the middle would be better. But signing players you don't think are going to be better than what you have, or be able to help at all isn't the way to get better either.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I don't think it's been addressed adequately, but i'm not freaking out about it either. We have options. Moving Clay and using our other OLB's keep the defense at an above average level. I can live with it. Of course we're thin then and having Ray Lewis in his prime in the middle would be better. But signing players you don't think are going to be better than what you have, or be able to help at all isn't the way to get better either.

I have a hard time believing that there hasn´t been a single player available either in free agency or the draft or via a trade to improve the WLB position over the last two offseasons. Yet Thompson decided to not address it once again.

 

[TJV]

I really would like to share the optimism of some on the ILB position but I truly can´t. Thompson and some of you seem to think that guys like Bradford, Thomas and Palmer (who was injured last year) will be able to provide the upgrade at WLB we´re in dire need of although none of them was capable of moving past either Hawk, Jones or Lattimore on the depth chart all of last season while the play at the position was atrocious. In addition Barrington is a marginal starter at SLB at best.

As I've posted before I wish Thompson would have addressed ILB in UFA. But I want to make a few points about your posting on the ILB position generally. 1) As McCarthy said, Matthews will continue to play inside. 2) You’ve posted several times the Packers haven’t addressed WLB. The caveat you should add IMO is they haven’t in your opinion. They appear to believe Ryan is capable to fill that role. You don’t think he is, and you could be correct, but that doesn’t mean they haven’t addressed it from their point of view. And I'll bet you would agree there is at least some chance they're right. 3) Making the point that Bradford, Thomas and Palmer couldn’t beat out Hawk, Jones, or Lattimore IMO needs a couple of caveats: Bradford wasn’t switched to ILB in time to compete – I thought he was drafted as an ILB but they started him at OLB. As you mentioned Palmer was injured and Thomas was a rookie. Also while you think Barrington is a marginal starter, he was an upgrade from the three previous starters wasn’t he? If you agree that diminishes your point others couldn’t beat out Hawk, Jones, and Lattimore: Perhaps it wasn’t their lack of ability but a lack of opportunity. Honestly I think their inexperience and injury were more important reasons, but the point is it wasn’t Barrington’s fault it took so long for him to get his chance.

I’m not wildly optimistic about ILB. But if the ILB not named Matthews is better than Barrington was last year - either by his improvement or replacement, I don’t think ILB will prevent them from winning a title.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

As I've posted before I wish Thompson would have addressed ILB in UFA. But I want to make a few points about your posting on the ILB position generally. 1) As McCarthy said, Matthews will continue to play inside. 2) You’ve posted several times the Packers haven’t addressed WLB. The caveat you should add IMO is they haven’t in your opinion. They appear to believe Ryan is capable to fill that role. You don’t think he is, and you could be correct, but doesn’t mean they haven’t addressed it from their point of view. And I'll bet you would agree there is at least some chance they're right. 3) Making the point that Bradford, Thomas and Palmer couldn’t beat out Hawk, Jones, or Lattimore IMO needs a couple of caveats: Bradford wasn’t switched to ILB in time to compete – I thought he was drafted as an ILB but they started him at OLB. As you mentioned Palmer was injured and Thomas was a rookie. Also while you think Barrington is a marginal starter, he was an upgrade from the three previous starters wasn’t he? If you agree that diminishes your point others couldn’t beat out Hawk, Jones, and Lattimore: Perhaps it wasn’t their lack of ability but a lack of opportunity. Honestly I think their inexperience and injury were more important reasons, but the point is it wasn’t Barrington’s fault it took so long for him to get his chance.

I’m not wildly optimistic about ILB. But if the ILB not named Matthews is better than Barrington was last year - either by his improvement or replacement, I don’t think ILB will prevent them from winning a title.

You bring up a lot of valid points although I don´t agree with all of them.

It´s pretty obvious the team plans on continuing to play Matthews inside but if it´s true that he doesn´t want to play there anymore there´s a risk of creating some issues with our best defensive player. I really have a hard time believing the coaches wouldn´t have played either Bradford or Thomas if they would have improved the play at the position last year. I agree it´s possible both will have improved a ton by the start of the 2015 season but it´s far from a given.

Finally, the Packers are one of the best teams in the NFL even with the lack of talent at ILB but I think addressing the position adequately during this offseason would have made them the odds-on favourite to win it all.

 

[tynimiller]

I would still love to see Spikes added...cheaper now than before and pretty much would give us an awesome run defense on rushing downs.....next year I pray we get a stud athletic coverage ILB that is seen as spot value to TT....cuz barring Ryan proving everyone wrong I don't see stud written on him. I see a more athletic version of Hawk....so upgrade yes, but minimally.

 

[TJV]

I really have a hard time believing the coaches wouldn´t have played either Bradford or Thomas if they would have improved the play at the position last year. I agree it´s possible both will have improved a ton by the start of the 2015 season but it´s far from a given.

I would have a hard time believing it too except for one thing: They didn’t play Barrington at the position for the first half of the season; so they had a reserve who was better than their starters. But as I said there were other reasons Bradford and Thomas didn’t play.

I don’t know if the Packers would be the odds on favorite to win it all if Thompson would have addressed ILB in UFA, for example. But I don’t care which team is the odds on favorite, I believe they’d be better.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I would still love to see Spikes added...cheaper now than before and pretty much would give us an awesome run defense on rushing downs.

Spikes would for sure still be the best run defender amongst the Packers inside linebackers.

I would have a hard time believing it too except for one thing: They didn’t play Barrington at the position for the first half of the season; so they had a reserve who was better than their starters. But as I said there were other reasons Bradford and Thomas didn’t play.

We'll figure out pretty fast what the coaching staff thinks about Bradford, Thomas and Palmer. I would be surprised though if any of them would turn into a impact player for the Packers.

 

[PikeBadger]

I'll be quite surprised if at least one of Thomas/Palmer/Bradford does not play a significant role on this year's team. I'm not forecasting Matthews/Peppers impact but I do expect at least one of them will become a roster fixture for a few years. I also expect to see noticeable improvement from Barrington.

 

[HardRightEdge]

I'll be quite surprised if at least one of Thomas/Palmer/Bradford does not play a significant role on this year's team. I'm not forecasting Matthews/Peppers impact but I do expect at least one of them will become a roster fixture for a few years. I also expect to see noticeable improvement from Barrington.

Bradford, maybe, by virtue of the fact that being an unknown frees the imagination.

I think Ryan leapfrogs these guys, even if he's not the sideline-to-sideline guy one would prefer teaming with Barrington.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I'll be quite surprised if at least one of Thomas/Palmer/Bradford does not play a significant role on this year's team. I'm not forecasting Matthews/Peppers impact but I do expect at least one of them will become a roster fixture for a few years. I also expect to see noticeable improvement from Barrington.

I agree that one of them will probably play a significant amount of snaps, making a positive impact is a different story though.

 

[fritothedog]

Add Crockett and Hunt
1.33 edit: and Lavon Hooks
1.36 edit: and Agnew + Vaughtters
1.58 edit: and Harris + Maples
edit. add Gunter; Deleted Collins (tryout)

So we have signed:

John Crockett - RB - North Dakota State
Malcolm Agnew - RB - Southern Illinois
Alonzo Harris - RB - Lafayete
Raymond Maples - RB - Army

Adrian Coxson - WR - Stony Brook
Larry Pinkard - WR - Old Dominion
Jimmie Hunt - WR - Missouri

Mitchell Henry - TE - Western Kentucky

Matt Rotheram - OL - Pittsburgh
Fabbians Ebbele - OL - Arizona
Marcus Reed - OL - Fayetteville State

Lavon Hooks - DT - Ole Miss

Tavarus Dantzler - ILB - Bethune-Cookman
James Vaughtters - OLB - Stanford

Bernard Blake - CB - Colorado State
Ladarius Gunter - CB/S - Miami (Fla)

I read that Oklahoma State DT James Castleman signed with the Packers. This is exciting because he became everyone's favorite player in the bowl game against Washington because they played him on offense twice. He is a strong kid with good work ethic, but I am not sure he is talented enough for the NFL. I for one would love to see it though.

TT probably likes him because he played basketball in high school.

0:58 for wildcat touchdown and 4:36 for everyone's favorite play of the game. (Number 91 if that isn't clear.)

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

I haven't seen anything on him here yet so I thought I would share. He has an outside shot at helping us out but my guess is he is a camp body. Hope he makes the team though. It would certainly be fun.

 

[thisisnate]

I read that Oklahoma State DT James Castleman signed with the Packers. This is exciting because he became everyone's favorite player in the bowl game against Washington because they played him on offense twice. He is a strong kid with good work ethic, but I am not sure he is talented enough for the NFL. I for one would love to see it though.

TT probably likes him because he played basketball in high school.

0:58 for wildcat touchdown and 4:36 for everyone's favorite play of the game. (Number 91 if that isn't clear.)

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

I haven't seen anything on him here yet so I thought I would share. He has an outside shot at helping us out but my guess is he is a camp body. Hope he makes the team though. It would certainly be fun.

holy hell i would not want to try to tackle that

 

[Croak]

The league attempts to achieve parity by allowing weaker teams the early picks and thus strengthening their chances. When teams like Green Bay stay within the rules, it works. I'd say TT has done pretty well for having a bunch of picks that were in later rounds. Sure, he's human and sometimes screws up, but who of us doesn't? Over all, his job has been well done.

 

[Half Empty]

The league attempts to achieve parity by allowing weaker teams the early picks and thus strengthening their chances. When teams like Green Bay stay within the rules, it works. I'd say TT has done pretty well for having a bunch of picks that were in later rounds. Sure, he's human and sometimes screws up, but who of us doesn't? Over all, his job has been well done.

I don't follow. How does Green Bay, or any team NOT stay within the rules? And, what's the definition of parity? If you mean no dynasties, I'd have to go along with you, although I'd argue that free agency and the salary cap are much more responsible. If you mean everybody gets a chance at the brass ring, I'd have to disagree and point out the perpetual bottom feeders.

 

[Poppa San]

I don't follow. How does Green Bay, or any team NOT stay within the rules? And, what's the definition of parity? If you mean no dynasties, I'd have to go along with you, although I'd argue that free agency and the salary cap are much more responsible. If you mean everybody gets a chance at the brass ring, I'd have to disagree and point out the perpetual bottom feeders.

You mean teams like Pittsburgh for their 1st 40 years, or Arizona since the '30's, or Green Bay in the 70's and 80's?