Projecting the 53 Man Roster

[OldSchool101]

I feel like we should have a long snapping challenge LOL

I'll be at the Eagles Packers game on the 26th, i'll bring a video camera too

Man I’m jealous. I have at least 8 family members plus their HS friends all converging on Lambeau that game. My wife n daughter n I have just enough time to fly half way across the country and visit family in LaCrosse Octoberfest weekend. But I’m still tying to figure out a way to divert from MSP airport. I’ll be up there Thurs morning.

Is there a LS challenge winner prize? i think I can knock PackerDNA out of contention

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Graham didn't fit what MM was doing either.

I would respectfully disagree with that. He may not have played as well as everyone wanted or thought he would/should, but he fit what MM was running on offense.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Wimm, this just flat out isn't true.

When was the last time the Packers had a live tackling session in practice???

I just threw 9 names out there, that I predict will be kept. Both Patrick and McCray have experience, which I think is more important when slotting backups. Pankey could replace one of those guys. Madison, daBeer and Nijman seem like perfect PS candidates, but not guys I want to see playing anytime soon.

I wouldn't feel comfortable about either McCray or Patrick playing the majority of snaps either. I agree that they benefit from having experience compared to other guys competing for a roster spot though.

All joking aside, I'd look to trade Allison or Davis to Miami for a (5th round?) pick in '20. Miami might be a good place to trade an OL on the chopping block as well.

The Packers should keep Allison for this season. If they can work out a trade it would be smart to acquire an inside linebacker in return.

I was also thinking this. But there’s gonna be at least 1-2 WRs that will be very difficult to send packing.

How many do you think we will try to stash on the PS?

It depends on if any of the receivers released by the Packers will be claimed by other teams. I expect them to try to stash at least two on the practice squad.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

I would respectfully disagree with that. He may not have played as well as everyone wanted or thought he would/should, but he fit what MM was running on offense.

Not really. MM used him as a blocker pretty often which was pretty often too much.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Not really. MM used him as a blocker pretty often which was pretty often too much.

Again, Graham was signed as a pass catching TE and at the time he was signed, the Packers considered him the top FA TE out there. How did he NOT fit MM's pass first offense? The fact that he didn't have that great of year and that he was on the field during running plays doesn't negate the reason he was signed.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Again, Graham was signed as a pass catching TE and at the time he was signed, the Packers considered him the top FA TE out there. How did he NOT fit MM's pass first offense? The fact that he didn't have that great of year and that he was on the field during running plays doesn't negate the reason he was signed.

Because MM tried to use him as a blocker, as I said. He should have been the replacement for Jordy Nelson/Cobb as a slot-WR. He was not used that way though.

 

[gopkrs]

The tight end position on this team really frustrates me.

Petals wants to be able to run and pass effectively out of the same personnel group. His whole offense is predicated on attacking a defense in different ways but out of alignments that make everything appear the same.

But the Packers have two tight ends that they figure to keep who are not dual threats.

Graham (we think) is a passing game weapon, but he's a major liability in the running game. Lewis (we think) is still a good blocker, but he isn't scaring anyone in the passing game. So neither fit the approach of the offense. They each either tip the offenses hand before the play OR render the play ineffective by their crappy execution.

And because they're both so limited, and the young guys are ostensibly not ready yet, we may be forced into keeping a fourth tight end. So you end up losing a roster spot somewhere else and you still don't have a guy that really fits the offense.

My biggest criticism of Gutekunst to this point in his tenure is the Graham debacle. It was a bad idea to sign him and a worse idea to keep him.

I would seriously consider giving Tonyan real snaps early in the season and seeing what he does with them. He would seem to be the only dark horse hope of coming up with a tight end that actually fits the offense this season.

I think (hope) that the demise of Jimmy Graham is premature. I think he could have a really good season. I would still like to see Tonyan (who looks like he catches the ball very well) and Sternberger get opportunities to play. I would only keep Lewis if he shows that he can help (a lot) in the run game. He could be good for a couple of surprise catches which MM did not try last year. But if he can't block that well anymore; then I hope they let him go.

 

[Dantés]

I think (hope) that the demise of Jimmy Graham is premature. I think he could have a really good season. I would still like to see Tonyan (who looks like he catches the ball very well) and Sternberger get opportunities to play. I would only keep Lewis if he shows that he can help (a lot) in the run game. He could be good for a couple of surprise catches which MM did not try last year. But if he can't block that well anymore; then I hope they let him go.

Graham would have to have a huge year as a receiver to justify his bloated contract because he detracts from the offense as a blocker.

If you consider a baseball analogy, a player with a -2.0 WAR in the field and a +2.0 WAR in the batter's box is still a 0.00, replacement level player.

Graham is a minus in the running game. So he has to be above and beyond as a receiver to be a net asset to the team. I don't buy him returning to pass catching dominance and I simply hate his fit in this offense. He should have been cut.

 

[Dantés]

Because MM tried to use him as a blocker, as I said. He should have been the replacement for Jordy Nelson/Cobb as a slot-WR. He was not used that way though.

If a TE is so incapable as a blocker that his only use is as a slot receiver, the problem is with the player and whoever chose to pay him, not the coach.

People have been accusing coaches and coordinators of misusing Graham for years. He is the common denominator in all of those situations.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

If a TE is so incapable as a blocker that his only use is as a slot receiver, the problem is with the player and whoever chose to pay him, not the coach.

People have been accusing coaches and coordinators of misusing Graham for years. He is the common denominator in all of those situations.

I may be reading you wrong, but I'm starting to get the impression that you don't like Jimmy Graham nor the decision to sign him.

 

[Dantés]

I may be reading you wrong, but I'm starting to get the impression that you don't like Jimmy Graham nor the decision to sign him.

It's my favorite thing to complain about!

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

It's my favorite thing to complain about!

Well I for one am hoping Graham has a Pro Bowl year and I can tell you to "Stuff a sock in it!"

Do I expect it? Not really, but I do expect more from #12 and #80 than we saw last season. Given a new offense, a healthy Rodgers and possibly advanced chemistry of the 2, I am cautiously optimistic it isn't out of the question.

 

[HardRightEdge]

This is my understanding as well. Contracts count, period.

The only out is split-value contracts, which old veterans and other journeymen get (possibly guys on rookie deals.) Basically, Stars don't get split-value contracts, everyone else could.

A split value contract, using nice round numbers, is something like "We'll pay you $1,000,000 a year. If you go on IR, we'll reduce that by 1/2." Or a 1/3. Etc. But per game. Again using round numbers, if a player plays 8 games, they'd earn $500,000. And then going to IR for the remaining 8, they would only get $250,000 for the balance of the season.

There is a hitch.

https://frontofficenfl.com/2017/03/10/nfl-split-contracts/

"If a veteran player has four or more Accrued Seasons and makes a team’s week one roster, his full salary is guaranteed for the rest of the season whether his contract includes a split salary or not. Any player signed during the season is not subject to this exception."

If you sign a vested vet to a split contract prior to opening day it would be with the expectation or risk he might start the season on IR or PUP but available later in the year. Of course the player would have to agree to that presumably with no better options. It would also make sense to sign a player with a durability issue to a split contract in-season where the vested vet full guarantee no longer applies. The Packers signed Ryan Grant to a split contract in December 2012, for instance.

Ibraheim Campbell, coming off an ACL which might land him on PUP or IR, might be an example of the kind of player on a split contract, but I don't see any indication he has such a contract.

I've not followed this discussion to know which specific player is being discussed, if any, but you can take this CBA provision into account.

 

[HardRightEdge]

It's my favorite thing to complain about!

I don't have a favorite complaint, but I can be added to the list of complainers dating from when he was signed.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

If a TE is so incapable as a blocker that his only use is as a slot receiver, the problem is with the player and whoever chose to pay him, not the coach.

People have been accusing coaches and coordinators of misusing Graham for years. He is the common denominator in all of those situations.

I mean, I'm not judging his contract but it's not like the Packers were flush with so much WR talent last year that MM was forced to move him in-line to make room for rookies. Signing him to that contract was a mistake. MM doubled down on the mistake by asking him to do more of the things that aren't his strength. Then again, this is me assuming he still has the athleticism to be a valuable receiver; it's possible MM was correct in having him block so much if Graham has deteriorated significantly as a receiver.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Love you

That reminds me of a friend who often concludes a sarcastic comment to his wife with a "love you!"

He also often addresses her as "love bucket" or "sugar britches". We don't want that.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

That reminds me of a friend who often concludes a sarcastic comment to his wife with a "love you!"

He also often addresses her as "love bucket" or "sugar britches". We don't want that.

I have a married buddy that proudly where's a t-shirt that simply says "Yes Dear"

 

[Deleted member 6794]

There is a hitch.

https://frontofficenfl.com/2017/03/10/nfl-split-contracts/

"If a veteran player has four or more Accrued Seasons and makes a team’s week one roster, his full salary is guaranteed for the rest of the season whether his contract includes a split salary or not. Any player signed during the season is not subject to this exception."

If you sign a vested vet to a split contract prior to opening day it would be with the expectation or risk he might start the season on IR or PUP but available later in the year. Of course the player would have to agree to that presumably with no better options. It would also make sense to sign a player with a durability issue to a split contract in-season where the vested vet full guarantee no longer applies. The Packers signed Ryan Grant to a split contract in December 2012, for instance.

Ibraheim Campbell, coming off an ACL which might land him on PUP or IR, might be an example of the kind of player on a split contract, but I don't see any indication he has such a contract.

While I guess there are some exceptions most vested veterans don't agree to a split contract. Teams have to get creative with performance bonuses to save some cap space if such a player ends up on injured reserve.

 

[GleefulGary]

When was the last time the Packers had a live tackling session in practice???
.

You said the NFL does not allow live tackling in practice. That's not true. I'm not talking about how often the Packers do or don't do those drills. All I'm commenting on is the falsehood that you stated.

 

[HardRightEdge]

I noticed James Crawford has been named the sole special teams captain for tonight's game. He was also special teams captain in the final game last season. Packers.com credits him with 13 special teams tackles last season, which is quite a few. Add it all up and it's a good bet you can push him off the bubble and and onto the roster.

Frankly, I haven't noticed him on defense in the first 2 preseason games. Olivadotti, back in May, said they were "settling him in" at ILB; Gutekunst said he might be inside or outside with a lukewarm, "he might help us on defense".

So, whether he's a #4 ILB, or #5 OLB bumping Gilbert, is unknown to me at the moment but he does look slated to be a core special teams player. That's what most of this 53 man speculating is about, right? Those bottom 10 slots, give or take.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I noticed James Crawford has been named the sole special teams captain for tonight's game. He was also special teams captain in the final game last season. Packers.com credits him with 13 special teams tackles last season, which is quite a few. Add it all up and it's a good bet you can push him off the bubble and and onto the roster.

Frankly, I haven't noticed him on defense in the first 2 preseason games. Olivadotti, back in May, said they were "settling him in" at ILB; Gutekunst said he might be inside or outside with a lukewarm, "he might help us on defense".

So, whether he's a #4 ILB, or #5 OLB bumping Gilbert, is unknown to me at the moment but he does look slated to be a core special teams player. That's what most of this 53 man speculating is about, right? Those bottom 10 slots, give or take.

Not impressed at all with Crawford at ILB and now with the injury to Bolton, the position even gets thinner. While he may be a good special teamer, would be nice to have some quality depth at ILB.

 

[Mondio]

Not impressed at all with Crawford at ILB and now with the injury to Bolton, the position even gets thinner. While he may be a good special teamer, would be nice to have some quality depth at ILB.

He might be an ace on ST, I don’t want to ever see him on a regular defensive down. I’ve seen enough to know that

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

He might be an ace on ST, I don’t want to ever see him on a regular defensive down. I’ve seen enough to know that

Agreed. He looks totally lost at ILB. When you already have very little depth at that position, hard to even count Crawford as an ILB.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Not impressed at all with Crawford at ILB and now with the injury to Bolton, the position even gets thinner. While he may be a good special teamer, would be nice to have some quality depth at ILB.

I don't want to see him play on defense either. He missed the tackle on Oakland's first TD. Try to say something nice about somebody and that's what you get.

Actually, after that missed tackle he looked OK. Randy Ramsey actually looked a little better, but that's against 3rd. tier players.

Last time I checked, though, this is "Projecting the 53 Man Roster", not not pick the first guy off the bench. So put him where you like, on or off.

Your "starting" ILB, except in run down base defense, might be Raven Greene.

 

[HardRightEdge]

I think we should keep Jamerson just for those gold teeth. Are those (1) real caps, (2) one of those pop in overlays, or (3) some crazy new kind of mouth guard? If it's (2) shouldn't he be concerned it might get jammed down his throat? Inquiring minds want to know. Kids these days. And get off my lawn.