I was told that he isn't sure how long it will last but look for Martinez to take his place or Martinez to take Ryan's place
Sam Barrington still not healed?
- Thread starter Arthur Squires
- Start date
H
HardRightEdge
Guest
Well, Martinez replacing Barrington is an obvious scenario if Barrington's injury persists.
If Barrington can play, Martinez replacing either Barrington or Ryan for at least the 70% of nickel/dime snaps is a plausible scenario.
So, I don't glean any new information from your post as to Barrington's injury status.
He wouldn't budge on what's wrong..only offered martinez is such a instinctively smart player and plays faster then his 40 time. Staff is really in love with him.
He studies day and night, smart as hell.. I knew I liked him with in 1st month, but now I'm getting more confirmation on how he is adapting
H
HardRightEdge
Guest
That's pretty much what the beat reporters have told us. Personally, I don't get particularly excited about draftees before they actually play some NFL football unless a Von Miller-type player walks in the door, which would never happens at the bottom of the first round.
There are simply too many instances of practice warriors not being able to translate to the field.
Arthur Squires
Cheesehead
The main reason I was happy the packers drafted him is his knowledge of the game and his film junkie background much like Jake Ryan. And if you watched him at Stanford he definitely plays faster than his 40 represents.
Arthur Squires
Cheesehead
But we would definitely miss the authority Barrington brings to the middle.
D
Deleted member 6794
Guest
There are question marks about Martinez being able to effectively defending the run at the pro level. We'll have to wait at least for the preseason games to make an educated guess about that area of his game. There's no doubt in my mind he's an upgrade in coverage over the incumbent inside linebackers.
Arthur Squires
Cheesehead
My main worry aswell. I seem to remember him getting ran over and having to drag down backs smaller than him. Like you said preseason will show whats what. I think this sunday vs a big back like Robert Turbin would be perfect to assess his run stop ability.
D
Deleted member 6794
Guest
Barrington was able to do cutting as part of his drills during yesterday's practice at Clark Hinkle Field.
H
HardRightEdge
Guest
That's something.
Arthur Squires
Cheesehead
Wow i just read that Barrington lost 22lbs. That should help make him move a little faster. Thats the main worry with him so far. He always seemed so slow.
H
HardRightEdge
Guest
I don't see a reference to that affect, but assuming it's true, 22 lbs. from what?
His Combine weight was 246; his listed weight at packers.com is 240 lbs.
I don't see how he could play ILB in this defense at 218 - 224 lbs.
Arthur Squires
Cheesehead
Yeah It is on Packers.com. They say he's coming in 10 pounds lighter than last season. But he's 20lbs lighter than he was in December. I also read on acmepackingcompany.com that he's lost 22lbs. So he's around 234-235 which should help him move faster.
H
HardRightEdge
Guest
Well, that makes more sense. What he weighed in December after being inactive for a year is not relevant. 234-235 lbs. is at the low end of reasonable.
Don't count your chickens, though. Hawk dropped weight for speed, was no faster, and lost some punch. Finley dropped down to 240 lbs. after his first serious injury and he wasn't any faster. Matthews has dropped weight. The packers.com roster shows Matthews at 255 lbs.. These roster listings are often antique. He's now playing under that weight and he's not any faster.
It's pretty common for players to drop weight after injury or with age to maintain speed and quickness, while seeking to make up the difference in the weight room or with just plain experience.
D
Deleted member 6794
Guest
Here's a link to the article from the Press Gazette website Arthur was referring:
http://www.packersnews.com/story/sp...lb-sam-barrington-back-ankle-injury/88535032/
It seems like Barrington plans on playing at 239 pounds in 2016 which according to him is eight pounds lighter than last season.
Last edited by a moderator:
Arthur Squires
Cheesehead
He's still bringing the pop according to what people are saying he had to be told to calm down and take it easy by teammates.
H
HardRightEdge
Guest
The part I like is "pent up aggression". For all the yakety yak about speed and athleticism in today's game, a physical presence in the middle of field is still necessary. Let's hope he saves it for the regular season and doesn't injure himself (or a teammate) in the interim.
Last edited by a moderator:
Arthur Squires
Cheesehead
Did i read that Jake Ryan has a hamstring issue? Does this keep him from playing tomorrow? I understand Barrington might play some also. If Ryan is a no go that means we get an early look at Martinez playing against starting offense. It would be intersting watching Blake Martinez cover Gary Barnidge. Carl Bradford would be next up and he needs to show some reason to keep him around. Definitely not worth the 4th round investment thus far.
D
Deleted member 6794
Guest
Jake Ryan is unlikely to play tonight because of a hamstring injury. Martinez probably won't get the chance to cover Barnidge (hernia) though as he's questionable as well.
Arthur Squires
Cheesehead
I never thought I'd say this but yes Bradford is showing much much improvement to warrant a roster spot. He was bringing the wood vs Cleveland, looking a little like Barrington when he blew up that RB catching ball in the flat!!!
H
HardRightEdge
Guest
Despite the fact he's high on the roster's "most improved" list, he's squarely on the bubble, with 10 LBs ahead of him:
ILB: Ryan, Barrington, Martinez (plus Matthews in an emergency)
OLB: Matthews, Peppers, Perry, Jones, Elliott, McCray, Fackrell
Bradford was drafted for OLB where speed is not a priority since coverage duties fall to the ILBs in the 3-4. In fairly short order he was moved inside because of a fairly early conclusion that he did not project as an edge rusher.
Assuming Barrington is back to normal, Bradford would lose in a foot race among the ILBs noted above (along with Thomas who is on the wrong side of the bubble). In an attacking tough guy + coverage guy pairing, he's three deep in the tough guy group. I will say he looked like he knew what he was doing dropping in zone, but you would not want to see him running with anybody in man coverage.
Now, Bradford showed more in one preseason game that I've ever seen out of Thomas or last year's early season starter, Nate Palmer, who was quite bad and another guy drafted as an OLB,, so the fact Bradford's on the bubble is encouraging for the roster.
I'm less enthusiastic about Elliott than most, but he's one of the top ST tacklers. Fackrell could use a red shirt year, but with PS you run the risk of having him signed away. McCray looked sketchy against the run, but he's a scrappy pass rusher and is counted on to be a ST tough guy. Besides, with all the OLBs who will be FAs next year and the tight cap situation for 2017, the logic behind the McCray signing is a projection as cheap depth next year. He won't play enough on defense this season to make a case for more than a modest contract after this season.
So, barring injury in the ILB group before the final cut down, PS looks like a strong possibility. On injury at OLB could also open a spot if like what Bradford does on ST. If he keeps playing the way he did against Cleveland and lands on PS, he'd probably get some interest from other teams. 4-3 ILB might be his best fit.
Last edited by a moderator:
D
Deleted member 6794
Guest
Bradford showed significant improvement during the game vs. the Browns but as long as there aren't any injuries at inside linebacker I don't expect him to earn a big role on defense.
I fully expect the Packers to keep four inside linebackers on the roster.
H
HardRightEdge
Guest
That's easy to say when looking at one position group in isolation. But when you start talking about possibly 7 WRs, 7 OLBs, and possibly 9 O-Linemen, something's got to give somewhere. Stealing a spot from the safety group only goes so far...it's how the Packers got to 6 WRs in the first place.
I suppose they could pick up a spot if they had second thoughts about Lane Taylor and cut him, which would hardly be a crime, or reckoned they could sneak Murphy on the PS, or cut Elliott, or cut one out of the Adams/Abbrederis/Janis/Davis group.
I'm sure many would protest most or all of those moves, without actually figuring out where that roster spot is supposed to come from.
If Bradford's a special teams stud, and somebody goes to IR at one of those overloaded position groups, then a stronger case can be made. Otherwise, PS would be his likely landing spot.
Last edited by a moderator:
Pkrjones
Cheesehead
With the linebacker injuries piling up in Buffalo and elsewhere I wouldn't bank on any of our "castoffs" making it back onto the PS.
Similar threads
