Packers Huddle

Yoop wrote: ↑

17 Nov 2021 09:42

go pak go wrote: ↑

17 Nov 2021 09:30

Yoop wrote: ↑

17 Nov 2021 09:27

31 is old, just ask any teen ager

hey I'd love to bring him back for another year or two, but I don't want to pay a lot to do so, I don't know Whitney's injury history, but 31 is about when edge rushers lose that edge, you yourself claimed you don't like giving 3rd contracts.

I turn 31 in 3 weeks. I can't accept it's old.

I am all about any contract if the value is there. It all depends on Whitney's market. We at minimum will lose one of the Smiths if not both. If Whitney wants another "prove it" year or a modest 2 - 3 deal under $10 million per season, it may be worth it.

happy birthday, a certificate of Packer ownership would be a great birthday present for yourself and family.

your right, 31 for the average man is young, but for a pro football player it's like dog years, a multiplier has to be added in, hell Rodgers stubbed his toe and looked like a 73 year old last week

With that long straggly hair and gray beard he looks like an old billy goat.

Remember when we were excited for Vernon Scott because we needed someone like him?



Seems like we stumbled onto something good by playing a more natural 3rd safety, anyway. Is anyone surprised he cannot even sniff the field right now?

Based off MLF and Stenavich's comments about Bakhtiari, I wouldn't bet on seeing him before the bye week.

NCF wrote: ↑

18 Nov 2021 11:01

Remember when we were excited for Vernon Scott because we needed someone like him?



Seems like we stumbled onto something good by playing a more natural 3rd safety, anyway. Is anyone surprised he cannot even sniff the field right now?

Hasn't Scott been injured much of the year? Who is the "more natural" 3rd safety? Henry Black? He's fine, but certainly among the weaker links of the very good defensive unit.

I think a lot of people thought Scott would thrive if Savage played a lot of "star" since Scott was also a speedy free safety, but also a big hitter. Since we didn't move Savage, we didn't need that on the back end.

paco wrote: ↑

18 Nov 2021 12:06

Based off MLF and Stenavich's comments about Bakhtiari, I wouldn't bet on seeing him before the bye week.

Yeah, it sounds like they're not really sure how to get him into "football shape" without playing live football; that he looks good when he's out there, but "can he sustain it for an entire game?"

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

18 Nov 2021 12:27

NCF wrote: ↑

18 Nov 2021 11:01

Remember when we were excited for Vernon Scott because we needed someone like him?



Seems like we stumbled onto something good by playing a more natural 3rd safety, anyway. Is anyone surprised he cannot even sniff the field right now?

Hasn't Scott been injured much of the year? Who is the "more natural" 3rd safety? Henry Black? He's fine, but certainly among the weaker links of the very good defensive unit.

I think a lot of people thought Scott would thrive if Savage played a lot of "star" since Scott was also a speedy free safety, but also a big hitter. Since we didn't move Savage, we didn't need that on the back end.

this has to be the 2nd or 3rd time that Black has graded the best of the worst graded players, that may sound bad, but not on this defense, a 60 is a above average grade, black has been a solid 3rd safety, rarely misses tackles and doesn't let the ball past him.

and Scott did, he also misses tackles, takes poor angles, about the only thing Scott has on Black is the speed.

Yoop wrote: ↑

18 Nov 2021 13:16

this has to be the 2nd or 3rd time that Black has graded the best of the worst graded players, that may sound bad, but not on this defense, a 60 is a above average grade, black has been a solid 3rd safety, rarely misses tackles and doesn't let the ball past him.

and Scott did, he also misses tackles, takes poor angles, about the only thing Scott has on Black is the speed.

Vernon Scott has played 3 special teams snaps this year and 0 defensive snaps this year. He played 89 snaps on defense last year as a rookie. I'm not sure how anyone has evaluated his play.

It was always the mental side with him, though. He's a raw athletic talent who needs/needed some time to adapt to the next level and who saw his preparation hampered by injuries this year. He's a free safety, while Black has played SS/dime back as that hybrid S/LB role. Black has done just fine, and there's no reason to push Scott onto the field because of that.

But we genuinely don't know who or what Scott is. We can read into the fact that he's not getting playing time, and to an extent, we certainly should. But there's no reason to be like "second year 7th round draft pick who missed most of the season with an injury hasn't lived up to his billing" because, well, he's a second year 7th round draft pick who is raw and who was injured and whose services haven't been needed. And there's certainly no evidence or tape by which we can discuss what he can't do on the field.

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

18 Nov 2021 12:27

I think a lot of people thought Scott would thrive if Savage played a lot of "star" since Scott was also a speedy free safety, but also a big hitter. Since we didn't move Savage, we didn't need that on the back end.

This was kind of my point. Your 3rd-safety should be the one playing that hybrid role. As a result, Amos and Savage have been pretty locked into place and are one of the more important (even if less heralded) reasons that our defense has thrived.

NCF wrote: ↑

18 Nov 2021 13:42

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

18 Nov 2021 12:27

I think a lot of people thought Scott would thrive if Savage played a lot of "star" since Scott was also a speedy free safety, but also a big hitter. Since we didn't move Savage, we didn't need that on the back end.

This was kind of my point. Your 3rd-safety should be the one playing that hybrid role. As a result, Amos and Savage have been pretty locked into place and are one of the more important (even if less heralded) reasons that our defense has thrived.

OOHHH yes, the "more natural" being that the two safeties continued to play safety, rather than moving one of them. Not that the 3rd guy is a "more natural safety," but he is a more natural 3rd safety. Yes, I like and appreciate that.

Yal still buying every thing is progressing as normal?

Drj820 wrote: ↑

18 Nov 2021 13:59

Yal still buying every thing is progressing as normal?

Nope.

Not uncommon to come back from ACL in 7 or 8 months nowadays. This is taking forever.

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

18 Nov 2021 13:47

NCF wrote: ↑

18 Nov 2021 13:42

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

18 Nov 2021 12:27

I think a lot of people thought Scott would thrive if Savage played a lot of "star" since Scott was also a speedy free safety, but also a big hitter. Since we didn't move Savage, we didn't need that on the back end.

This was kind of my point. Your 3rd-safety should be the one playing that hybrid role. As a result, Amos and Savage have been pretty locked into place and are one of the more important (even if less heralded) reasons that our defense has thrived.

OOHHH yes, the "more natural" being that the two safeties continued to play safety, rather than moving one of them. Not that the 3rd guy is a "more natural safety," but he is a more natural 3rd safety. Yes, I like and appreciate that.

The fact that we are able to play light boxes and have our safeties play two high has been such an advantage. They are now actually in a position to be able to make plays on the ball.

It is glorious.

10-12 months is still reasonable especially for an Olineman. Bakh is at 10.5 months. But I'll agree, I'm ever so slightly concerned. But ask me again after the bye.

NCF wrote: ↑

18 Nov 2021 14:04

Drj820 wrote: ↑

18 Nov 2021 13:59

Yal still buying every thing is progressing as normal?

Nope.

If they didn't think he could play at all this season thy would not have activated him. I suspect he won't be back until after the bye.

This might actually get me to vote for once....

Isn't Corey Linsley part of that 5 Rd Comp selection due to age?

go pak go wrote: ↑

18 Nov 2021 19:36

Isn't Corey Linsley part of that 5 Rd Comp selection due to age?

He was 29 as a FA.

go pak go wrote: ↑

18 Nov 2021 14:29

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

18 Nov 2021 13:47

NCF wrote: ↑

18 Nov 2021 13:42

This was kind of my point. Your 3rd-safety should be the one playing that hybrid role. As a result, Amos and Savage have been pretty locked into place and are one of the more important (even if less heralded) reasons that our defense has thrived.

OOHHH yes, the "more natural" being that the two safeties continued to play safety, rather than moving one of them. Not that the 3rd guy is a "more natural safety," but he is a more natural 3rd safety. Yes, I like and appreciate that.

The fact that we are able to play light boxes and have our safeties play two high has been such an advantage. They are now actually in a position to be able to make plays on the ball.

It is glorious.

It's amazing what having good ILBs can do for the quality of safety play.

williewasgreat wrote: ↑

19 Nov 2021 04:53

go pak go wrote: ↑

18 Nov 2021 14:29

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

18 Nov 2021 13:47

OOHHH yes, the "more natural" being that the two safeties continued to play safety, rather than moving one of them. Not that the 3rd guy is a "more natural safety," but he is a more natural 3rd safety. Yes, I like and appreciate that.

The fact that we are able to play light boxes and have our safeties play two high has been such an advantage. They are now actually in a position to be able to make plays on the ball.

It is glorious.

It's amazing what having good ILBs can do for the quality of safety play.

I will take it further and note, especially lately with Keke out, we have been playing more "Bear Front" with 3 DTs but a 6 to 7 man box and it so far has been enough to limit the run.

I would be surprised if that works this week. I think MN matches up well against us to be honest. I think Sunday is going to be a very hard game; as long as MN doesn't play like crappy MN.