Also didnt see Moldens pro day numbers. 4.59 is very disappointing I thought he would be in the upper 4.4s considering pro day numbers are skewed to be fast. To me that makes him undraftable. Sad to see. That guys instincts are off the charts.
Rumor has it he had a gimpy hamstring and tried to gut it out anyway, and that's why he didn't do his c.o.d. drills, too. So maybe not end-of-the-world
Also didnt see Moldens pro day numbers. 4.59 is very disappointing I thought he would be in the upper 4.4s considering pro day numbers are skewed to be fast. To me that makes him undraftable. Sad to see. That guys instincts are off the charts.
Rumor has it he had a gimpy hamstring and tried to gut it out anyway, and that's why he didn't do his c.o.d. drills, too. So maybe not end-of-the-world
I would say the same thing if I had a poor 40.
Packers virtually met for the 2nd time with Asante Samuel Jr and Gutey personally attended FSUs pro day. Im now 100% sure this is the pick. Id be shocked if it wasnt.
Also didnt see Moldens pro day numbers. 4.59 is very disappointing I thought he would be in the upper 4.4s considering pro day numbers are skewed to be fast. To me that makes him undraftable. Sad to see. That guys instincts are off the charts.
Rumor has it he had a gimpy hamstring and tried to gut it out anyway, and that's why he didn't do his c.o.d. drills, too. So maybe not end-of-the-world
I would say the same thing if I had a poor 40.
Packers virtually met for the 2nd time with Asante Samuel Jr and Gutey personally attended FSUs pro day. Im now 100% sure this is the pick. Id be shocked if it wasnt.
Wait. This is the Green Bay Packers.
This is the team who NEVER seem to pick guys they have interest in pre-draft in their first round. This is the team when they talk to the drafted player, "did Green Bay ever reach out to you before the draft?" and the answer is always NO.
Now that was also the Ted Thompson Packers. There were whispers about the Packers and Love last year. So maybe things are changing.
Rumor has it he had a gimpy hamstring and tried to gut it out anyway, and that's why he didn't do his c.o.d. drills, too. So maybe not end-of-the-world
I would say the same thing if I had a poor 40.
Packers virtually met for the 2nd time with Asante Samuel Jr and Gutey personally attended FSUs pro day. Im now 100% sure this is the pick. Id be shocked if it wasnt.
Wait. This is the Green Bay Packers.
This is the team who NEVER seem to pick guys they have interest in pre-draft in their first round. This is the team when they talk to the drafted player, "did Green Bay ever reach out to you before the draft?" and the answer is always NO.
Now that was also the Ted Thompson Packers. There were whispers about the Packers and Love last year. So maybe things are changing.
no word if Guty visited Newsome, virtually or other wise, so we got that going for us word is he met Zav Collins 3 times, so we might as well draw a line right through that slow as a turtle MLB prospect that you love so much
This is the team who NEVER seem to pick guys they have interest in pre-draft in their first round. This is the team when they talk to the drafted player, "did Green Bay ever reach out to you before the draft?" and the answer is always NO.
Now that was also the Ted Thompson Packers. There were whispers about the Packers and Love last year. So maybe things are changing.
The Packers USED to use almost all of their pre-draft resources on the later-round guys and priority undrafted free agents because they are the ones you have to do extra work on, while you can find out what you need to know about bigger program, more-hyped, more-studied, more-prepared players from vast networks of contacts around the league and the NCAA. They barely even TOOK (official) meetings/visits with guys projected on days one and two.
That changed immediately when Gutey took over. Seems like their meetings shifted at least 50% devoted to the higher profile guys. So while there's still some level of secrecy, it was rarely the case that they met with guys and never picked them--they actually FREQUENTLY brought in the guys who did pre-draft visits. Its just allll of those were late-round types. So the guys drafted in the first 3-4 rounds would be like "nah, we never talked" on the regs.
But they didn't, like, host a visit with a guy as a smokescreen only to pass on him and pick someone they never talked to with the pick instead. It was just that for all the picks people actually cared about in the mainstream narratives (earlier ones), the Packers hadn't "met with" them.
But I can tell you that as a participant in TT's first combine in 2005, the team met with about 80% of the players at the combine in the informal coaches' interview section (which has been reconfigured a bit since then). They still get facetime with these guys; just not a formal, longer, documented session.
The Packers USED to use almost all of their pre-draft resources on the later-round guys and priority undrafted free agents because they are the ones you have to do extra work on
The other reason they did that with the undrafteds was to show them some love, let them meet Packer coaches and generally treat them like highly sought-after players. That way, when the draft ended and there was a mad scramble to sign guys - they would be more likely to pick GB over others. And it worked - because many times we'd hear from the player and he would say: " they showed genuine interest in me and GB has a great track record of undrafted guys making the team"
Herman makes a lot of sense, and Barry even said he wants more then one player to rotate in and out of the slot (Star) so as Andy said we already have Savage, and Sullivan and probably Amos that can do so, adding another if the draft should fall that way would give Barry a lot of options to move players around and cause QB's to have to think faster, which could lead to more mistakes.
Packers virtually met for the 2nd time with Asante Samuel Jr and Gutey personally attended FSUs pro day. Im now 100% sure this is the pick. Id be shocked if it wasnt.
Wait. This is the Green Bay Packers.
This is the team who NEVER seem to pick guys they have interest in pre-draft in their first round. This is the team when they talk to the drafted player, "did Green Bay ever reach out to you before the draft?" and the answer is always NO.
Now that was also the Ted Thompson Packers. There were whispers about the Packers and Love last year. So maybe things are changing.
no word if Guty visited Newsome, virtually or other wise, so we got that going for us word is he met Zav Collins 3 times, so we might as well draw a line right through that slow as a turtle MLB prospect that you love so much
I do like Collins a lot. I've definitely cooled off on Collins because of his speed. But yet again the dude is a big dude. We got a lot of great ILBs in the league that were big dudes but didn't have Devin Bush speed.
Re: Hot topic, who is our Star
Posted: 14 Apr 2021 11:41
by YoHoChecko
That was a good video, if not maybe contradictory a little.
I just read Uglem's article which Andy references in his video. And there is unfortunately a lack of specification about what makes the nickel/star role so crucial to this defense (it in fact lumps all DBs together for the discussion).
But it made ZERO mention of utilizing three safeties and changing them out with the nickel defender routinely, which seems to be Herman's suggestion here.
I guess one could make the case that the skillset for many safeties and for a nickel DB are similar, in that they have to be physical tacklers and they don't need elite speed (I think free safeties need elite speed but I recognize my position in the minority there). But the c.o.d. and coverage ability on WRs necessary for a nickel/star points, to me, to a physical CB, not a safety-type of player. Savage might be able to do it, but like Herman says, Savage is very well suited to be a safety--and to be one in this scheme, specifically, so long as he keeps his tackling improvement going.
So I stand by the notion that we need to draft a CB or two capable of playing inside and able to be a good, physical tackler, and we do not need to add safeties such that we have 3 on the field at any given time.
What I DID like about that Uglem article was that it mentioned that the most common nickel D is 3 DL, 2 EDGE, 1 off-ball LB, 3 CBs, and 2 S... that is ideal for me--even allowing you to put Z or Gary as one of the DL with the other 2 at EDGE for pass downs and penetration without losing too much bulk up front.
Re: Hot topic, who is our Star
Posted: 14 Apr 2021 11:44
by Pckfn23
Why move a player from a position we know he can succeed at to a position we think he may have success at? Thank you Herman for being the voice of reason.
That was a good video, if not maybe contradictory a little.
I just read Uglem's article which Andy references in his video. And there is unfortunately a lack of specification about what makes the nickel/star role so crucial to this defense (it in fact lumps all DBs together for the discussion).
But it made ZERO mention of utilizing three safeties and changing them out with the nickel defender routinely, which seems to be Herman's suggestion here.
I guess one could make the case that the skillset for many safeties and for a nickel DB are similar, in that they have to be physical tacklers and they don't need elite speed (I think free safeties need elite speed but I recognize my position in the minority there). But the c.o.d. and coverage ability on WRs necessary for a nickel/star points, to me, to a physical CB, not a safety-type of player. Savage might be able to do it, but like Herman says, Savage is very well suited to be a safety--and to be one in this scheme, specifically, so long as he keeps his tackling improvement going.
So I stand by the notion that we need to draft a CB or two capable of playing inside and able to be a good, physical tackler, and we do not need to add safeties such that we have 3 on the field at any given time.
What I DID like about that Uglem article was that it mentioned that the most common nickel D is 3 DL, 2 EDGE, 1 off-ball LB, 3 CBs, and 2 S... that is ideal for me--even allowing you to put Z or Gary as one of the DL with the other 2 at EDGE for pass downs and penetration without losing too much bulk up front.
Hermans comment about having a couple players that Barry can move in and out of that position makes the most sense to me, the point Dourghty made was that he liked the size of a safety over a CB, I think the goal with a Star is to have a ball hawk ( Robber, rover) short center as well as safety with wheels deep.
Savage has very good coverage skills, he can play that position just as well as any CB we could draft, when Herman says he doesn't think we should lock him into that position, I agree, I feel the same about locking him into deep center, I want to move savage around as much as possible.
he played 230 snaps at the position last year, I'd like to see some film of that, I still prefer a CB like Newsome or Samual because I want to protect the edge against KIng missing games, we also have Vernon Scott who looked OK with the little exposure he got, he could take a leap this year, Whatever, I still think Savage has a much higher ceiling then people think, an so I want to take advantage of that.
Why move a player from a position we know he can succeed at to a position we think he may have success at? Thank you Herman for being the voice of reason.
the voice of reason was that Savage played 230 snaps up in that Star position and excelled doing so, thats why some football people think he should play there more, and Andy didn't actually disagree, even commented about the pluses of being able to move people around.
yes he's a very good FS, but he was even better when he was moving up just prior or post snap
the voice of reason was that Savage played 230 snaps up in that Star position and excelled doing so, thats why some football people think he should play there more, and Andy didn't actually disagree, even commented about the pluses of being able to move people around.
He actually did disagree. He said specifically that if he plays there more often than as a spot duty or disguised look or an adjustment, then teams may start picking on him and trying to exploit him as a coverage player. When he's playing there without the OC or QB expecting him to be there, they don't scheme against it.
Obviously, in a complex game with tons of substitutions and specialization and disguised looks and multiple formations, it is good to have people that can move into different spots and cover different responsibility to surprise the offense and/or catch them off guard.
But what we need are multiple CBs who can play inside and play outside. We could use an upgrade over King for CB2 AND an upgrade over Sullivan for nickel CB. We have little reason to suggest that Hollman or Jackson will be able to step up and fill either of those roles. We could get lucky with UDFA holdovers like Kabion Ento or Samford Samuels, but certainly can't count on it.
The talk of Savage playing there as more of a fixture is due to our NEED. He might be the best option we have on the roster right now. But if the best option you have is moving a 3rd year safety into a new position into a new scheme instead of building upon his displayed strengths and developing instincts at the position, then you need to upgrade the roster at that position instead.
We need to draft CBs capable of playing inside or out. We need to add at least 2 players there (if not in the draft, there are still some serviceable FAs out there). We need CBs who can tackle. Right now, behind Jaire, that is a notable weakness of the position. We need CBs that can play well in a zone. King, particularly, is at his worst playing zone.
Now, the coaches need to be flexible enough to make the scheme fit the players' talents. They're going to self scout and evaluate everyone and try to put guys in a good position. But the bottom line here is that we don't have a group of CBs who possess the skills commonly associated with our coach's play style. To fix that, we should think less about moving ascending players into more challenging roles and think exclusively about who we can add to our roster to improve those specific skills and capabilities.
Re: Hot topic, who is our Star
Posted: 14 Apr 2021 13:39
by Pckfn23
He was fine as an in the box safety, but the STAR is not an in the box safety. The STAR is slot corner, essentially with extra blitz and run defense responsibilities. Savage did play in the slot, but that doesn't mean that was his best spot. He played 770 snaps at free safety. He was best as a Free Safety zone defender on the back end. Exactly what Herman said in his video that slot/star would not be the best use of his abilities. Move him there every now and then, but do not put him there as his primary position.
He was best as a Free Safety zone defender on the back end. Exactly what Herman said in his video that slot/star would not be the best use of his abilities.
That's all true - but at the same time- he's also the best option we have for 2021. That Star role is not conducive for a rookie to handle- quite the opposite. You want a guy with experience, who's seen a lot of offenses, schemes and packages. So unless GB grabs a vet via trade/ FA...Savage may win that spot by default.
He was best as a Free Safety zone defender on the back end. Exactly what Herman said in his video that slot/star would not be the best use of his abilities.
That's all true - but at the same time- he's also the best option we have for 2021. That Star role is not conducive for a rookie to handle- quite the opposite. You want a guy with experience, who's seen a lot of offenses, schemes and packages. So unless GB grabs a vet via trade/ FA...Savage may win that spot by default.
No way. You gotta maximize your best players’ talent and assemble the right role players to do the rest. You don’t disrupt the development of a cusping player and weaken his impact to fill some hole you develop.
Besides, nickel CB is where many many rookies start their careers. So I think the premise is faulty too
He was best as a Free Safety zone defender on the back end. Exactly what Herman said in his video that slot/star would not be the best use of his abilities.
That's all true - but at the same time- he's also the best option we have for 2021. That Star role is not conducive for a rookie to handle- quite the opposite. You want a guy with experience, who's seen a lot of offenses, schemes and packages. So unless GB grabs a vet via trade/ FA...Savage may win that spot by default.
That Star role may simply be a slot corner. No reason a 1st round rookie couldn't handle it, if we got the right guy. Draft to fill that role, don't weaken free safety. Why mess with that?
The STAR role in the sense of Charles Woodson, may just be a figment of the media imagination. Why would we play the Woodson STAR role when we don't have a Woodson type player? Just maybe Star is simple a nickel corner playing in the slot.
word is he met Zav Collins 3 times, so we might as well draw a line right through that slow as a turtle MLB prospect that you love so much