2017 Packers 53-Man Roster (Play GM)

[Dantés]

I agree that it's rare for the Packers to outright release a rookie fifth round pick but on the other hand with the team having a crowded depth chart at wide receiver it's highly unlikely both Yancey and Dupre make the final roster.

If they choose to keep 7, it's easy to see that happening. If it's 6, it's a little cloudier. That would leave Davis, Yancey, Dupre, Janis, and Allison all fighting for three spots. Unless they feel his ST value is too strong, I think Janis is out. And while he has as much chance as any of them, I don't think Allison is any lock.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

If they choose to keep 7, it's easy to see that happening. If it's 6, it's a little cloudier. That would leave Davis, Yancey, Dupre, Janis, and Allison all fighting for three spots. Unless they feel his ST value is too strong, I think Janis is out. And while he has as much chance as any of them, I don't think Allison is any lock.

I don't consider Allison a lock to make the team either but believe that Janis will earn a spot on the 53 because of his performance on special teams.

 

[Dantés]

I don't consider Allison a lock to make the team either but believe that Janis will earn a spot on the 53 because of his performance on special teams.

Could be. But my guess is that, of that group or 5, Yancey is most likely to make the roster based on draft capital invested. He's the closest thing to a lock out of the bunch.

 

[Mondio]

If they choose to keep 7, it's easy to see that happening. If it's 6, it's a little cloudier. That would leave Davis, Yancey, Dupre, Janis, and Allison all fighting for three spots. Unless they feel his ST value is too strong, I think Janis is out. And while he has as much chance as any of them, I don't think Allison is any lock.

i'm not even going to begin to sort it out yet. Too much to be proven yet. Davis showed a tiny bit, then was shelved and then the coach came out and said he should have been given some more opportunities at the end of the year. Allison performed when it counted, is he on the way up? is he going to end up like boykin? Janis struggled early last year and came on better and looked like his old self on ST. He's valuable there, will he remain so while taking a WR position? or can the keep another basically ST position only? I'm excited to see what the new guys can do, but they have a lot to learn.

There is going to be a lot of competition there and I hope some really separate themselves from the bunch and make it an easier decision

 

[Poppa San]

OL (9) Linsley, Evans, Patrick, Taylor, Bakhtiari, Bulaga, Murphy, Spriggs, Barclay
TE (4) Bennett, Kendricks, Rodgers, Sandland
WR (5) Adams, Allison, Davis, Nelson, Yancey
QB (2) Hundley, Rodgers
RB (3) Jones, Montgomery, Williams
FB (2) Kerridge, Ripkowski
DL (6) Guion doesn't return from suspension except for injury.
Lowry, Clark, Daniels, Adams, RJF, Price
LB (8) Biegel, Elliott, Fackrell, Heiman, Martinez, Matthews, Perry, Ryan
DB (11)
Gunter, Hawkins, House, King, Randall, Rollins
Brice, Burnett, Clinton-Dix, Evans, Jones
ST (3) Crosby, Schum, Hart - unless something better appears

Surprise cut/trade Cobb, maybe one of the DBs or OL.
Wouldn't be shocked if RJF doesn't make it and is replaced by a LB.
Also I think Janis and Kerridge are going for the same spot.
DBers Evans and Hawkins along with Kerridge win the coin toss to make the team.
Of course, the way the Packers trainers operate, 2-3 of these guys will be IRd before Labor Day.

 

[PackFan2]

date 2.0 (took out Biegel, cause i feel hes injury prone, once pads goes on... he'd probably be injured again).
I expect a starter or key backup player to get injured when the pads go on. Toss up between Tripp and Heiman. Heiman could probably go both ways (playing ILB and FB) another update soon.

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

We have three rbs drafted, and I like them all... how many rbs do we keep?

 

[HardRightEdge]

We have three rbs drafted, and I like them all... how many rbs do we keep?

Two or three. The third would have to demonstrate some notable potential as a runner or demonstrate special teams utility. Or the #1 or #2 gets dinged up in preseason. Or Montgomery is perceived as an injury risk; he gets injured pretty regularly. Maybe a 4th. on PS.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

We have three rbs drafted, and I like them all... how many rbs do we keep?

1. Montgomery
2. Williams
3. Jones
4. Mays
5. Phillips
6. Stanback

Have to think barring injuries; Montgomery and Williams are locks. They keep a 3rd on the 53 if Ripkowski is the only FB. I think that spot and 1-2 PS spots are up in the air for the remaining 4.

Packers have a lot of bodies and potential at RB, TE and WR.....I think those positions will be a tough call on how many of each to keep on the 53 and who they can most likely stash on the Practice squad.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Two or three. The third would have to demonstrate some notable potential as a runner or demonstrate special teams utility. Or the #1 or #2 gets dinged up in preseason. Or Montgomery is perceived as an injury risk; he gets injured pretty regularly. Maybe a 4th. on PS.

I highly doubt the Packers keep only two running backs on the 53 after the way that worked out last season.

 

[PikeBadger]

I expect the Packers will keep 3 RB's minimum. Also, I fully expect to see 1 on the practice squad. I'd be surprised to see more than 8 OL and less than 9 LB's on the starting 53.

I'd be very surprised to see Cobb released or traded this year. With the TE position appearing to be solidified and strengthened, I can see us starting out with only 5 WR.

 

[HardRightEdge]

I highly doubt the Packers keep only two running backs on the 53 after the way that worked out last season.

One would think not, but last season was not the first time. It's become kind of a habit to keep a #3 on PS for injury emergencies. Or scrape one off the waiver wire like Michael.

The argument for keeping a #3 on the roster are (1) the guy can make the game day roster as a special teamer or (2) the guy tears it up in preseason and it's believed he won't last on the PS. Barring those eventualities there's not much point in keeping a guy on the roster who does not suit up on game day. He might as well sit on the PS.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Last year the Packers found out quickly what happens if you don't have depth at the RB spot. Really, beyond Lacy, there was nobody listed at RB to start the season, on the 53 or the PS that amounted to anything. Had it not been for Montgomery switching to RB, it would have been a really rough year at the position. I think this is one of the big reasons TT went after 3 RB's in the draft. While he probably won't keep all 3 on the final 53, along with Monty, you have to think he hopes 2 out of the 3 rookies turnout to be keepers for that 53 and the 3rd can be stashed, if he shows potential. Also, we saw what happens when you rely on trying to find an adequate RB midseason with Davis and Michael, not much.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

One would think not, but last season was not the first time. It's become kind of a habit to keep a #3 on PS for injury emergencies. Or scrape one off the waiver wire like Michael.

The last time the Packers had only two running backs on the initial 53 before the 2016 season was in 2010 when the team decided to keep three fullbacks for some reason. I don't consider it to be a habit though.

 

[Curly Calhoun]

The last time the Packers had only two running backs on the initial 53 before the 2016 season was in 2010 when the team decided to keep three fullbacks for some reason. I don't consider it to be a habit though.

My guess is that in addition to Ripkowki at fullback, GB keeps Montgomery plus two of the rookies, and tries to stash a third one on the PS. Of course, injuries can change everything.

 

[HardRightEdge]

The last time the Packers had only two running backs on the initial 53 before the 2016 season was in 2010 when the team decided to keep three fullbacks for some reason. I don't consider it to be a habit though.

Perhaps opening day. There have been two on the roster at other times with some frequency. They don't seem to be all that concerned about being caught short handed.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

They don't seem to be all that concerned about being caught short handed.

Maybe they should be after the way last season unfolded though.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Maybe they should be after the way last season unfolded though.

Totally agree. These are the lessons a GM must learn from experience. It appears TT learned it at TE, by doubling up on 2 pretty decent FA's. I think that may have been his goal as well at RB by drafting 3. Obviously, a team can't afford or may not have access to quality depth at every position. However, after 2016 and the mess we were in at the RB position once Lacy went down, I hope to never see the RB position that thin again.

 

[Candidate for Deletion]

I don't consider Allison a lock to make the team either but believe that Janis will earn a spot on the 53 because of his performance on special teams.

Couldn't disagree more. While I cannot adequately refute the idea that Allison is this year's Boykin, I think he goes the opposite route and becomes one of the top three (presuming the loss of Cobb and/or Nelson at the expiration of their contracts). Granted, this is at least 50% because I have a roster crush on him, but I do think he's much better than Boykin and light years ahead of Janis. Janis has next to no chance of making the roster, due to his having made exactly diddly in progress as a WR and STs not having the roster priority which skill positions demand.

 

[Dantés]

Couldn't disagree more. While I cannot adequately refute the idea that Allison is this year's Boykin, I think he goes the opposite route and becomes one of the top three (presuming the loss of Cobb and/or Nelson at the expiration of their contracts). Granted, this is at least 50% because I have a roster crush on him, but I do think he's much better than Boykin and light years ahead of Janis. Janis has next to no chance of making the roster, due to his having made exactly diddly in progress as a WR and STs not having the roster priority which skill positions demand.

The deeper you go on the depth chart, the more priority ST skills are given. It's a pretty important factor for the 4th-7th spots. Janis may not make the cut, but if he fails to do so I am guessing it will be because a younger player (say, Yancey) has proven capable of replacing him as a gunner.

Personally, I don't see the appeal with Allison. He did a nice job presenting a target to Rodgers when plays broke down and AR scrambled to buy time, but I didn't see anything beyond that to get excited about.

 

[Candidate for Deletion]

As far as RBs go, I'd be shocked if we don't have 4 on the roster and 1 on the PS. I include Ripkowski in the 4 even though he's listed as FB just for convenience and clarity. Otherwise, the other 3 are Monty (obviously), Williams (almost certainly), Jones (probably, though I like Mays) and the PS being whoever the top dog is who misses the roster. One thing nobody seems to be talking about is who is the most likely of the rookies to flame out. There's almost certainly going to be at least one who totally disappoints and just gets cut. I actually think Jones could be that guy, though that's just my own bias - I like Mays a ton, and I like Stanback more than Jones. I don't know squat about Phillips.

Still, I think that the pendulum swings the other direction and we have a ton of RBs on the roster. One final outside possibility is that too many of the rookies end up being too raw, and they decide to bring in a veteran as the 4th rb (like, though not necessarily, Jennings). I don't find this the most likely possibility, and is dependent upon at least 2, maybe 3 of the rookies being severely disappointing, but it is still likely enough to mention.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Couldn't disagree more. While I cannot adequately refute the idea that Allison is this year's Boykin, I think he goes the opposite route and becomes one of the top three (presuming the loss of Cobb and/or Nelson at the expiration of their contracts). Granted, this is at least 50% because I have a roster crush on him, but I do think he's much better than Boykin and light years ahead of Janis. Janis has next to no chance of making the roster, due to his having made exactly diddly in progress as a WR and STs not having the roster priority which skill positions demand.

It's probable Allison will be activated to the roster in week 2 but he's definitely not a lock to make the team.

I'm absolutely convinced Janis will never have a constant impact as a receiver because he isn't capable of fully grasping the playbook but he will make the roster as long as he's the best gunner on the team.

 

[Candidate for Deletion]

The deeper you go on the depth chart, the more priority ST skills are given. It's a pretty important factor for the 4th-7th spots. Janis may not make the cut, but if he fails to do so I am guessing it will be because a younger player (say, Yancey) has proven capable of replacing him as a gunner.

Personally, I don't see the appeal with Allison. He did a nice job presenting a target to Rodgers when plays broke down and AR scrambled to buy time, but I didn't see anything beyond that to get excited about.

As to the first point, that is naturally the case, but I reject the idea that Janis is an elite gunner. He's made visible splashes in maybe half a dozen games. His stats don't exactly make him seem irreplaceable as a ST guy, though, and if he is kept it is admitting that either Yancey or Dupree (whoever it would be who wouldn't make the cut, likely Dupree given the draft capital) had little chance of developing. Given how unlikely it is that TT and co admit such a thing about a rookie, I just can't imagine Janis staying.

For the second point, I again concede that I am blinded when it comes to him. I love him, and I cannot argue that everyone else should, but I BELIEVE!

 

[Deleted member 6794]

As to the first point, that is naturally the case, but I reject the idea that Janis is an elite gunner. He's made visible splashes in maybe half a dozen games. His stats don't exactly make him seem irreplaceable as a ST guy, though, and if he is kept it is admitting that either Yancey or Dupree (whoever it would be who wouldn't make the cut, likely Dupree given the draft capital) had little chance of developing. Given how unlikely it is that TT and co admit such a thing about a rookie, I just can't imagine Janis staying.

With Goodson possibly starting the season on the PUP list I don't consider any other player on the roster capable of replacing Janis as the best gunner.

 

[Dantés]

As to the first point, that is naturally the case, but I reject the idea that Janis is an elite gunner. He's made visible splashes in maybe half a dozen games. His stats don't exactly make him seem irreplaceable as a ST guy, though, and if he is kept it is admitting that either Yancey or Dupree (whoever it would be who wouldn't make the cut, likely Dupree given the draft capital) had little chance of developing. Given how unlikely it is that TT and co admit such a thing about a rookie, I just can't imagine Janis staying.

For the second point, I again concede that I am blinded when it comes to him. I love him, and I cannot argue that everyone else should, but I BELIEVE!

I'm not saying he's an elite gunner. But he's the best one the Packers have had in recent seasons, so I can't see him leaving unless someone proves capable of replacing him in that role (which would not be totally unsurprising, to be clear). Yancey is physically cut out for the role. I have no idea how much ST he played in college. Should Janis' ST ability be replaced in camp, I would guess we're looking at Nelson, Adams, Cobb, Davis, Yancey, and Dupre to open the season with a decision coming on Allison after his week one suspension.