Projecting the 53 Man Roster

[mradtke66]

I suspect that we might not sign a vet ILB until after week 1.

Assuming we'd be only want someone like T'eo for a few weeks until Burks is healthy (pick you preferred street FA), if he's on the roster week 1, his full salary is guaranteed. Now you're stuck with some dead cap when he's cut or you keep a player you're not in love with just to get over a short-term hump.

However, if you play week 1 with an emergency patch (Extra Safety? Fackrell? play a 'true' 5-2 alignment on running downs?) , get your patch job on the roster week 2, play 3-6 weeks, and cut him. You only pay him for 3-6 weeks.

They're street FA players for a reason--they'll likely be there week 2 with little risk.

Now if they find someone they like a little more than that at cut-down time, that's different.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I suspect that we might not sign a vet ILB until after week 1.

Assuming we'd be only want someone like T'eo for a few weeks until Burks is healthy (pick you preferred street FA), if he's on the roster week 1, his full salary is guaranteed. Now you're stuck with some dead cap when he's cut or you keep a player you're not in love with just to get over a short-term hump.

However, if you play week 1 with an emergency patch (Extra Safety? Fackrell? play a 'true' 5-2 alignment on running downs?) , get your patch job on the roster week 2, play 3-6 weeks, and cut him. You only pay him for 3-6 weeks.

They're street FA players for a reason--they'll likely be there week 2 with little risk.

Now if they find someone they like a little more than that at cut-down time, that's different.

I'm not really that convinced Burks was starting quality to begin with and playing backups in his spot until his potential return is risky IMO. I would prefer the opposite approach, try to find a decent ILB that can start and if Burks comes back and unseats him, great, if he doesn't so be it. With either scenario you still have a better backup then what is currently on the team.

This isn't week 5, where you are just trying to find someone to play a few games until your All Pro LB comes back.

 

[Mondio]

That's wishful thinking. You can find former solid starters out on the street for not a lot of money. The reason they are available is because they are beat to crap--a recent serious injury, a series of injuries leading to a permanent decline, or just mentally dulled from all the pounding. RB is the fastest depreciating asset in the NFL.

point being, teams get by very well with all sorts of no names at RB every year in this league. Outside of pass protection it's probably the most plug and play position on the field outside of a long snapper or punter. I'm not meaning you just go out and pick up a starter whenever you go looking, but there will be plenty of very capable guys being cut in a week that will be just as good someone you're going to trade for right now. i'd save the picks.

 

[gopkrs]

Tre Carson might be our guy

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

What I find rather interesting about the RB position and maybe this is just for the Packers, but all these guys that the Packers have picked off of waivers and other teams PS through the years, that did nothing for other teams, seem to come to Green Bay and do the exact same thing. So maybe some of you are seeing how other teams are finding successful leftover RB's, if you are.....please let the Packers know what the secret formula is.

Wheres as a guy like Ryan Grant was obtained cheap and thrived in Green Bay. Same for Ahman Green, who still is one of my favorite Packer RB's in modern history.

 

[Mondio]

If we were in need of a starter, I might agree with you. But in a week there are a lot of guys that will be available who they likely have indentified as being as talented as guys they could trade for right now. I remember Grant being cheap, 6th rounder as the season began? I don't remember what Ahman cost, I thought it was a QB or something or was it fred vinson? I supposed I'll be googling after this, no, not that kind of googling.

But if we get past cut downs and nobody is there they'd like, trades are still an option and it's only a week's difference.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

If we were in need of a starter, I might agree with you. But in a week there are a lot of guys that will be available who they likely have indentified as being as talented as guys they could trade for right now. I remember Grant being cheap, 6th rounder as the season began? I don't remember what Ahman cost, I thought it was a QB or something or was it fred vinson? I supposed I'll be googling after this, no, not that kind of googling.

But if we get past cut downs and nobody is there they'd like, trades are still an option and it's only a week's difference.

Yes, the Packers traded Fred Vinson + a 6th rounder to the Seahawks for Ahman Green + a 5th rounder, I think we all know who came out way ahead on that. Vinson never played a snap for the Seahawks or any team after being traded from GB. Ryan Grant was obtained from the Giants for a 6th round pick. That was actually a Sept. 1 deal.

My point is, if you are willing to trade something now, your selection is much larger and if your scouts have done their homework, they might just find a real steal for one of your castoffs or future late round picks.

We could go back and forth all day on this, we just share a different philosophy is all.

 

[Mondio]

guys who are on teams available for cheap now, will likely be available for cheap later and maybe cut for free

But Green wasn't "cheap". Sure we came out ahead, but Vinson had a decent rookie season and was a 2nd rounder

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

guys who are on teams available for cheap now, will likely be available for cheap later and maybe cut for free

But Green wasn't "cheap". Sure we came out ahead, but Vinson had a decent rookie season and was a 2nd rounder

Damn....we should have traded Josh Jones away for a RB!

 

[Dantés]

The Packers might be willing to spend a little draft capital for a #3 running back just because of the higher likelihood that they may need said player.

Sure, a #3 who is stuck behind two healthy, entrenched players isn't a high priority.

In the Packers case, the #3 would be behind a starter who has struggled to stay healthy as a pro, and a backup who isn't currently healthy at the moment.

So they may want to acquire a guy of high enough quality that said player could give them real, productive snaps, as opposed to just being an emergency contingency.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

So they may want to acquire a guy of high enough quality that said player could give them real, productive snaps, as opposed to just being an emergency contingency.

Agreed. You keep your "break glass if needed" guy(s) on the PS and that would be Juice and/or Carson. But given the type of offense MLF is suppose to be trying to run, 3 decent backs seem to be what you would want to shoot for on the 53. I also don't think Gute would have spent a 6th rounder on Juice nor would he be parading backs in and out of Green Bay the last few months, if it wasn't at least a moderate priority to have a #3 back by the start of the season.

 

[Mondio]

Damn....we should have traded Josh Josh away for a RB!

would have been nice, but alas, not everyone is tradeable

 

[Mondio]

I'm not opposed to getting someone in here, trust me. Our run game has been lackluster and that's the highest level of compliment it deserves at this point. But it's going to be the same thing, looking for potential and there are likely a bunch of guys going to become available with the same or even better than guys that are available for a lower round trade in a week.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

would have been nice, but alas, not everyone is tradeable

Yeah, I said that tongue in cheek to try and tie our 2 conversations together.

I'm not opposed to getting someone in here, trust me. Our run game has been lackluster and that's the highest level of compliment it deserves at this point. But it's going to be the same thing, looking for potential and there are likely a bunch of guys going to become available with the same or even better than guys that are available for a lower round trade in a week.

This is a serious question, not trying to be a sm*rt a&& (this time). How are other teams finding all these RB's late in the draft every year? Seems like the Seahawks do it every season, same with the Bears. Sure we got A. Jones, but other then that, our RB's drafted or picked up have kind of sucked. Is it the Packer OL, Coaches, system, Scouts or just bad luck?

 

[Dantés]

I'm not opposed to getting someone in here, trust me. Our run game has been lackluster and that's the highest level of compliment it deserves at this point. But it's going to be the same thing, looking for potential and there are likely a bunch of guys going to become available with the same or even better than guys that are available for a lower round trade in a week.

Our FO (and every FO) have a pretty solid idea of who will be on the street in a week. If they pay draft capital for a particular player, I would have to think that it's because *in their opinion* that player is a cut above the others. Perhaps it would be a guy who is not going to be cut, but the other team likes their RB4 enough to trade the guy ahead of him?

That decision would not necessary make the FO correct, but it would make sense to me.

 

[Mondio]

Yeah, I said that tongue in cheek to try and tie out 2 conversations together.



\

are you trying them out? or in?

and I don't know, they've probably all cycled thru enough guys just like us at all positions, we just only see the successful ones, because we dont' follow their rosters that closely.

it's probably been emphasized more in certain places too, that by itself will make it better. We spent more time on a precision passing game, the rules and our QB favored it, but being able to just run the ball beats a lot of people, i hope to be better at it.

 

[Mondio]

Our FO (and every FO) have a pretty solid idea of who will be on the street in a week. If they pay draft capital for a particular player, I would have to think that it's because *in their opinion* that player is a cut above the others. Perhaps it would be a guy who is not going to be cut, but the other team likes their RB4 enough to trade the guy ahead of him?

That decision would not necessary make the FO correct, but it would make sense to me.

I'd agree with that. I know they want more, as you said, they aren't bringing all these guys in because they're happy with what they have. If they did trade, i'd want it to be for someone they think is as good as the 2 starters though.

 

[Dantés]

I'd agree with that. I know they want more, as you said, they aren't bringing all these guys in because they're happy with what they have. If they did trade, i'd want it to be for someone they think is as good as the 2 starters though.

I don't think they will find a trade candidate who is as good as Aaron Jones. He's a stud. But they could likely find someone as good or better than Jamaal Williams.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

It will be interesting to see just how much MLF and the Packers run the ball and I suppose some of that will be dictated by the success of the run game. TT and MM seemed to be just fine with one solid RB and then a hopeful backup and "who cares about #3 as long as he knows the playbook." Packers then were a pass first team.

I could be reading things wrong about the new offense, but I have seen other teams who really rely on 3 decent RB's and each of them bring a different skill set to the table. So I was hoping our #3 back would be similar to what James White is in New England or Clement in Philly, guys that can pick up some yards, decent chip blockers, but are a threat to catch and run. James White was a 4th round Gem IMO. He really wasn't expected to do all that much, but he has turned into a very dependable duel threat RB.

I guess we will see just how much the Packers run the ball this year and if they really need a solid #3.

 

[OldSchool101]

What I find rather interesting about the RB position and maybe this is just for the Packers, but all these guys that the Packers have picked off of waivers and other teams PS through the years, that did nothing for other teams, seem to come to Green Bay and do the exact same thing. So maybe some of you are seeing how other teams are finding successful leftover RB's, if you are.....please let the Packers know what the secret formula is.

Wheres as a guy like Ryan Grant was obtained cheap and thrived in Green Bay. Same for Ahman Green, who still is one of my favorite Packer RB's in modern history.

RBs are a funny thing. We took a kid that didn’t even start for little ol Liberty U in the small town of Lynchburg, VA. Gado comes in and gets player of the week honors multiple times and rushes for 100+ repeatedly.
There’s dozens of “street” RBs talented enough to perform admirably at the NFL level on short notice. It’s just finding the right ones peaking at the right time.
All that said, Im not giving up on Dexter just yet. It’s way early in the process yet to be writing players off, even at RB. We saw many people doing the same thing with Ty after his second game. We saw that with Gary after 1 preseason match? We also saw this with Trevor etc... etc..
I realize we’re all ready for the nightmare to be over, but patience.

 

[mradtke66]

I'm not really that convinced Burks was starting quality to begin with and playing backups in his spot until his potential return is risky IMO. I would prefer the opposite approach, try to find a decent ILB that can start and if Burks comes back and unseats him, great, if he doesn't so be it. With either scenario you still have a better backup then what is currently on the team.

This isn't week 5, where you are just trying to find someone to play a few games until your All Pro LB comes back.

You're not wrong, while I hope the light goes on for Burks we haven't seen it. At least yet. However...

I just don't think we're going to find a guy who we would actually want at WILB. They're somewhat hard to find, more so with modern pass catching TEs and RBs, forcing that guy to be more of a coverage guy.

The players that could do the coverage job are rare. Either have a chance to draft them early (Kuchley), you luck into a late rounder who can do the job, or do try an experiment with Burks.

The guys we could sign are thumpers, more in line with what Martinez does and brings to the table. And they're plug and play. Teach them your play calls they'll be in the lineup in no time. But as vested vets, they're a little pricey. And maybe injury prone. So why take the risk when you wait a week and start open tryouts?

And if he loses his spot, is he going to be pissy? A bad teammate? If you have to cut him to send a message, his million dollar contract (what's the minimum for a player like T'eo?) and cap hit smacks you in the face.

 

[Pkrjones]

Brandon has left the house. Don't let the door hit you... Best of luck in D.C.

 

[morango]

RBs are a funny thing. We took a kid that didn’t even start for little ol Liberty U in the small town of Lynchburg, VA. Gado comes in and gets player of the week honors multiple times and rushes for 100+ repeatedly.
There’s dozens of “street” RBs talented enough to perform admirably at the NFL level on short notice. It’s just finding the right ones peaking at the right time.
All that said, Im not giving up on Dexter just yet. It’s way early in the process yet to be writing players off, even at RB. We saw many people doing the same thing with Ty after his second game. We saw that with Gary after 1 preseason match? We also saw this with Trevor etc... etc..
I realize we’re all ready for the nightmare to be over, but patience.

We are all so focused on the RBs in this thread but I haven’t seen much running room created by the O-line this preseason. For that matter I haven’t seen it for several years. Not sure if MLF will be able to fix it, but I don’t think RB is the main issue.

 

[OldSchool101]

We are all so focused on the RBs in this thread but I haven’t seen much running room created by the O-line this preseason. For that matter I haven’t seen it for several years. Not sure if MLF will be able to fix it, but I don’t think RB is the main issue.

amen. Just an observation. But I’ve seen several preseason runs where Dexter was hit 2 yards behind the LOS and wiggled his way for +2. He had no business making the LOS and it was 100% him alone. Had that same play been Eddie Lacy in his prime he would’ve carried a couple guys for a +1.
If I were to rank our OL depth at run blocking, I would guess they are in the bottom 50%. Not trying to be mean, just from watching preseason games around the league.
I’m guessing our “A team” is a top 10 run blocking unit just off the top of my head. Dexter running behind them would likely make a big difference.
Rushing success is much about momentum, so the argument that he’s playing against #3’s is largely irrelevant. You get #3’s that far in the backfield that quickly and many starting RBs wouldn’t have done any better.

 

[Do7]

Brandon has left the house. Don't let the door hit you... Best of luck in D.C.

I am starting to become convinced that someone hacked into his account.