Training Camp Position Battles

[Sunshinepacker]

Other fun angle to the whole punter thing; can't recall who but someone wrote an article that having a great "pin them inside the twenty" punter can actually be a bad thing. I know, crazy right? But hear me out. We all know coaches in the NFL are super conservative and don't coach to win, they coach not to lose. So, evidence shows that coaches are FAR too eager to punt on forth down when history says they should go for it (especially when you have the best QB in NFL history). It all depends on field position but generally, if it's fourth and less then around seven and you're past the fifty, it makes sense to go for it. However, when the coach has a "great" punter, it makes it easier to make the wrong choice and punt.

Anyway, just thought that was interesting since MM is the prototypical conservative nap coach.

 

[Mondio]

That's the difference between being a FAN and an EMPLOYEE. Fans can afford to ignore reality. Employees who depend on the job for their livelihood need to make decisions to optimize their chance at getting a paycheck.

Then Vogel should have accepted the challenge and out kicked the kid. If he couldn't have, he should punt well enough that all other teams would be watching for the moment he's cut. Teams are always watching other teams kickers, or any other player for that matter. a big difference is that a punter doesn't have to learn any playbook, need time to acclimate etc. They get the snap, take their steps and kick the ball. Kicking it directionally and hang time isn't team dependent. He should be able to do that anywhere. He shied from competition, it's not a good look for a guy worried about a paycheck.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

I know, Kizer hasn't even practiced with the Packers yet, but these are some strong statements, for whatever they are worth from McCarthy. I kind of understand why they went out and got Kizer, if this is truly how the Packers feel about him.

• McCarthy not only said Kizer “has starter ability in this league,” but suggested the second-year quarterback has franchise potential.
  
• “In my opinion, if he was in that class this year,” McCarthy said, “he would’ve been part of that group of first four guys, or first five. I always felt there were five, the five quarterbacks, first-round guys.”
  
• “I think he has exceptional arm talent,” McCarthy said. “What we’re asking him to do is, particularly the footwork and just how he fits the scheme, and how he operates is brand new to him. That always excites me, because when you see that guy has no experience or background but has the ability, to me that’s an opportunity for a lot of growth. So I think he has a bright future.”

I keep forgetting that Kizer came out of Notre Dame 2 years early. He just turned 22. If McCarthy's hunches turn out to be true, we may have stolen him from the Browns. Then again, with Rodgers talking about playing at least 5 more years, what do you do with him?

https://www.packersnews.com/story/s...hone-kizers-exceptional-arm-talent/583644002/

MM's comments on QB ability should be thrown in the trash with the other worthless things. If recent history has taught us anything, it's that MM is either a congenital liar about the position or he just hah no clue.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Then Vogel should have accepted the challenge and out kicked the kid. If he couldn't have, he should punt well enough that all other teams would be watching for the moment he's cut. Teams are always watching other teams kickers, or any other player for that matter. a big difference is that a punter doesn't have to learn any playbook, need time to acclimate etc. They get the snap, take their steps and kick the ball. Kicking it directionally and hang time isn't team dependent. He should be able to do that anywhere. He shied from competition, it's not a good look for a guy worried about a paycheck.

Your first sentence would imply that you didn't read what I wrote. Or you simply ignored it.

 

[Mondio]

Your first sentence would imply that you didn't read what I wrote. Or you simply ignored it.

I read it, and didn't ignore it, I addressed it. He's a competitor in a competitive sport. I'd expect more fire from a cashier who wasn't pulling their weight or in danger of being replaced. If your initial reaction to competition in your livelihood is to just move on, you're not going ver far in life. and I don't care if you're an NFL punter or a stock boy at the Pig working before school. It's not different being a fan, especially when I've been an employee somewhere or another from basically end of my 8th grade year until now. That's a lot of years, a lot of jobs and a lot of competition. reality is, Vogel would have continued to have been paid like he always had been until he either made the team or was cut. In the meantime whether he's kicking for GB or not, every kick he made would be for this job, or helping get another. Punters aren't like other players. They can be brought in the day of a game and do what they've always done. he cowered from competition. That's not a good sign from a football player at any position.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

That's the difference between being a FAN and an EMPLOYEE. Fans can afford to ignore reality. Employees who depend on the job for their livelihood need to make decisions to optimize their chance at getting a paycheck.

Actually, the only decision Vogel made, if the reports are correct, was to ask for his release from the contract he was under. The Packers were under no obligation to release him, but I am sure had they not, they would have had an unmotivated, unhappy player on their hands. I hope Vogel at least thanks the Packers for doing what they did, but I doubt he did.

Other fun angle to the whole punter thing; can't recall who but someone wrote an article that having a great "pin them inside the twenty" punter can actually be a bad thing. I know, crazy right? But hear me out. We all know coaches in the NFL are super conservative and don't coach to win, they coach not to lose. So, evidence shows that coaches are FAR too eager to punt on forth down when history says they should go for it (especially when you have the best QB in NFL history). It all depends on field position but generally, if it's fourth and less then around seven and you're past the fifty, it makes sense to go for it. However, when the coach has a "great" punter, it makes it easier to make the wrong choice and punt.

Anyway, just thought that was interesting since MM is the prototypical conservative nap coach.

Alabama seemed to do just fine with Scott as their punter. The few times I watched them, I didn't notice Saban being extra conservative on his 4th down decisions. While having an excellent punter probably gives you the ability to be a bit more patient and take fewer risks on offense, knowing you can win the field position battle, its just an extra tool in your strategy of winning the game IMO. If that was the case, you could say the same thing about having a good defense and I doubt many would argue that having a good defense is a bad thing.

 

[RRyder]

Who has guaranteed it? I keep on asking, you keep on avoiding.

I mean these might not be guarantees in a literal sense but damn if that's not the gist of these posts

I’m also a big Bama fan. JK Scott is a FIELD FLIPPER...a player that changes the misfortunes of an offense and puts the defense in tremendous advantages ROUTINELY. He was a big part of Alabama’s succcess and every fan will tell you that. He is a freaking weapon. Anyone who scratches their head at this pick is simply uneducated about him. Also, you will not find a kid with a higher quality of character in the draft. He’s not just a punter...the kid is a leader.

The leader comment is my favorite

I mean, just look at what Gute said...

He talked about how they thought he was a rare talent and worth the draft pick. Rare. Talent.

It was a really stinkin good punters class. Not even joking around.

JK Scott has a career average of over 45 yards AND can kick with over a 5 second hangtime. That. Is. Nuts.

I'm Alabama alumni and have watched every game this kid has played in. He's the best college punter I've ever seen and I was actually excited about the pick. Two years ago he was out kicking coverage or pinning inside the 20 on every attempt. This year he was told to focus on hang time so they limited returns (due to out kicking coverage). The result- 5 second hangtime and only 5 punts returned all year. He's got a huge leg but even more importantly is that he's excellent at pinning opponents deep. I thought Vogel preformed fine but Scott is a big upgrade.

All these things imply a guaranteed significant upgrade over Vogel. And considering Vogel was actually pretty good. Guaranteeing a significant upgrade over Vogel is guaranteeing that Scott will be elite.

Point is there's GOING to be blow back when a Punter is talked about like this

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I mean these might not be guarantees in a literal sense but damn if that's not the gist of these posts



The leader comment is my favorite







All these things imply a guaranteed significant upgrade over Vogel. And considering Vogel was actually pretty good. Guaranteeing a significant upgrade over Vogel is guaranteeing that Scott will be elite.

Point is there's GOING to be blow back when a Punter is talked about like this

Just my 2 cents for what it is worth, I don't think any of those posters "guarantee" Scott's performance, rather they are fans talking about what they have seen from this kid and they are excited about him and are trying to share that with those who don't know him or are shaking their heads over the draft pick. I was a Vogel fan myself, scratched my head at this pick, then found out more about Scott and now I am quite pleased with the pick.

 

[RRyder]

Just my 2 cents for what it is worth, I don't think any of those posters "guarantee" Scott's performance, rather they are fans talking about what they have seen from this kid and they are excited about him and are trying to share that with those who don't know him or are shaking their heads over the draft pick. I was a Vogel fan myself, scratched my head at this pick, then found out more about Scott and now I am quite pleased with the pick.

Like I said they aren't guarantees in a literal sense but they're pretty close.

Come on. One guy said "he wasn't just a Punter. He was a leader" and that he was a big part of Alabama's success...... Let that sink in.... Alabama....

Like if that's not over hyping a Punter I don't know what is

 

[GleefulGary]

If we're going to pick out what one person says here and then use that to generalize what people are saying about a player, then we are really, really reaching.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

If we're going to pick out what one person says here and then use that to generalize what people are saying about a player, then we are really, really reaching.

Yup, I have been yapping about EQ since way before the draft, not quite to "Sutton like" levels, but I liked the guy and loved when the Packers picked him. Am I convinced that he will be a great WR? Hell no, but do I think he could be, yes and if he is, he was one hell of a 6th round pick. But I am pretty sure someone could list a lot of reasons why he will suck, which some have done and it doesn't bother me because they could be right.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Alabama seemed to do just fine with Scott as their punter. The few times I watched them, I didn't notice Saban being extra conservative on his 4th down decisions. While having an excellent punter probably gives you the ability to be a bit more patient and take fewer risks on offense, knowing you can win the field position battle, its just an extra tool in your strategy of winning the game IMO. If that was the case, you could say the same thing about having a good defense and I doubt many would argue that having a good defense is a bad thing.

Comparing a college team's production (especially a college team that has vastly more talented players than the majority of teams they play) to NFL teams isn't going to work well.

Field position battles are nice when you're punting on the other side of the 50, not when it's 4th & 3 from the 43 yard line. And I'm not sure how you're logic on defense works. Are you saying that because a team has a greater chance of scoring by going for it on 4th & 4 they shouldn't have a good defense? How does that work?

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Yup, I have been yapping about EQ since way before the draft, not quite to "Sutton like" levels, but I liked the guy and loved when the Packers picked him. Am I convinced that he will be a great WR? Hell no, but do I think he could be, yes and if he is, he was one hell of a 6th round pick. But I am pretty sure someone could list a lot of reasons why he will suck, which some have done and it doesn't bother me because they could be right.

Rumors were that he has a dad like Lonzo Ball's and that he refused to play special teams at ND. I have no idea, just passing on what I've read. Also he's apparently really smart and NFL coaches hate players that are smarter than them (unless you're an All-Pro QB).

 

[Sunshinepacker]

I read it, and didn't ignore it, I addressed it. He's a competitor in a competitive sport. I'd expect more fire from a cashier who wasn't pulling their weight or in danger of being replaced. If your initial reaction to competition in your livelihood is to just move on, you're not going ver far in life. and I don't care if you're an NFL punter or a stock boy at the Pig working before school. It's not different being a fan, especially when I've been an employee somewhere or another from basically end of my 8th grade year until now. That's a lot of years, a lot of jobs and a lot of competition. reality is, Vogel would have continued to have been paid like he always had been until he either made the team or was cut. In the meantime whether he's kicking for GB or not, every kick he made would be for this job, or helping get another. Punters aren't like other players. They can be brought in the day of a game and do what they've always done. he cowered from competition. That's not a good sign from a football player at any position.

No, I stated why fans feel one way (your classic "COMPETITION!!!!!" angle) verse the employee...who, by the way, will still be COMPETING for a different team! I don't get why this is hard to understand. Vogel's employer said, "We don't want you". Vogel said, "Ok, then can you let me go so I can go support my family with a different employer?" The Packers were nice and said yes.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Rumors were that he has a dad like Lonzo Ball's and that he refused to play special teams at ND. I have no idea, just passing on what I've read. Also he's apparently really smart and NFL coaches hate players that are smarter than them (unless you're an All-Pro QB).

Yes there was some discussion here last week about EQ's family. I guess I walked away from the discussion, as well as articles I read, feeling pretty good about EQ and his family. The NFL is EQ's final career path, if he and his family aren't smart enough to realize that the NFL is a bit different than college, than he will bust, but I think/hope they are smart enough to see that.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

We all know coaches in the NFL are super conservative and don't coach to win, they coach not to lose. So, evidence shows that coaches are FAR too eager to punt on forth down when history says they should go for it (especially when you have the best QB in NFL history). It all depends on field position but generally, if it's fourth and less then around seven and you're past the fifty, it makes sense to go for it. However, when the coach has a "great" punter, it makes it easier to make the wrong choice and punt.

Anyway, just thought that was interesting since MM is the prototypical conservative nap coach.

Comparing a college team's production (especially a college team that has vastly more talented players than the majority of teams they play) to NFL teams isn't going to work well.

Field position battles are nice when you're punting on the other side of the 50, not when it's 4th & 3 from the 43 yard line. And I'm not sure how you're logic on defense works. Are you saying that because a team has a greater chance of scoring by going for it on 4th & 4 they shouldn't have a good defense? How does that work?

I was responding to your assertion that having a good punter can be a negative thing in that it could cause an offense to be too conservative, which you said NFL coaches are, especially McCarthy. Having a good punter is just another good tool in your arsenal IMO. A coach still has to make the best decisions out there to win the game. I think you are trying to use this in a way to take a poke at McCarthy being too conservative. Do you think having a crappy punter will change that and make the team better in the process?

Alabama had a solid Punter in Scott and I didn't see Saban playing conservative. I brought up defense, because it can work the same way. If you have a top defense, does that cause your team to become more conservative on offense?

You can say "history says.....if it's fourth and less then around seven and you're past the fifty, it makes sense to go for it. However, when the coach has a "great" punter, it makes it easier to make the wrong choice and punt." but I doubt there are many coaches in the NFL that will agree with you.

 

[Mondio]

No, I stated why fans feel one way (your classic "COMPETITION!!!!!" angle) verse the employee...who, by the way, will still be COMPETING for a different team! I don't get why this is hard to understand. Vogel's employer said, "We don't want you". Vogel said, "Ok, then can you let me go so I can go support my family with a different employer?" The Packers were nice and said yes.

Oh, I know he'll have to compete, and if he doesn't think he can win, instead of getting better, he'll walk away. No room for that mentality on a winning team. It's probably that attitude that encourages GB to try and replace him in the first place. GB didn't cut him now to be nice. Vogel's employer didn't say we don't want you. They said we want better than what we had, the spot is open for competition. Vogel folded

 

[Deleted member 6794]

If you have a top defense, does that cause your team to become more conservative on offense?

Having a great defense might result in the offense play calling being more conservative.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Having a great defense might result in the offense play calling being more conservative.

While it might, it could also do the opposite if you have a potent offense like the Packers have had. Rodgers knows that there is not much of a margin for error, when he has a defense that has a hard time getting off the field, change that and he might be willing to take a few more risks.

I mainly pointed that out because the OP was trying to imply that a good punter, who can drop the ball inside the 20 consistently, could be a detriment in that he could make MM even more conservative. I just don't see that happening. I also don't agree with the OP's idea that teams should always go on 4th and 7 or less when inside the 50. Great Defense or not, that is just a recipe for disaster in my opinion.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

While it might, it could also do the opposite if you have a potent offense like the Packers have had. Rodgers knows that there is not much of a margin for error, when he has a defense that has a hard time getting off the field, change that and he might be willing to take a few more risks.

I mainly pointed that out because the OP was trying to imply that a good punter, who can drop the ball inside the 20 consistently, could be a detriment in that he could make MM even more conservative. I just don't see that happening. I also don't agree with the OP's idea that teams should always go on 4th and 7 or less when inside the 50. Great Defense or not, that is just a recipe for disaster in my opinion.

I definitely agree that having a great punter doesn't put a team at a disadvantage by any means.

 

[swhitset]

Other fun angle to the whole punter thing; can't recall who but someone wrote an article that having a great "pin them inside the twenty" punter can actually be a bad thing. I know, crazy right? But hear me out. We all know coaches in the NFL are super conservative and don't coach to win, they coach not to lose. So, evidence shows that coaches are FAR too eager to punt on forth down when history says they should go for it (especially when you have the best QB in NFL history). It all depends on field position but generally, if it's fourth and less then around seven and you're past the fifty, it makes sense to go for it. However, when the coach has a "great" punter, it makes it easier to make the wrong choice and punt.

Anyway, just thought that was interesting since MM is the prototypical conservative nap coach.

I was with you .... til the last sentence... I think McCarthy goes for it on 4th down far more often than you seem to think...I do not consider him an ultra conservative coach... I have no way to prove it... But I don't believe 4th and 26 against the Eagles would have ever happened if McCarthy had been the coach. I think he would have run the ball down their throat on 4th down and closed out the game.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I was with you .... til the last sentence... I think McCarthy goes for it on 4th down far more often than you seem to think...I do not consider him an ultra conservative coach... I have no way to prove it...

The Packers are tied for 19th in fourth down attempts since McCarthy became the team's head coach.

 

[swhitset]

The Packers are tied for 19th in fourth down attempts since McCarthy became the team's head coach.

lol thanks for the stat... I'd offer two ideas around it....
1. 19th, while not in the top half, does not fall into what I would term ultra conservative.
2. Since the Packers have traditionally had a pretty good offense... I think we also need to know how the Packers compare to the other teams with regards to total conversions on drives. ie how many drives are converted on 1st, 2nd and 3rd down. In other words... since you you gave an aggregate number... how many 4th down decisions has McCarthy had to make compared to the other 31 teams?

I should say .. when you state that they are tied for 19th...is that, as I suspect simply a total number of attempts? or is it a percentage of tries based on how many each individual team had had to make?

 

[RRyder]

lol thanks for the stat... I'd offer two ideas around it....
1. 19th, while not in the top half, does not fall into what I would term ultra conservative.
2. Since the Packers have traditionally had a pretty good offense... I think we also need to know how the Packers compare to the other teams with regards to total conversions on drives. ie how many drives are converted on 1st, 2nd and 3rd down. In other words... since you you gave an aggregate number... how many 4th down decisions has McCarthy had to make compared to the other 31 teams?

I should say .. when you state that they are tied for 19th...is that, as I suspect simply a total number of attempts? or is it a percentage of tries based on how many each individual team had had to make?

Yeah 19th doesn't scream ultra conservative. Its low end middle.

Also I'm curious on the context of the attempts. The Packers have one of the better winning percentages in that league over that time frame so they aren't "padding" the 4th down attempts going for it on 4th down late in the game while trailing as much as other teams

 

[Sunshinepacker]

I was with you .... til the last sentence... I think McCarthy goes for it on 4th down far more often than you seem to think...I do not consider him an ultra conservative coach... I have no way to prove it... But I don't believe 4th and 26 against the Eagles would have ever happened if McCarthy had been the coach. I think he would have run the ball down their throat on 4th down and closed out the game.

Football Outsiders ranked MM as one of the most aggressive coaches in going for it on 4th down. That doesn't mean he's not conservative. When your saying you want more bacon with your mean and you point out that one salad already has more bacon bits than any other, that doesn't mean you're happy with the level of bacon.