Cory's Corner: Kenny Clark is linked to B.J. Raji

The Packers need Kenny Clark to be great in 2017, and it can all be traced back to B.J. Raji.

Raji started 15 games that season, didn’t put up monster numbers but still played very well. He only had six pressures but was strong against the run despite getting hampered with a groin injury in the fifth game vs. St. Louis.

So what does Clark have to do with Raji? Well, Raji took a mysterious leave of absence from football on March 14, 2016. “I cannot rule out a return to the NFL in the future, but I will definitely not be playing during the 2016 season,” Raji said in his statement to the Green Bay Press-Gazette.

A position that seemed to be shored up by a trusty veteran was all-of-a-sudden bare and general manager Ted Thompson didn’t have much choice but to draft for need when the Packers’ pick came up at 27. Thompson took Clark, who was thought to be a vital asset because of his wrestling background.

Clark’s strength reminds me of the power of center Corey Linsley. Both are maulers that can usually win their one-on-one battles. And despite looking green early on, Clark did progress and was beginning to figure it out — especially against the vaunted Dallas offensive line in the NFC Divisional Playoffs.

But Clark is not Raji. For being a large man, Raji had staccato toes and was a lot slipperier than the boxier Clark. Which begs the question, what kind of defense does Green Bay have if Raji were still around?

I’ve criticized Raji plenty, but he knew how to win. He proved it in the 2010 NFC Championship Game by returning an ill-advised Caleb Hanie pass 18 yards for the eventual game-winning score. And then surprised everyone with one of the funniest touchdown celebrations ever.

Clark was handled with care by the coaching staff last year. He’s got to be allowed to make mistakes and grow this year. He’s better than Letroy Guion and he proved it at the end of the year.

Raji was the guy that everyone thought would last a long time in Green Bay. Looking back on it now, it’s hard to believe that he was taken 17 spots ahead of Clay Matthews in the 2009 NFL Draft.

And because Raji abruptly left, it’s now Clark’s time. That means playing at a Pro Bowl level and becoming a leader that the unit has desperately been searching for.

Is that a lot to ask? Yes it is. But his one-year internship is over. He needs to produce this year. 

 

PLEASE SUBSCRIBE TO OUR CHEESEHEAD NATION WEEKLY NEWSLETTER HERE.

__________________________

Cory Jennerjohn is a graduate from UW-Oshkosh and has been in sports media for over 15 years. He was a co-host on "Clubhouse Live" and has also done various radio and TV work as well. He has written for newspapers, magazines and websites. He currently is a columnist for CHTV and also does various podcasts. He recently earned his Masters degree from the University of Iowa. He can be found on Twitter: @Coryjennerjohn

__________________________

NFL Categories: 
0 points
 

Comments (25)

Fan-Friendly This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.
NickPerry's picture

February 25, 2017 at 07:07 am

The Packers need more than just Clark to be better but I liked the way Clark seemed to be improving towards the end of the season. Clark CAN"T take a step backwards for example and not produce like a #1 pick in 2017, not with OLB and CB in the shape they are. Thompson has spent a lot of draft picks trying to improve the Front 7 and DL specifically. Clark and Lowry need to pay off for the Packers starting next season. Just be one less position to have to worry about for the Packers.

Free Agency is coming soon and I believe the Packers are going to be players, at least at some level. They have 7 draft picks plus the Comp Pick for Hayward, there's a lot of patch work to do with just 8 draft picks. Just once I'd like to see the Packers do everything they can, use every avenue available to them to put a team on the field that can win it all.

Sure we need Clark to be great in 2017, but they need a hell of a lot more than just Clark to be better to improve a 30 something ranked defense.

0 points
0
0
Since'61's picture

February 25, 2017 at 09:05 am

Well said Nick! Thanks, Since '61

0 points
0
0
gr7070's picture

February 25, 2017 at 07:13 am

Nearly everything about this article is wrong.

Raji hadn't played very well in *years*! He didn't shore up his position; he could only be trusted to suck.

How could anyone think Clark "usually won his one on one battles?"

Thank goodness Clark is not Raji.

It's hard to annoint any DT with the "knows how to win" moniker, let alone one who was horrific for three years. And who's team won mostly because of their O and QB. Granted early on his D was good, when he was actually good.

I'm amazed Raji was kept on the roster as long as he was, I did not expect him to last a long time.

The unit does have a leader who plays at a near-probowl level.

To answer your question, what kind of defense does Green Bay have if Raji were still around? A worse one!

About the only thing I agree with in this article is "Clark did progress and was beginning to figure it out". He did that!

The article reads like someone wanted to wax poetically and then fabricated a narrative to match their mood.

Sorry for being so critical, but nearly everything written is false.

0 points
0
0
JerseyAl's picture

February 25, 2017 at 08:22 am

"I'm amazed Raji was kept on the roster as long as he was, I did not expect him to last a long time."

I happen to mostly agree with you on Raji, but come on, he was a top-10 draft pick. Ted would not kick him to the curb - he would have STILL been on this team in 2016 (to my chagrin) if he had wanted to be.

Raji is from a town in NJ where my sister lives. Talking to people there who knew him, I was told he was not really that "into" playing football, but couldn't pass up the $$$ opportunities. His goal then was to land two 3-year contracts and OUT. With some exceptions, he played like a guy whose heart was not into it.

0 points
0
0
Rossonero's picture

February 25, 2017 at 08:32 am

I had a sinking feeling about that too. Raji just fell off as he got older. I'm sure he's enjoying his retirement and being able to help his family out through the medical issues they faced.

0 points
0
0
Ferrari Driver's picture

February 25, 2017 at 10:05 am

Jersey Al says: "... he played like a guy whose heart was not into it."

Fully agree (and side note - woefully, Eddie Lacy reminds of of him)".

Physically, Raji should have dominated the game. Other than one year in the league, I considered his play pedestrian.

0 points
0
0
CAG123's picture

February 25, 2017 at 12:41 pm

It may be too early to tell but for some reason I have the same feeling about Randall. I don't think he likes playing in GB and when I watched him give up a big play you see see him throw his hands up, look around, put his hands on his hips then shake his head.

0 points
0
0
NickPerry's picture

February 25, 2017 at 01:47 pm

If you play 12 yards off every play, never get your hands on a receiver even in the first 5 yards, and manage to STILL get beat deep while playing 12 yards off, it won't matter one damn bit if you play in GB, a place with a dome, or sunny Arizona.

Hopefully Randall takes a look at some tape, actually A LOT of tape and figures out what the hell happened between 2015 and 16. Injuries had something to do with it but so did that thing that rests squarely between his shoulders with the helmet on it.

I hope you're wrong about Randall. Be rough going for the Packers if his heart isn't in it already.

0 points
0
0
vj_ostrowski's picture

February 25, 2017 at 07:51 pm

This goofy idea from fans that CBs are playing 10 yards off for no reason, as if it's some sort of mistake or absence of coaching is ridiculous to me. As if this was the problem and no one at 1265 could figure it out. It blows my mind that people think this.

0 points
0
0
CoryJennerjohn's picture

February 25, 2017 at 10:50 am

I agree that Raji was aloof sometimes, but he was still an above average player and still played hard until he opted to leave.

He wasn't horrific for three years. That's absurdly false.

0 points
0
0
OrganLeroy's picture

February 25, 2017 at 03:06 pm

Many fans also like to forget that after his rookie year, the Packers decided to play him at DE despite the fact he was a pure NT with exceptional quickness. His play suffered as aresult.

0 points
0
0
Rossonero's picture

February 25, 2017 at 08:31 am

When I heard about Clark's wrestling background, I understood why Ted took him. They struck gold with a short, stocky guy by the name of Mike Daniels, and figured that could be an asset for Clark as well.

The main knock on Clark was his lack of size and shorter arm length. Clark's arms are 32 1/8 and Daniels are 32 1/2. However, I don't get the size criticism because he's 6'2" and 314 lbs., whereas Daniels came into the league at 6'0" 291 lbs., but he obviously has bulked up since then.

The key is that low center of gravity-- that's one reason why Daniels has been so successful. Clark has that low center of gravity too. Who better to learn technique from than Mike Daniels? I hope these two guys are spending a lot of time together, mainly for Clark's sake.

The good news is Clark is only 20 when he was drafted, so he has room to grow and bulk up even more.

0 points
0
0
Since'61's picture

February 25, 2017 at 09:13 am

Clark is a good example of the type of player you will find when you draft late in the 1st round as the Packers usually do and will again this year. He can evolve into a solid player but not likely reach all-pro or HOF levels. However, the Packers only need to be solid on defense as long as we have A. Rodgers and our productive offense. If we can shore up our pass rush and our CBs with one or 2 solid FAs plus our draft picks we can have a defense that is good enough to win with our offense. Rodgers can still play at a high level but we're rapidly approaching the "now or never" point. Thanks, Since '61

0 points
0
0
NickPerry's picture

February 25, 2017 at 02:11 pm

Well said Since '61.... I truly believe if Thompson isn't active this season, doing everything possible to shore up a defense that could actually be worse in 2017 that 2016, we could very well be at that "Now or Never" point sooner rather than later.

It Thompson continues to use JUST the draft to try and fill the ever growing number of holes on the defense, when does the Offense begin to falter? We saw what happened in 2015 without Nelson and a fat Lacy. Cobb's not a #1 and either is Adams, not really. Cook was a pleasant addition but will be 30 before the Packers make their first draft choice this year and isn't signed yet. Even if they sign Cook it's a pretty damn good year for TE's, one where you could get a good one in the 3rd or 4th round. Be nice to address it NOW instead of when it's a huge hole again.
I love me some Montgomery and am one of the few who believe he could be the feature RB in GB but they still need more than just Monty and Rip.

By 2018 the Packers could really be needing reinforcements at the "Skill Positions" on Offense and we haven't even talked about TG Lang, and depth for the OL.

Since '61 has it it on the proverbial head. "Now or Never" is approaching like a freight train, and with the Packers luck in the injury department year in and year out the train could before we know it.

0 points
0
0
sonomaca's picture

February 25, 2017 at 09:14 am

Pack loves the PAC (12).

UCLA: Clark, Hundley, Jones
USC: Matthews, Perry
Stanford: Martinez, Montgomery, Murphy
Cal: Rodgers, Rodgers, Davis
ASU: Randall
Arizona: Gilbert

That's 25% of the roster. Someone have an explanation?

0 points
0
0
4thand1's picture

February 25, 2017 at 09:59 am

Because of where they draft. The best players from the sec , big 10 are gone.

0 points
0
0
sonomaca's picture

February 25, 2017 at 11:10 am

Good point. Perhaps the West is underscouted. Only 7 of 32 NFL teams are West of the Mississippi.

We see the same thing in golf. West coast talent is a bit overlooked.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

February 25, 2017 at 01:09 pm

I can't remember the name of the Packers primary west coast scout, but supposedly he has the ear of the front office.

I wouldn't put too much into the west coast thing once you get past round 3. At that point, you're looking at players who might fit your scheme or bring something you don't already have...and you can find those players from any conference. If we think Davis is a unique athlete, we'd be mistaken. But rounds 1-3? I think that's where it's a bigger deal.

Still, I hear some people posting here that the Packers don't take enough players from the SEC or Big fourTEeN. It's not about teams and conferences, it's about individual players. Many argue that the best football is being played in the SEC and that it naturally draws the best players: in a way, there's a preselection or player vetting happening just by being on an SEC team. The talent floor on many of those teams might be higher than those in other conferences (and some have argued that it makes it MORE difficult to truly assess a player because of it), but that average player in the SEC still isn't likely to be any more than PS material in the NFL. You're going to find really good players in every conference...but it's more than that: it's just about finding the RIGHT players.

0 points
0
0
Lphill's picture

February 25, 2017 at 09:27 am

Remember Clark played a lot more than expected last year and he held his own I believe he shows more this coming season with a full season under his belt. We don't need Raji .

0 points
0
0
sonomaca's picture

February 25, 2017 at 09:49 am

Could we see Pack go for McKinley in round one (UCLA), and Moreau in 3.

0 points
0
0
Rossonero's picture

February 25, 2017 at 12:12 pm

I think McKinley is very realistic.

0 points
0
0
NickPerry's picture

February 25, 2017 at 02:16 pm

Me too but I'm holding out hope for Charles Harris from Missouri if the go OLB.

0 points
0
0
OrganLeroy's picture

February 25, 2017 at 03:18 pm

McKinley is expected to run a sub 4.5 @ the combine @ 265 lbs. according to Tony Pauline. He's been posting 4.5's in workouts on campus and has been rising fast. Very unlikely he'll be there @ 29 plus he's weak against the run. Harris is a much better option IMO and a more rounded player and is more likely to be there. The combine will sort some of that out.

0 points
0
0
stockholder's picture

February 25, 2017 at 04:10 pm

I don't think McKinley makes it past the LIons. I'm still seeing McCaffrey RB being picked by the packers as BPA. I still think Tim Williams will be better than McKinley. In fact, if he had better character, he should be the packers pick. And I would follow that with willis. I'm just not sold on a CB #1. They just look like potential busts.

0 points
0
0
Turophile's picture

February 25, 2017 at 05:54 pm

I thought this was a bit of a 'fluff' article (it's that time of year), but there was one thing that caught my eye. Go back to the start of the piece and just look at that picture of Kenny Clark. Specifically, check out just how huge those thighs of his are.

That kind of power build reminds me of Lions RB, Barry Sanders. The guy was only 5'8", but those huge thighs he had helped him to be the most exciting RB I've ever seen. You just don't see RBs in the NFL simply step back out of a tackle when the opponent has his arms wrapped around you, Barry could do that, on occasion.

Clark has such a huge 'bubble', he could be absolutely immovable for any offense trying to shift him, double team or no. Of course he'll need good technique as well, but he has huge potential, which he began to show late last season.

0 points
0
0