Content
X

Create Account

Or log in with Facebook

X

Log in

Or log in with Facebook

Packers Daily Links: No Guarantee Barnett Is Out... Yet

By Category

Packers Daily Links: No Guarantee Barnett Is Out... Yet

While it may very well end up being the case that Nick Barnett is lost for the season with a wrist injury, nothing has been etched in stone just yet. "A league source told ESPNWisconsin Wednesday night that while Barnett may in fact be done for the year, no final decision has been made," writes Packers beat reporter Jason Wilde. Barnett told Wilde in a direct message that he'll know more after a second opinion on Friday. Head coach Mike McCarthy said pretty much the same thing during his press conference on Wednesday.

In other injury news, the offensive line was without a couple of starters Wednesday during practice. "Left tackle Chad Clifton was held out because of his normal pattern of rest for his sore knees, but right tackle Mark Tauscher was a surprise addition to the injury report with a shoulder sprain," writes Rob Demovsky of the Green Bay Press-Gazette. "He was injured while playing special teams on a placekick against the Lions." McCarthy indicated Tauscher was already feeling better than he was on Monday, so while the injuries may not be serious, they continue to be something to watch.

Quarterback Aaron Rodgers chalked up his post-game comments about spreading out the offense and getting the best players on the field following the Lions game to frustration. But he had support in the locker room. “Oh, I loved it,” tight end Jermichael Finley is quoted as saying by Pete Dougherty of the Press-Gazette. “That’s what we need around here, somebody to speak up, and a guy like him to speak up. It was a good thing. I’m with him on that 100 percent, and hopefully things change.” As long as the Packers get their typical 60-plus offensive snaps per game, I doubt there will be any more criticism of personnel and schemes from within the organization.

Some Packers voiced opinions that they wished the team had acquired Marshawn Lynch. However... "Several Packers players said off the record that they were disappointed Thompson wasn't able to complete a deal for Lynch and that he would have made the team better," writes Greg Bedard of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. "But no player said the failure of a deal affects their prospects for the season." Meanwhile, the running backs currently on the team took it as a vote of confidence.

Ted Thompson was smart not to pay the third-round asking price for Marshawn Lynch says Bob McGinn of the Journal Sentinel (subscription required). He also likened the move to acquire Randy Moss by the Vikings to one of instant gratification. "All I think I know is Marshawn Lynch wasn't worth a third-round pick to the Green Bay Packers. That they could control," writes McGinn. "Moss will have to be dealt with twice in the next seven weeks." What this also means is that the Packers couldn't have acquired Lynch for the same asking price as the Seahawks. They had to beat it.

Reaction to all the injury situation of the Packers has fans fearing the worst. "Either way, you have to think Barnett’s out for the foreseeable future with this injury and, season-ender or not, things are looking grim for Green Bay’s defense," writes Chris Lempesis of Ol' Bag of Donuts. "With Morgan Burnett out for the year, Brandon Chillar possibly out for the year (or at least a good long while) and the Barnett situation, the Packers are already down three starters. That’s not even mentioning Nick Collins’ knee injury, which he said may sideline him this week."

There is some good news amongst all the bad. "[Charles] Woodson was named the NFC defensive player of the week after his interception-return touchdown, two late pass breakups and career-high 14 tackles against the Lions," writes Bill Huber of Packer Report.

Lost among the injury news is really a good article by Tom Fanning of the Packers official website talking about the red zone success by the Packers this season. "The Packers enter Sunday’s game with Washington ranked No. 2 in the NFL with a 75 percent touchdown rate, converting on nine of 12 opportunities, which trails only Philadelphia (80 percent)," writes Fanning on Packers.com. A big reason for the success has been the far fewer sacks the offensive line has given up this season, especially in the red zone. That has led to less field goals and more touchdowns.

Sam Farmer of the Los Angeles Times has a good description of what decertification means in the wake of the recent NFLPA event in Green Bay. On the subject of a possible lockout he writes, "I think there will be, even if it only takes place between March and the traditional start of training camps in late July."

  • Like Like
  • -3 points

Fan friendly comments only: off Comments (29) This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.

hyperRevue's picture

According to McGinn (via Nagler's tweet), Thompson offered a 4th round pick plus a player for Lynch. I think that's more than a fair price and Thompson was more than reasonable to stick to it.

CSS's picture

Haven't seen the speculation yet, Nagler. Give us your 3 most likely 'players' of NFL starting quality that TT was about to part with.

Spitz? Underwood? Would he dangle McDonald who has a ton of upside based on pre-season film?

hyperRevue's picture

When reports were floating around that the Bills wanted a starting o-linemen, my only thought was to move Colledge and start Buluga.

CSS's picture

The only reason I find Colledge to be unlikely: Bulaga clearly outplayed him when given reps in the pre-season. I get the impression the coaching staff is sitting on Bulaga for pending down-time with either Tauscher or Clifton.

Talent wise, they should have already made the move.

hyperRevue's picture

I agree with your "saving Buluga to fill in for Clifton/Tauscher" concept.

But, really, I can't think of any other player on the roster who would a) have value to another team and b) be expendable. Maybe a tight end?

I dunno. It's obviously a moot point anyway. But fun speculation. And I think it takes some of the heat off Thompson.

PkrNboro's picture

Bingo -- gold star for you.

Notice that later it came out that Clifton was having trouble with a swollen knee. Naturally, the club knew about this and had to spin-doctor a story.

davyjones's picture

Lynch, Lynch...blah, blah, blah...We gotta let it go. If we look at some stats we see a very different story than what all the negativity here implies. The GBP's have a team rushing average of 3.9 YPC putting them squarely in the middle of the NFC pack. Yes, I know, a lot of that is Rodgers. If we back out his numbers and just look at Jackson/Kuhn, the number is 3.63...pedestrian to be sure, but still ahead of 1/3 of the teams in the NFC---in Average YPC. Not that horrible for a team that hasn't even tried to run the ball. Even without Rodgers' numbers factored in, they rank ahead of the Colts, Saints, & Bears, among others lesser names. One might assume that if/when they actually try to run the ball, that average per carry might go up a little as backs find a groove. If it doesn't, 3.63 is just fune for a team with the passing weapons this one has. Would we all prefer to be averaging 4.5 YPC? Sure. But geez, just from reading the posts on the running game you'd think we averaged under 2 yds a carry. We really just haven't tried very hard.
Now, down 3 D starters hurts a lot more, but people are just going to have to step it up. Someone is going to surprise us to the upside.

CSS's picture

And Rodgers YPA from under center (not shotgun) are a full yard higher than the rest of the league. Teams are selling out to make the run one-dimensional and Rodgers, to this point, is making them pay.

Akbart's picture

I was hoping for a Matt Flynn for Lynch and one of those dandy cornerbacks, (the pack is not going to win without Rogers anyway).

hyperRevue's picture

Flynn is an interesting trade chip. Trading your only reliable back-up QB mid-season probably isn't the smartest move, but, you're right, if Rodgers goes down it's over regardless.

PackersRS's picture

Now we can use that 3rd pick and get an ILB!

CSS's picture

For some reason I feel like the need for an ILB kind of 'snuck up on me'. Honestly, they don't have a true 3-4 thumper on the roster, and the guys they do have are either out via contract (Hawk) or have questionable injury/productivity (Barnett) in 2011.

Also, what are they really looking for in future drafts at the position? With all the passing teams on the schedule they're on a pace to spend maybe 30% or less of their time in base defense, so are they really even looking at a true 3-4 ILB? Is it worth a 1st round pick if the guy is on the bench so often out of base?

I'm stumped moving forward......

Brian Carriveau's picture

ILBs are on the field almost all the time in subpackages, though.

CSS's picture

Well, that's kind of my point. A true 3-4 ILB has a bigger, thicker body type that attacks the line of scrimmage but tends to not be as fluid (it's rare) when asked to drop into coverage or get latteral in a hurry.

So, what body type are they looking for when a team spends so much time outside of base? Trying to reconcile the need to stop the run, creating favorable defensive down-n'-distance (see body type above) w/Capers philosophy vs. the evolving 'pass happy' league we're in.

So what body type do they really covet? Big guys that do it all are rare and, with over half the league running 3-4 defense they will be coveted and gone in the top 15 picks.

PackersRS's picture

I'm not advocating for a thumper. I'm advocating for an ILB that can cover, something we don't have. We had in Barnett, and that was it.

My point is, ILB would be a need next year regardless, whereas RB and SS wouldn't.

Don't know who's available, though...

PackersRS's picture

And just look at our DL and our ILB. Clear, to me, that we have bigger types in the DL than most 3-4 teams, and smaller ILB than most 3-4 teams.

CSS's picture

No matter how you cut it I'm in full agreement that it looks like a draft priority next year.

Of course, there's always a chance TT will acquire a ...(snicker)... dominant free-agent...(giggle)....to fill the....haahahahahah shit, couldn't do that with a straight face

PackersRS's picture

Just because I WANT an ILB and think that it would be the best approach, doesn't mean I don't know reality...

jay's picture

Would it be terrible to draft an OLB type guy for ILB. I know ILB normally defend against the run, but if we're looking for someone who can cover, then the run stuffer isn't really that necessary. Bruce Carter of UNC looks attractive as far as coverage guy, but it's far too early to judge if he'll be there when we pick. But that's one name to keep in mind.

alfredomartinez's picture

i hope its indigestion im having, cause other wise all these injuires by the pack may serioiusly be giving me a heartattack as i post this...shiiiittt...fuuuuuukkkkkk....

Cole's picture

Biggest needs in next years draft: ILB, OLB (impact player), S, DL, RB possibly.

jay's picture

I would disagree as far as DL. Assuming we can resign Jenkins (big assumption but a workable one) then we have 4 more than serviceable linemen. What do you think will happen to Jolly when his suspension is over? If he stays my point is all the stronger.

I would say ILB, RB, S, BPA (no TE though please!)

lars's picture

So, all the needs are defense and "maybe" a RB? OT and G are needs as I doubt Colledge and Spitz get resigned and Tauscher is done. Clifton will be by next season, too.

jay's picture

Oh yeh...wow can't believe I forgot about OL. We still don't know what TJ Lang is doing and if he's capable of adequately replacing Tauscher. If we know that by the end of the season, we should be fine on RT. Sitton is great, so I assume you mean Colledge. Yeh throw G into the mix.

Cole's picture

The season is not lost. Players we can't lose: Jenkins, Matthews, Woodson, Collins, WIlliams, Rodgers, Finley, Jennings, Driver.

Cole's picture

So is Collins hurt for this week or not. At GBPG they keep saying he is? I am confused.

PackersRS's picture

I think he's hurt per se, but can play.

thepretzelhead's picture

The 2008 season...beating the Vikes and we lose Barnett for the year. Turned into a lost season...and "experts" called for TT and MM's head. I suppose these rats are sharpening their teeth.

Chad's picture

People constantly bitching and moaning about TT need to take a long look at the Steelers organization. They are team known for building through the draft, and how many Super Bowls have they won in the past 5 years? Oh yeah... 2.

Of course, they also draft a shitload of LB's.

Log in to comment, upload your game day photos and more!

Not a member yet? Join free.

If you have already commented on Cheesehead TV in the past, we've created an account for you. Just verify your email, set a password and you're golden.

Or log in with Facebook

Packers Tickets

Quote

"A school without football is in danger of deteriorating into a medieval study hall. "
"The Bears still suck!"
"I firmly believe that any man’s finest hour, the greatest fulfillment of all that he holds dear, is that moment when he has worked his heart out in a good cause and lies exhausted on the field of battle – victorious."