Packers Question of the Day - Are the Packers thin at Cornerback?

Ah, yes. A question that I'm notorious for having an unpopular answer for. But I'm curious - just how unpopular is it? Is there anyone out there in the Packers Blogosphere that sees eye-to-eye with me?

I've gone on the record many a times claiming that I don't believe the Packers have very much depth at cornerback. Behind the veteran and former undraftee Sam Shields, the two up-and-coming second-year talents in Damarious Randall and Quinten Rollins, the Packers have the inefficient Demetri Goodson and the physical LaDarius Gunter at their disposal.

Let's just... pretend Goodson doesn't exist. Especially with a four-game suspension staring him in the face and his lack of production whenever he does see the field, which, in 2015, was 72 snaps. Not counting the 199 he played on special teams, behind only Rollins' 202 - the leader of the Packers' corners as far as special teams snaps go.

Chances are there may be an undrafted free agent finding his way onto the roster to compensate for Goodson's absence. Makinton Dorleant, Josh Hawkins, Robertson Daniel — to name a few in contention.

Am I crazy for believing their isn't much at the bottom of the depth chart for the Packers' cornerbacks? Does their need to be? I could use some thoughts on this.

 

__________________________

Zachary Jacobson is a staff writer/reporter for Cheesehead TV. He's the voice of The Leap on iTunes and can be heard on The Scoop KLGR 1490 AM every Saturday morning. He's also a contributor on the Pack-A-Day Podcast. He can be found on Twitter via @ZachAJacobson or contacted through email at [email protected].

NFL Categories: 
0 points

Comments (24)

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

August 05, 2016 at 09:25 am

How much do we really know about Gunter? It sounds like he is a pretty high level contributor in practice and makes plays almost every day (ie picked off Rodgers in his first two practices last year as a rookie), but will Whitt let us see him this year? Something to look for in these preseason games.

I don't have much to back it up with based on game play, but I like the Gunter kid. Sounds tough. Last 3 superbowls have featured a #36 on D for the Green and Gold. Just saying.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
JerseyAl's picture

August 05, 2016 at 10:12 am

"staffordsneckfat"

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
staffordsneckfat's picture

August 05, 2016 at 11:32 am

Sup Jersey Al. I like the cut of your jib.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
The TKstinator's picture

August 05, 2016 at 03:07 pm

Packers not thin at CB. They phat.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

August 05, 2016 at 09:37 am

I've been reading good things about Rollins and Gunter in camp, and I like Daniel's measureables. I won't hide my disdain for Goodson in coverage...if they can find another good gunner, my hope is that he won't find his way out of camp.

I've been uneasy about the Packers experience at CB, but there's talented depth. Even without Goodson, I would say, "yes", they're thin on experience, but, "no", they aren't thin when it comes to capable players.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Duke Divine's picture

August 05, 2016 at 09:54 am

What dobber said.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
DrealynWilliams's picture

August 05, 2016 at 11:48 am

Spot on @Dobber

"yes", they're thin on experience, but, "no", they aren't thin when it comes to capable players."

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

August 06, 2016 at 10:06 am

Goodson has some experience and is talented, but is he capable? IDK, but so far the answer is no.

Is Gunter experienced? No. Talented? Yes. Capable? IDK.
Are the UDFAs experienced/talented? No/Yes. Capable? IDK.

I remember Favre saying he thought the 2006 team was the most talented he'd been on. Didn't say those talented guys would play well, mind, because he had to keep a straight face. The 2006 team went 8-8.

8-8 isn't acceptable. While I am interested in talent, I am also interested in guys who can actually play. Hawkins has no experience, but he might be talented and capable of playing well in the NFL - that's fine unless it means he is capable of playing well 2 years down the road. Gunter needs to be good. We are thin at CB if the definition is someone who likely can play at an NFL average level this year.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/packers/2006-08-01-fa...

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

August 05, 2016 at 09:55 am

'Are the Packers thin at Cornerback?'

IMO, no...

I would take the Packers top 4 guys over anyone else's in the league.
After the top 4 guys you have Hyde, Robertson Daniel and a bunch of UDFA's. With Joe Whitt as the CB coach. I have plenty of faith in him getting at least one of the UDFA's ready to go...

I'm not concerned with the Packers CB's. Obviously everything changes with injuries, but the top 4 guys I like a lot.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Ryan Brunner's picture

August 05, 2016 at 09:57 am

Toughest position in pro football to find quality, top tier guys at. I like our group of young, talented kids.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Packer_Pete's picture

August 05, 2016 at 10:04 am

Yes. If any of the top 3 goes down injured then the Packers will be in a world of trouble. but maybe one of the young guys will step up. there is a lot of talent on the roster, but also very inexperienced talent. but overall the position is not in the worst of shapes, compared to other position groups.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
JerseyAl's picture

August 05, 2016 at 10:13 am

You are all forgetting about Micah Hyde, who can fill in at CB when needed.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

August 05, 2016 at 10:32 am

I didn't forget him. He is in my post. ;)

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
holmesmd's picture

August 06, 2016 at 03:39 am

Hyde is not nearly fast or even quick enough to play CB. Has anyone else seen him get toasted on a fairly regular basis when in coverage? If Hyde has to play CB for us out of necessity, we're probably going to be in trouble:/

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

August 06, 2016 at 10:14 am

I didn't forget him. He can't play CB.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
scullyitsme's picture

August 05, 2016 at 11:26 am

Just about every article has Robert- Daniel as the next Al Harris. I'm guessing Joe Whitt can do it again. Look around the league, Everyone is in trouble if more than one good corner goes down. Basically in trouble if more than one good player at any position goes down.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Ibleedgreenmore's picture

August 05, 2016 at 12:02 pm

All they need to do is coach em up, they do have the talent and this year we hope they get some experience.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
EdsLaces's picture

August 05, 2016 at 12:10 pm

Thin at cb ....um no.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
MarkinMadison's picture

August 05, 2016 at 03:39 pm

You might find some teams where you like the top two guys better. I don't think you'll find a team where the whole position group is any better. It's a cap world. Thin is a relative term.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

August 05, 2016 at 04:52 pm

I was thinking the very same thing. Maybe a few teams with better top 2 talent but then it drops way off. Like our somewhat inexperienced but talented group sans Goodson more.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Bedrock's picture

August 05, 2016 at 10:21 pm

I read a lot of comments above comparing our CB group to other teams. That's pointless. Other teams CBs don't have any part of the "thin at CB discussion" since it's receivers exposing if a CB group is thin. I get the comparison idea. The argument should be, does our 4th/5th CB match up against the 4th/5th receivers of the teams we'll play.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

August 06, 2016 at 10:48 am

I love the word capable, because "sometimes words have two meanings."

A) Capable: has the potential to do x task well.
B) Capable: is currently competent at task x.

All the CBs are talented or they wouldn't be on the roster. Some have experience, but most have little NFL experience or none.

Shields: Definition B applies.
Randall: Definition B applies.
Rollings: Definition B applies.
Gunter: Not sure - ask Whitt.
Goodson: Definition A applies. I have hope.
UDFAs: Definition A - hope B applies late this season.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
al bundy's picture

August 06, 2016 at 07:15 pm

I have an issue of 5'9 185 pound cb's and safeties. Ted gets a lot of credit for his undrafteds and late round picks but these guys were there for a reason. Why do pack fans expect ronnie lott quality when you have guys no ones heard of. You get what you get ted. Temas have been able to sustain drives by paaing not running the past three years. The d has had a tough time getting three and outs.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

August 06, 2016 at 09:25 pm

Al, you've beat this horse repeatedly. I challenge you to find a DB aside from Banjo, who doesn't play but a handful of meaningful defensive snaps, who has a reasonable chance of making the roster who is under 5'10". You've said the Packers "stretch" these guys when they list them on their roster? Then go to their combine numbers where they're not measured by an individual team.

There are a lot of really good CB out there under 6' tall...Chris Harris, Brent Grimes: both under 5'10" and undrafted. If there's a position out there where teams are mining for gold in UDFAs, it's CB where many of these guys are UDFAs because they lack some measurable (often height or 40-time). What the Packers have and are doing isn't unusual, it's the norm.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0

Log in to comment 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.