Content
X

Create Account

Or log in with Facebook

X

Log in

Or log in with Facebook

Packers Stock Report: Daniels Dominates, Cobb Proves His Worth

By Category

Packers Stock Report: Daniels Dominates, Cobb Proves His Worth

In an interesting turn of events, the Green Bay defense carried the load for most of the team’s 17-9 victory over Seattle in Sunday’s season opener, though several players across the board announced their presence with authority. Here’s a look at how the Packers are trending as they prepare for a Sunday Night Football clash with Atlanta:

Rising

Mike Daniels: There likely has never been a more obvious choice in this column. Daniels owned the line of scrimmage, making an already bad Seahawks offensive line look even worse. He made seven tackles, but his most notable contribution came when he accrued his 1.5 sacks on back-to-back plays, the second of which also saw him force a fumble that set up a Ty Montgomery touchdown. Daniels wanted a larger role in the pass rush game, and he’s walking the walk through one week. If he wasn’t already considered the best defensive player on the team, he probably is now.

Nick Perry: The recently extended edge man came up with 1.5 sacks of his own, though his performance was somewhat overshadowed by Daniels. From the first defensive snap of the game—where Perry bull rushed his way into the backfield with ease—he set the tone for how the Packers would push the Seattle offensive front around for the rest of the afternoon. Depth will still be the concern on the defensive edge, but if Perry can keep that up, he’ll do great things for the Packers in 2017.

Randall Cobb: Recently, Cobb has mostly been the subject of trade conversation among armchair GMs. He showed what he can still bring to the table against Seattle, though, catching nine passes for 85 yards. With the amount of weapons in Green Bay’s passing arsenal, he may still have to carve out a niche as the season goes on, but week one was a good start.

Falling

End-of-half timeouts: There are certain situations in the waning moments of the first half where it makes a lot of sense to stop the clock in an attempt to get one las shot at scoring. What occurred on Sunday afternoon, in my opinion, was not one of those situations. Long story short, by the time Mike McCarthy used his final two timeouts after consecutive running plays, the clock was down to 43 seconds. With that amount of time remaining, Seattle had all the leverage. If they run the ball and pick up a first down, they can decide what they want to do from there. If they come up short, the clock runs out. Ultimately, they picked up the first down and proceeded to march down the field and kick a field goal as time expired. Things like this get lost in the shuffle when you end up winning the game, but they can loom large more often than not.

NFL Categories: 
  • Like Like
  • 2 points

Fan friendly comments only: off Comments (95) This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.

jeremyjjbrown's picture

I was one who thought Cobb would diminish this season because the TEs would take his targets and snaps. I hope I continue to be wrong. If he's getting covered either by a safety or the other teams 3 or 4 corner he's going to destroy them.

croatpackfan's picture

Falling: Davone House. He was swimming around with no clue where is player he had to cover in several occasions.

I do not agree on that TO issue. I think Mike McCarthy had his arguments, how well D was playing. And, every decision in life brings some level of risk. It is how it is!

Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

I agree on House, but disagree on McCarthy. I thought he coached a fine game overall, but he messed up with those timeouts.

We all make mistakes. It's called, "being human."

lou's picture

I was concerned as all were during the first half when the offense tried to beat man coverage 15-20 yards downfield, it looked like the year Jordy was out and like the first quarter of games last season. But give McCarthy credit, in the 2nd half he adjusted to more WR and RB screens an shorter curls, last year he didn't do this until we had to "run the table". On the timeouts, my guess is everyone has hammered Mike about being too conservative (mostly when they have a lead) so he said lets try to get some points before the half ends.

jrf153's picture

McCarthy did the same thing with the timeouts last year a few times and it lead to the other team scoring each time.

dobber's picture

House played virtually no defensive snaps in the preseason. He's still getting into game shape. I expect he'll be better this week, but you're right: he was one of the few points of concern in week 1

marpag1's picture

I'm missing something... why is everyone so down on House? To my recollection, he was beaten rather badly on a deep ball down the right side that was overthrown and incomplete. He had a 5 yard holding call that was declined. He (barely) ran into the kicker, which was also declined. I think maybe (???) I remember him missing a tackle somewhere.

But the dude played 100% of the defensive snaps. Had three tackles, including a very nice TFL on Seattle's second snap. I cannot remember that he gave up even a single pass completion. Am I forgetting something? What exactly are you guys down about?

flackcatcher's picture

We fans do have a tendency to overreact. For a guy who saw almost no playing time during the preseason House was assignment sure. Coming off a bulky hamstring, he played smart and made few if any mistakes in coverage. House played well.

croatpackfan's picture

As I re read my comment I do not see any suggestion to bench Davon or to cut Davon or to trade him or anything similar to that.
I just mention that he played the game in week 1 badly. I certainly hope he will improve and he will play much better in the next weeks of the season.
But that does not change the fact: Davon was the worst player on Packers D in week 1 game.
It is not sentence with retribution. It is just fact.
I hope he will become very important player for Packers.

Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

I too felt Cobb should be released, not because he couldn't perform, but due to his pricetag, inconsistent health, and the depth we have at his position.

Did Cobb "prove all the doubters wrong" with this performance? Of course not, since no one doubted he could play. But he did prove to be a matchup nightmare for Seattle's lanky corners and poor depth. Cobb's quickness out of cuts, veteran savvy, and sure hands were on full display, while his bulkier teammates struggled to create space.

Cobb didn't have a good game; he had a great game. And if he keeps having games like this all season, people like me who thought the cap dollars would be better spent elsewhere will be proven wrong--I gleefully admit that. I've always loved Cobb, and nothing would make me happier.

I find it a bit amusing, however, for Cheeshead writers to keep laying it on thicker than Buck and Aikman discussing Seattle not getting calls. After one game, they mock those of us who simply felt WR was a deep position and the cap dollars would be better spent elsewhere.

Honestly, it's getting pretty childish. Chad Johnson didn't celebrate touchdowns to this degree. Cobb's a fine player and we all cheer him on, but disagreeing over cap spending is hardly a federal offense.

Brandon Fisher's picture

Pretty much you don't want to admit you were wrong

Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

Pretty much you didn't read what I wrote. In fact, that's almost 180 degrees opposite of what I wrote.

porupack's picture

BF;
ALP admits that he might be wrong about the cap dollars, if the trend continues. Right? Seems like he's open to changing his view.

I disagreed with thoughts to getting rid of Cobb to save cap dollars when you have reliable, tough, gritty players, especially great character guys that can be relied on when you need to get the 1st down. Cap money doesn't buy first downs, extend drives, and get the points. Cap money only buys the coaches chances that you get a good player that does the above. But when you already have one.....just keep him, keep the synergy.

Brandon Fisher's picture

We cut Cobb to sign who exactly? This isn't Madden buddy and Rodgers even said himself they are a better team when he's healthy and on the field. Is he being paid too much? Probably but so is Clay, doesn't mean we don't need them both this year to compete for a SB.

Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

Buddy? Maddon? I just love the nonstop, petty mocking by some people on this site.

As I've posted repeatedly, there are multiple ways we could use the cap dollars, and we will lose a good player somewhere to keep Cobb--that's a virtual guarantee.

Now, is he worth it? He sure was on Sunday.

Brandon Fisher's picture

Guess I should have kept reading but doesn't change the fact that people saying we needed to cut Cobb have no idea what they were talking about. Think people forget Green Bay isn't a top destination for free agents. Still would have liked to hear who we could have signed if we did indeed cut him.

Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

Not "signed," but "re-signed." We could have retained Lang or Tretter without Cobb's money on the books. We could put the extra cash toward Rodgers or Davante Adams. We also have plenty of other contracts coming due. Pick something; his contract vs. performance has really hurt this team.

Every dollar counts with a salary cap. Overspend in one place, and you lose someone somewhere else. Fact is, Cobb's position is loaded and young, while he earns in the top 5-10% of NFL WR's. Was he worth it Sunday? Of course! Will he be worth it all year? Maybe. I want nothing more than to see him be worth every dime, as that means we'll be a Super Bowl contender.

Matthews is an even worse problem, but his position has none of the quality depth we see at receiver.

It's nothing against Cobb at all. It's just managing the roster with a limited cap.

flackcatcher's picture

Ah no. Tretter and Lang signed above market value, even cutting Cobb would have left the Packers short of free cash with dead money in the cap. Lose lose all around in cap world. Cobb is valued by the front office, by coaching staff. End of story.

Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

I totally agree, but that's why you lock them in sooner. We should have been working on Tretter a year ago.

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

We could of course have simply rolled over the savings from cutting Cobb. We don't have to spend it on another player immediately. Since cutting Cobb would have saved about $6.1M, and he's worth about that much, with a decent chance of being worth more, I didn't favor cutting Cobb. That is mostly just math, a concept that ought to be applied to those time outs.

stockholder's picture

Let's change places this game. Most wanted Cobb cut because of his contract. I said No. The thing this game showed, was WHERE WAS ADAMS.? ON HIS BACK! The money you want to pay Adams is not justified if you use this game. He wasn't open at all. A-rod threw to his right hand and that is his weak spot. You pay him Cobb's money, and it will be a cap disaster. Don't misunderstand; He can play against a poor defense now. But That's not what was displayed against Seatle. What was on display; was who wants to win, and who will do what is necessary. Nelson and Cobb belong together.

Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

Interesting perspective. It's true Adams wasn't getting open--except a brief streak with a young CB giving far too much space--and I would be concerned tying up too much money for a wide receiver again. It all depends on the pricetag.

But honestly, I expect Adams to devour Atlanta.

dobber's picture

That's just it, and I think you hit on it here: the Packers can game plan to feature any one of 4 (or more) skill position guys and the offense doesn't miss a beat. Would any of us be surprised if Cobb only catches 2-3 passes against Atlanta and Adams (or Nelson or Bennett or Monty) catches 8+? Probably not. This is a good problem to have. The $$$s are a completely different question.

Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

Wouldn't surprise me at all.

Do I want Adams back? Of course. But what if the coaches think they have a potential breakout candidate in someone like, say, Clark? Or someone else?

As I always say, Cap is King. Pricetag will be everything. In Cobb's case, there's no denying his production has been far below his price thus far.

Spud Rapids's picture

Stockholder, what you’ve just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

I'm joking it wasn't that bad but I do have issues with this post...

"The thing this game showed, was WHERE WAS ADAMS.?"
-Rodgers completed 27 passes to 6 different receivers... there is only 1 ball to go around and I fail how Cobb/Nelson having great days somehow looks bad upon Adams. He caught 3 for 43 yards including a huge conversion on a 3rd and 17.

"The money you want to pay Adams is not justified if you use this game."
-Who in their right mind uses a one game as a barometer on if someone should get paid???? How about we look at Adams first 3 years, 163 rec for 1930 yards and 16 TDs, compare that to 100 rec for 1268 and 6 TDs... the second stat line was Nelson through 3 years.

"A-rod threw to his right hand and that is his weak spot."
-I don't know what you are getting at here, I think you are reaching

"What was on display; was who wants to win, and who will do what is necessary."
-I guess you're attempting to somehow convey Adams doesn't play hard? I don't follow the logic or how you can determine this... I do know that Adams was tops in the league last year in contested catches per the article below:

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000773531/article/davante-adams-lea...

The TKstinator's picture

Spud: Billy Madison is no doubt in a bath tub somewhere reading your post and smiling, while debating the relative merits of shampoo vs. conditioner. I say, jolly good old chum!

Nick Perry's picture

Adams was put on Sherman's side for almost every offensive snap of the game. He caught 3 passes for 46 yards or something like that which isn't a bad day against Sherman. He OCCUPIED Sherman and did a fine job doing it. Lets give him a few games before trashing the guy. It's week one and the Packers just beat a healthy Seattle team with 8 Pro Bowl/All Pro Players just on the defense and an offense that played like 20 snaps in the preseason together. It's WAY to early in the season to start in on Adams.

GBPDAN1's picture

House missing the bulk of the preseason showed up on Sunday. He should get better with more playing time, as should Jones and King ( I hope). Any word on Randall? I read he had a concussion, but then read it was only leg cramps?

dobber's picture

Randall = cramps
Brooks = concussion
Spriggs = hammy

(that's all I got)

GBPDAN1's picture

Thanks. So we should have Randall, which will be big against Falcon receivers. Let's hope Bulaga can go ( and Brooks). Go Pack

Since '61's picture

I have always posted here that Cobb is a good football player. He proved it again against Seattle regardless of how much he is paid. I see no reason for fans too be concerned if he is being overpaid or that the money could be better used elsewhere.

We have about $15 million in cap space so if we had more money left over from Cobb where/how would it be used? Which player are we missing out on that would make such a critical difference?

Bottom line, Cobb has been and remains one of our best offensive players and he usually gets open on 3rd downs and in the redzone when Rodgers needs him. He has well earned his money. After all it's only money and it's not ours to begin with.

House played poorly but hopefully it was due to being rusty. The game in Atlanta will be the real test for House and the entire Packers D. House needs to lose the rust fast.

Thanks, Since '61

RCPackerFan's picture

I agree with you about Cobb. I don't worry about his contract, because quite frankly the Packers are one of the best teams at managing the cap and they are not hurting for money.

I do think that Cobb is the forgotten man in the offense. As the season goes on he will be a very important player for this offense.

I agree with House as well. That he looked rusty. Missing most of camp with the hamstring injury will do that. I don't think he played poorly, just looked rusty.

This week will be the first big test.

Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

The Packers "managed their cap" this year by losing key offensive linemen. The right side run-blocking we now see is a consequence.

Every dollar counts.

Cap is King.

dobber's picture

Even with Lang last year they were not what you'd call a juggernaut running the ball...

Frankly, if they wanted Lang back, they could've paid the man. His price tag was beyond what the Packers were willing to pay, and I would argue it had little to do with cap space.

RCPackerFan's picture

Lets remember they were running against one of the best front 7's in football. Also they were running without Bulaga who is a good run blocker.

Also if they paid Lang the price he wanted. What are the odds that they would have been able to resign Taylor (which they have done) and Linsley (whom they have been reportedly working on resigning)?

So in the end the question is would you rather have Lang, or Taylor and Linsley?

Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

$15 million is not nearly enough for upcoming extensions, and we would have kept Tretter had we extended him early.

I've posted multiple ways we could use the money, and I'm too busy to do so again today. Suffice it to say, teams that don't worry about cap dollars are teams that fall apart because of cap dollars.

Thus far, Cobb's contract has been a cap disaster. Will he justify it this year? Maybe. He sure did on Sunday.

But don't ever think contracts with your heart. Think with your Cap.

Cap is King.

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

"I see no reason for fans too be concerned if he is being overpaid or that the money could be better used elsewhere."

Wow, Since '61.

Razer's picture

Overall, the team played well and shows promise on all fronts. Hard to fault a lot of players or plays for the first game of the season.

As for MM's time outs at the end of the first half, I think that they are good calls if your defense is playing well. To that point, we had been forcing 3 and outs. Get the ball back in Rodgers hands with 40 seconds and good field position is the play. Our defense just isn't there yet and needs more seasoning to make this a good strategy. MM has repeatedly gambled with our D and it rarely pays off. Maybe by seasons end we can count on the secondary to be bulletproof and this strategy to be a better gamble.

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

Again, short of Pete Carroll losing his mind, there was really no chance of getting the ball back with 40 seconds. There was very little chance of getting the ball back at all. The NFL has a 40 second play clock.

Seattle got the ball with 55 seconds left. Seattle ran the ball for minus 1, GB TO. Seattle ran the ball for 8 yards, 3rd and 3 at the Seattle 18, GB last TO. 43 seconds left. There is NO CHANCE Seattle will throw a pass and risk an incompletion that stops the clock (which is the only way we get the ball back with any time on the clock), and they didn't. Instead, Seattle ran Procise on 3rd and 3 and he picked up 4 for the first down (Seattle TO!). If he didn't pick up the first down, the clock doesn't stop on a run unless Procise is dumb enough to go out of bounds, and Seattle uses the 40 second play clock to let time expire. Note that Seattle ran three straight times in this situation.

Taking our two timeouts only works if Seattle is dumb enough to pass the ball and risk an incompletion, the runner is dumb enough to run out of bounds, or Seattle sustains an injury and is forced by rule to take a time out.

MM went brain dead in this situation.

Den's picture

I agree. if MM is going to call time outs to get another chance at offense before the end of the half, he needs to really fire up the defense and not waste the downs letting the opponent score. If you want the ball back you have to take it back... or just let the clock run out.

TXCHEESE's picture

I believe House will be just fine. A little rust and not much playing time with the others. Cobb is a baller plain and simple. He was key in the playoffs last year. If you think Cook's sideline catch in Dallas was great, go back and look at the one Cobb made. With Bennett forcing the safeties deeper, Cobb will rule the underneath crossing area. Mike Daniels. What can you say, but he is a STUD. I was OK with McCarthy's first time out prior to the half, but after they gained 7 yds. on first down, he should have shut it down.

marpag1's picture

Schefter is saying that the Packers are releasing Ricky Jean Francois. Hmmm. Maybe the Packers are truly on the Clark/Lowery/Adams bandwagon, but I didn't see that one coming.

Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

Wow!

RCPackerFan's picture

That is a surprising move.

They also have Dial.
I have to believe that Adams is getting close to returning.

Francois only played 6 snaps against the Seahawks.

L's picture

Dial was the reason I assumed he became expendable. They probably liked film on Dial's potential a lot more, but didn't feel comfortable throwing him out there the first week; especially, when they had RJF who had been with the team throughout the offseason available.

Not to mention, as of now C.Ringo is a waiver guy, so there's a chance the Packers could stash him away on their Practice Squad if he clears waivers and wants to return. The waiving of RJF could be an indication to Ringo that not only is his past experience with Green Bay, but the potential to be promoted from the Practice Squad gives him his best option in finding quality playing time. I hope there's not a bunch of resentment for being released in the acquisition of Dial.

If nothing else I too hope that this is a sign M.Adams is nearing a return.

Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

Wow!

Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

Sorry...double-post...

Bearmeat's picture

That really is very surprising and somewhat disappointing. That DL needs veteran steadiness and leadership. Other than Daniels, it is now very very young. Plus, he helped recruit Brooks and Dial to sign with us. SO COLD! Ugh. TT.

Why not cut our crap OL #9???

Once again, TT proving that he hates vets.

Bearmeat's picture

Ringo just got cut by the Bengals. Maybe PS material again? Still not as good as RJF. But....

Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

Absolutely. Sign him.

Bearmeat's picture

Gunter gone too??

Man. TT is stone frigging cold today. Wow. :(

Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

I didn't see that. When, just now?

RobinsonDavis's picture

Now with the release of Gunter, ASSUMING the Francois story is true and I see no official notice yet, will the Pack add another player or bring up somebody like Gilbert, given Brooks' injury? Another possibility is Sprigg's injury could be bad and they need to assure a back-up tackle if Spriggs cannot go and Bulaga remains down. Very curious...BOTH releases seem out of character given both were on the active roster.

Spock's picture

Gunter released to open spot for Allison. Since '61 must be happy. I never understood '61's (there's no better word for it) IMHO Hate against Gunter. I wish him well in his NFL career. The dude played his heart out for us and was put in an unwinnable situation last year (1st CB against the other teams speedster WR's). I suspect he will catch on with some other team. This year his non-NFL speed resulted in this. Nothing for him to be ashamed of, nature only gives you so much speed, This year the Packers have a LOT of faster guys!

Since '61's picture

Spock - yes, I'm relieved that the Packers have finally chucked Gunter although they could resign him to the PS. However, my relief over Gunter's release has nothing to do with hatred for him or anyone else. I wanted Gunter gone for two reasons:
First, he hurt the team last season. I agree that he played hard which is great but results are what matter. This is professional sports and there are no participation awards.
Second and more importantly, we had a few CBs in TC this year which are better players than Gunter and give the Packers a better chance to win. End of story. No hatred, just preferring the best opportunities and players for the Packers to win.

If Gunter returns to GB via the PS or if he catches on with another team I wish him well. Hopefully he plays against us and Rodgers can go at him the way opposing QBs and WRs went against him while he played in GB.

Two final points, during the season while Gunter was playing I routed for him and did not criticize him until the season was over. To me the off-season is the time for questioning, criticizing, and suggesting personnel moves that might improve the team, or pointing out what has hurt the team. Once the season begins I never give up on the team and I support every player on the roster. Yes, I will point out a player who has a poor game, such as House against Seattle, but that is part of discussing the game, just like pointing out good efforts, (e.g., Daniels and Cobb) is part of our blog.

Second point, whether other bloggers agree or disagree with me I have rarely made personal comments against them. I don't know anyone on the blog well enough to "get personal" against them and none of this is important enough to me to hate anyone either on the team or on the blog.
Thanks, Since '61

Spock's picture

"61 , Yeah, I apologize, I went a little too personal with the "hate Gunter" comment. I always enjoy your well thought out posts, it just seemed to me you were overly harsh on Gunter in a lot of your posts. I didn't mean to "get personal" with you and probably should have edited that comment before posting it. It's been a very bad back day (not that that is an excuse) and I posted that after taking my 5th pain med (my absolute limit). I shouldn't post when I'm feeling like crap and cranky. I admire your posts and will now just shut up and admit I made a mistake by specifically calling your posts out. Peace, my internet "friend" (although I don't know you well either) . :)

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

Spock, if you didn't see my reply apologizing to you on the Daniels article, I again extend my sincerest apologies to you. You are an asset to the comment section.

The TKstinator's picture

I posted a comment similar to this one awhile back, but I think it bears repeating: I really appreciate that you guys can have a disagreement on here without acting like 5 year olds about it. That crap was really getting old! So, well done guys, and another thanks to Jersey Al for cleaning up the site.
Onward!

Spock's picture

TGR, Yes, I saw your respectful reply and, if I remember correctly, thanked you for taking time to reply. Loved your story about getting 'down-graded' to Drax, LOL. We all have comments we wish we had used different words for. It's a credit to the members still on this site that we can be 'gentlemen' about our differences of opinion.

The TKstinator's picture

Incidentally, my "gentleman's name" is Tony Plush.

Spock's picture

Tk, LOL. I remember when there was a story about how to come up with your 'porn star' name (can I say that?). Anyways, you were supposed to take the name of your first pet and then the first street you ever lived on. Mine was 'Sandy Easy'. Hah.

The TKstinator's picture

You certainly can say that. :)
"Rocky Superior" here...almost as much pressure to "perform" as if the name was "Magic Johnson".

Since '61's picture

Spock - I appreciate your thoughtful post. You are an asset to this blog.
I wasn't referring to your comment in particular but to some of the past bloggers who are no longer here due to their being banned. One of the problems with e-communications is that we are not always as clear as we would like to be. We've both been here for a while and we've seen plenty over the years on the field and on the blog. Take care of your back, stay well and peace to you as well my internet/Packer friend. Thanks, Since '61

croatpackfan's picture

I already comment on your hapiness regarding Gunter move, so I just want to ask you to explain me how in the world Gunter, by your words, "... hurt the team last season."

Had he pointed loaded gun in somebody's head to put him on 1st CB position? Or he blackmailed somebody for that role. Or he intentionaly played bad, so he hurt the team. Or whatever reason was in your head, I would like to understand that claim.

Because, by all reports, guy played his heart out of him in his effort to help Packers. So, lets read what some others have to say about how LaDarius played:
“I put LaDarius in some very hard situations,” Whitt said. “The last two games I probably shouldn’t have put him in the situations that I did, but it was best for the team. Out of the 19 games that we played, he probably had as many winning performances as anybody on the team. Now, he did have some hard games. Both Dallas games were hard. That second Atlanta game was hard. But he matched up in both games and played really well. Both Chicago games he played really well. Houston, we gave him no help, he played really well against a very good receiver (DeAndre Hopkins).
Hopefully, with the addition of the men that we add back to the room, and we can take a little bit of that stress off his play, and he doesn’t have to take some of the coverages that Sam (Shields) was taking, he’s going to play at a higher level consistently throughout the year. But the way he went out there and fought, and he did everything that we asked, you can’t ask any more from a man. And I put him in bad situations at times, but I thought it was best for the football team. And you’ve got to make a decision, what you think is best for the football team. And that’s what I did in that case.”
I wonder if you can analyte what coach Whitt said and put in correlation what you said - "First, he hurt the team last season."

And I'm, claiming you are personal when it comes to LaDarius Gunter. And I'm not personal when I asking you those questions.- That is what bothers me with your comments!

Since '61's picture

Croat - I usually enjoy your posts and I respect your long distance loyalty to the Packers. I too am a long distance fan, although not as long distance as you are. You can claim that I have something personal when it comes to LaDarius Gunter but whether you believe it or not I don't.

To me he had no upside left for the Packers and we had better options available at the CB position in this year's training camp.
Like other posters here I noted in some of my posts during the 2016 season that Gunter plays hard, however, while I originally expected him to improve the fact is that his performance declined over the course of the season to the point where he could not compete against the NFL receivers he faced during the playoffs.

OBJ had him beat for 2 TD passes but fortunately for the Packers OBJ did not catch the ball. In the Dallas playoff game his play against Dez Bryant enabled Dallas to comeback in the 2nd half. There is no need to discuss the Atlanta game again.

Now, this not all Gunter's fault. A win or loss is rarely the result of one player good or bad. However, Dom Caper's defense requires the CBs to be able to play one on one coverage. The CB play drives the blitz packages and the safety coverage. As a result of the Packers poor CB play, including Gunter, the Packers had to play two deep safeties for much of the 2016 season. Often the safeties rolled to Gunter's side to support him in coverage. That situation wreaked havoc for the Packers defense which had plenty of problems to begin with due to injuries.

A good or great defense can cover or hide a player like Gunter for part of a game or even part of a season. But the Packers defense was far from being able to that in 2016. When we faced the better QBs and offenses during the playoffs they were ready to zero in on Gunter and manipulate our defense to expose our various weaknesses. Even when Gunter's side was covered it left our other CBs one on one or one our of safeties out of position with the middle of the field wide open.

A defense is as good as it's weakest player and Gunter was our weakest player. He played hard, yes, but you receive no points for playing hard in the NFL and no sympathy from your opponents as they happily cut you to shreds as in the Atlanta game.
To paraphrase a famous line from a famous movie, "it's not personal Croat, this is strictly business". I'm sure that is what TT, or MM, or Joe Whitt said to Gunter after they told him that he was chucked.

I will complete my response to your inquiry with these final points:
1. Playing hard is the minimum expectation that I have for every player on the Packers roster and in the entire NFL. Playing hard is the starting point for me, but ultimately it's the results that matter. That's why we keep score.

2. I was pretty confident that the Packers were going to release Gunter after the debacle in Atlanta. I could not understand what TT and the coaching staff were waiting for. You accuse me of hating Gunter and being personal against him but how about telling a guy that he has made the final 53 roster going into the season and then letting him go after the first game of the season. How is that for crushing someone and you accuse me of being personal. What the Packers management did was as impersonal as it can get. They knew they were going to release Gunter at the end of camp, yet they kept him on the roster while the moved the players around that they wanted to keep. These moves are all planned to get to the final roster they want to have way ahead of time, including responding to injuries.

3. As for Whitt's comments about Gunter. No responsible NFL coach is going to bash his own guy after he releases him. Also, if Whitt does that he is hurting himself. What does that say about him as a coach if he says that the released player wasn't very good? He's no going to throw himself under the bus.

4. During the off season I make some harsh comments about players or coaches (e.g. Capers in the past) and TT. I believe that the off season is the time for questioning, criticizing and for seeking opportunities to improve the team. However, once the season begins I never give up on the team and support our players in every game. That's not to say I won't point out poor play during the season or agree with everything MM or TT will do. Constructive criticism is a great part of our blog. But after 56 seasons I can assure you that I know where I stand about the Packers.

Croat, that's it for me on Gunter. I'm sorry that we don't agree and I'm sorry you think that I have something personal against him, I don't. I just want the Packers to have the best players and the best opportunities to win every game they play and I want to maintain this blog as the best Packers blog on the web. I hope that the time I have taken to respond to your post makes these points. Thanks, Since '61

dobber's picture

"Man. TT is stone frigging cold today. Wow. :("

There wasn't anyone colder when dealing with the bottom of the roster than Ron Wolf. If you were at or near the bottom of the roster, you'd better keep your bags packed. Ron Wolf built some pretty good teams.

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

GB signed Dial for $750,001. The dollar means GB can negotiate an extension in-season. Had we paid just the $750K even, it would have been a qualified contract and the cap hit would have been $600K, or $160K less. I follow the cap closely, and I've never seen TT do that before. Why burn $160K? I wrote the following on APC:

"Again, the team is buying the right to negotiate an extension for $160,001, not for one dollar. RJF probably isn't in our 2018 plan. Posted by Thegreatreynoldo on Sep 11, 2017 | 4:01 AM"

I didn't think that RJF would be cut this season. Since he was on the roster for week 1, RJF keeps his signing bonus and all of his base salary, so there are no cap savings. Mind, Pack Eyed Optimist suggested cutting RJF to keep Ringo or Price at final cut downs. That would have saved $1.6M on the cap. Maybe some of the armchair GMs in the comments section are pretty savvy?

https://www.acmepackingcompany.com/2017/9/8/16269762/packers-contract-de...

croatpackfan's picture

There are a lot of reports of cutting RJF, but no info about that on packers.com

Also, Ringo was cut by Bengals, so I suppose they will bring him to PS instead of Lunsford. But, who knows. Maybe they saw something in Lunsford, but I think they'll keep Ringo over him.

dobber's picture

I was surprised that Lunsford ended up on the PS...maybe he was plan B after Price was claimed. Whatever the case, I didn't think he showed much in the preseason and he generated very little 'buzz' that made me think he was a prize...I recognize that doesn't mean much, but still...

Since '61's picture

The Packers are releasing RJF to make room for Allison.
That is a surprise, especially since they let Ringo go. I would have thought one of the OLs before a defender. Maybe Ringo gets back to our PS now and the Bengals pickup RJF. Who knows?
Hopefully it means that Adams is ready soon.
Good to have Allison back for the Atlanta game.
Thanks, Since '61

dobber's picture

I was surprised to see RJF go, but it could be with Spriggs's injury they didn't feel they could thin the OL ranks any more. I agree, though, in that I thought last week that McCray's neck was on the block after week 1.

Last man in is often the first one out, and Ringo was at the bottom of Cinci's pecking order. He had a good camp. I sure wouldn't mind seeing him come back, but someone above pointed out Brooks's concussion, and that might get Gilbert on the 53 come Sunday.

"Good to have Allison back for the Atlanta game."

This was curious. Without Allison, the Packers used their 4th WR only--I think--on 8 snaps Sunday. I think Kendricks played about 25% of the offensive snaps. So it really was Bennett, Nelson, Cobb, Adams and Montgomery at the "skill positions" all day long. Do I really expect that to change much against Atlanta? Maybe, since they're likely to play as if they need to win a horse race, but likely not...MM is slow to evolve in his patterns.

Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

Releasing both RJF and Gunter clears a roster spot. Maybe we'll promote someone off the PS, signing Ringo back to the PS as well.

I'd enjoy seeing Michael Clark brought up just for redzone jump balls, but I doubt he's ready.

stockholder's picture

Try Datone Jones over Ringo.

Bearmeat's picture

My bet would be on Gilbert. Brooks may not clear the protocol this week....

L's picture

That's kind of how I'm leaning, but who knows for sure. These moves were definite surprises, but than again so was the J.Sitton release last year.

Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

Datone? If he's healthy, that would be very interesting. I noticed our Nitro package looked an awful lot like a 4-3 with Mathews and Perry on the edges up front, and a safety displacing a linebacker.

Jones would fit well in that alignment. But of course, Minnesota runs a 4-3, and they released him.

Bearmeat's picture

He's too heavy for an elephant role now. He's up to 290 again (which he should have been for a 43 DT role). It'd take him 3 mos to lose that weight the right way.

Lphill's picture

Gunter released too .

JohnnyLogan's picture

Don't mind Gunter being released, shows we're going all in on a speedier D.

As to Cobb, Belichick would easily part with a 2nd round pick for him to replace Edelman. I know a lot of people around here would jump at that, but a healthy Cobb is every bit as good as Edelman, with years of experience with Rodgers. I don't think even a 2nd round pick would lure him away.

dobber's picture

"Don't mind Gunter being released, shows we're going all in on a speedier D."

I'd take this as a vote of confidence in Hawkins more than anything else. Whatever the case, they're buried on the depth chart in a position where they shouldn't--God willing--see the field very much 'cept for special teams, anyway.

Bure9620's picture

Cobb is one if the better underneath route runners in the league. (when healthy) He and Edelman excel at this. Hes a dynamic player and security blanket for AR. Chain mover is the best way to describe him. His skill set is very different from Jordy and DA. Another reason why I am a strong proponent for Cobb is I would like to see our most important player get the ball out of his hand quicker and Cobb allows this in certain situations. It can't just be schoolyard with AR looking to pull a play out of his butt on every play. He is especially useful against teams like Sesttle.
Seattle played more zone than I had anticipated, leaving him open underneath.

LayingTheLawe's picture

On defense Brice played nearly every snap and Thomas and Ryan barely played. The rookies Everyone figured were needed also did not see the field. It will be interesting to see who gets the snaps going forward.

Siwi87's picture

Good point Lawe. Could everyone please stay quiet about cutting Cobb. The man makes plays period. His contract will be cheaper compared to other receivers who will cash in with an ever increasing salary cap. The team is in great shape cap wise. Oh and our QB does not make as much money as a few others this year and next.....Extend Linsley and Adams and we will go from there with all of our one year free agents.

Since '61's picture

Gunter released. A bit over due but at least TT is improving the team with these moves. It will be interesting to see who replaces Gunter on the 53.
Thanks, Since '61

flackcatcher's picture

If Brooks is done for a while, it started a daisy chain in the front office. I thought RJF was in trouble with the Dial and that kid from the falcons pickup. Gunter was a tough release. Ted will always pick draft choices over free agents early on. Gunter is a solid player who will get picked up in this league. It all comes back to the O line again. Spriggs hamstring may be worse than we know, add that to Barkley? IR and Buluga(sorry for the misspellings) knee and the packers have the makings of a real problem on the O line.

dobber's picture

I think you're right: given the deficit of CBs in the league, Gunter won't be out of work soon. My bet is he'll be claimed off waivers.

In many ways, I'm sad to see him go. I admired his resilience.

flackcatcher's picture

So am I, I liked Gunter. Tough, smart player who could swing into three DB positions. He should get picked up. I think the RJF wavier depends on whether Books is out for an extended amount of time, or if Adams is put on IR. Man, there are a lot of moving parts for the packers so early in the season.

croatpackfan's picture

I see somebody is very happy! Good for you!

Gunter was replaced with Geronimo Allison!

Also, there is no info on the offcial packers.com regarding that information that Packers released
RJF. He is still on the roster, just changed the number - he is now #99...

http://www.packers.com/news-and-events/article-roster-moves/article-1/Pa...

Finwiz's picture

BYE BYE LADARIOUS GUNTER - I HOPE THE PACKERS ARE NEVER SO DESPERATE TO HAVE TO CALL YOU AGAIN!!!

dobber's picture

Way to stay classy, fellow posters...

Finwiz's picture

Gunter and the Packer management aren't reading CheesheadTV. We shouldn't flatter ourselves.

dobber's picture

How we conduct ourselves when we aren't being watched says more about our character than how we conduct ourselves when we are being watched.

Finwiz's picture

Seriously? Waxing philosophical on a sports web page. Hmmmm - misplaced priorities.
Gunter is gone because he sucked badly, including but not limited to, his play in the biggest game of the year last season. Pro sports are tough business. Time to face the facts and call a spade a spade.
I was starting to doubt their ability to judge talent and commit to change.
I feel very good about the future prospects for this team with the sense of urgency that's becoming clearly evident this season!

dobber's picture

Some interesting reading on how all 32 NFL rosters were built...

https://www.profootballrumors.com/2017/09/week-1-nfl-rosters-assembled

Also...
Malachi Dupre signed to Bills PS
Max McCaffrey signed by Jags to their 53 from the Saints' PS

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

 
 
 

Quote

"The Bears still suck!"
"A school without football is in danger of deteriorating into a medieval study hall. "
"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."