The glass half full and half empty· Page 2

texaspackerbacker
Veteran Member

9 years ago

Doesn't "Chmurization" require a hot tub and a baby sitter? (sorry hahahaha)

Rodgers (the other one) is getting better. I have seen him as equal to Quarless in the past, but he now has achieved some separation.

HHCD is also making progress - nowhere near what I had hoped for yet, but some flashes.

I very much agree, Jayrone Elliot should get the snaps that Perry is getting. Down with the seniority system!

Raji Power was nice to see, but it only lasted about a quarter. He needs to go all out all the time, or else he is very ordinary.

I don't know what to think about Burnett. Maybe he plays Safety like the original definition - the last line of defense, and if we don't see him much, it means others are doing their job. He just doesn't seem very instinctive, though - like Nick Collins used to be.

Shields was a little bit more like Shields this week.

Hayward may shy away from tackles - I didn't really see that. What I did see, though, was he was late or too far off in pass coverage several times. I'd like to see a lot more of Randall and some of Rollins gradually worked in. Gunter too.

Montgomery was good, but I wouldn't get too excited about him. He seems a little less fast than I hoped. I'd rather see the guy so many in here hate getting a few of those WR snaps. I bet he'd get regular season TDs just like the preseason.

I'm sure I will get an ass-kickin' for saying this, but I like Starks/a Starks type runner BETTER than Lacy/a Lacy type runner. Find a crease and get 5 instead of running into the butt of your O Lineman/get into the open and get 30 or 35 instead of get into the open and get 10 or 15.

The glass is ALWAYS gonna be 99 and 44/100% full as long as Aaron Rodgers is healthy and mobile. Just ask Sitton and the rest of the O Line who makes them look decent instead of moderately shitty.

Expressing the Good Normal Views of Good Normal Americans.
If Anything I Say Smacks of Extremism, Please Tell Me EXACTLY What.

sschind
Senior Member

9 years ago

#12

- Hayward: I know several people like him but I would like to sit down with them and watch every snap Hayward has played for us, it is crystal clear to me that he is afraid of contact. There's a Wilson run where Hayward was in front of him and tried to avoid tackling him! I'm not talking about missing a tackle I'm talking about trying not to tackle at all!. Wilson, for whatever reason, went down and Hayward carefully touched him to put it down by contact. Please watch the play it is sad and funny at the same time.

Originally Posted by: luigis

So Wilson went down and Hayward avoiding piling into him and drawing a 15 yard unsportsmanlike conduct penalty. Yeah I hate it when players do that too. Nail the guy and give up the yards who cares.

luigis
Member Topic Starter

9 years ago

#13

So Wilson went down and Hayward avoiding piling into him and drawing a 15 yard unsportsmanlike conduct penalty. Yeah I hate it when players do that too. Nail the guy and give up the yards who cares.

Originally Posted by: sschind

I never said that. But please watch the play, Wilson carries the ball and Hayward backpedals instead of running towards him to tackle. If you see the play you will realize Wilson would have probably been able to run over Hayward but he instinctively went down.

Luis

Zero2Cool
Elite Member

9 years ago

#14

Originally Posted by: luigis

Never one to make excuses but Wilson is much quicker than Casey Hayward. Maybe Hayward was trying to take the right line and needed to backpedal to make sure he was going to tackle him rather than completely whiff? I'm asking because I do not recall the play. Could that be possible?

PackFanWithTwins
Veteran Member

9 years ago

#15

I'm sure I will get an ass-kickin' for saying this, but I like Starks/a Starks type runner BETTER than Lacy/a Lacy type runner. Find a crease and get 5 instead of running into the butt of your O Lineman/get into the open and get 30 or 35 instead of get into the open and get 10 or 15.

Originally Posted by: texaspackerbacker

Lacy will get more tough yards, Starks is more dependent on the Oline. But Starks has more speed once in the open field. I not sure one style is better than the other. I like the combination of them because nothing has to change offensively and neither is a situational back.

Combined they remind me of 96 with Bennett and Levens.

The world needs ditch diggers too Danny!!!

Barfarn
Senior Member

9 years ago

#16

Hayward: I know several people like him but I would like to sit down with them and watch every snap Hayward has played for us, it is crystal clear to me that he is afraid of contact. There's a Wilson run where Hayward was in front of him and tried to avoid tackling him! I'm not talking about missing a tackle I'm talking about trying not to tackle at all!. Wilson, for whatever reason, went down and Hayward carefully touched him to put it down by contact. Please watch the play it is sad and funny at the same time.

Originally Posted by: luigis

Luis, if you’re talking about the play at 2:37 3Q [If referencing plays you should notate where they are in the game]; I have to disagree. Hayward has Kearse man- with no hope of help over the top. This shows Whitt and Capers trust Hayward implicitly, just like Tramon! The mistake Hayward made is he left Kearse too soon. Had Wilson pulled up and thrown to Kearse, it’s an easy TD; Wilson is NOT a 20M QB. And if this situation arises if we play again, it will be a TD; but Hayward will get his butt chewed out today for it, if he didn’t get a talkin’ to on the sideline Sunday. So I expect it won’t happen again. If asked, I bet Carroll blames the refs for Wilson’s gaff.

Getting back to the "issue," I don’t see the “back-peddling.” Hayward sees Wilson running [BTW, an amazing feat for a CB playing man w/ no help] stops and turns and squares up at the 34. He takes 3-4 baby steps and each one is closing, before taking one last lateral step inside at the 32.5/33 yrd line as Wilson starts to slide, which caused the contact w/ Hayward’s foot.

look at the replay: Seattle’s line is moving left and every Packer, except Hayward and the one deep safety [Dix, who’s positioned OUTSIDE the LEFT HASH], is moving the same direction and is positioned at or near the LOS as Wilson sprints out right. Hayward’s WR [believe it’s Kearse] would be out there to block Dix. Hayward knows if Wilson gets outside, it’s likely a TD. Hayward knows where his help is coming from and that is inside.

Wilson is shaking and baking as he runs right and Hayward is breaking down perfectly. Each and every move Hayward is making is designed to incrementally close; without losing contain on the outside. Wilson went down, because Hayward didn’t over commit, kept Wilson as inside as possible and the cavalry was about to arrive and splatter him. I suspect Hayward gets an F for coverage and an A for run support on this play.

DoddPower
Veteran Member

9 years ago

#17

I suspect Hayward gets an F for coverage and an A for run support on this play.

Originally Posted by: Barfarn

Well that average would seem to summarize Hayward's play so far this year to me: A good 'ole "C." Nothing horrible, but definitely not great either. Hopefully he improves. I haven't been that impressed with him ever, really. Average player, maybe a decent-to-good slot corner.

texaspackerbacker
Veteran Member

9 years ago

#18

Originally Posted by: PackFanWithTwins

I disagree. Give Lacy a BIG hole - which this O Line very seldom does - and Lacy rumbles straight ahead like a buffalo - fairly hard to bring down but not that much for NFL defenders. Otherwise, he often has a hard time getting going when the blocking ain't there - maybe almost half the time, and he isn't much for finding that opening a hole or two over from where the play is called i.e. running into his lineman's butt as I mentioned. Starks - and really a LOT of RBs do find that opening, and often get a LOT farther down field on the occasions when there is a nice hole - as well as the quick cutbacks we saw from Starks - and many other NFL RBs, but very seldom from Lacy.

Sometime in the not too distant future, we will undoubtedly have a big controversy over whether Ted should pay BIG money to keep Lacy. Let me be the first to come out AGAINST that idea. Give us a breakaway threat with moves instead.

Expressing the Good Normal Views of Good Normal Americans.
If Anything I Say Smacks of Extremism, Please Tell Me EXACTLY What.

luigis
Member Topic Starter

9 years ago

#19

Originally Posted by: Barfarn

Yes that play sorry for not referencing the play correctly.

I disagree with your assessment of the play, Wilson immediately crosses the LOS so a pass is no longer an option Hayward does well leaving the WR because Wilson can't pass but instead of running towards Wilson to tackle him he stays put at his position and as you say does some baby steps to the sides. If Wilson runs towards Hayward with decision the play might be a TD for Seattle, logically he assumed he was going to get downed and just slided in front of Hayward.

You can say Hayward didn't over commit, but I see he was afraid of contact, once again.

I'd give him an A in coverage and an F for fear.

Anyway I really appreciate that you took time to look at the play I'd like to go over many other Hayward plays with you or anyone to decide what kind of player Hayward really is. I think it is an interesting exercise.

Luis

macbob
Veteran Member

9 years ago

#20

Lacy's a BEAST.

Starks is a very good RB as long as he can stay healthy.

I'm glad we have both.

Important Information:

The PACKERSHOME uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More Details Close

Fan Shout

Zero2Cool (11h) : sounds like Packers don't get good compensation, Jaire staying

dfosterf (14h) : Nobody coming up with a keep, but at x amount

dfosterf (14h) : Trade, cut or keep

dfosterf (15h) : that from Jaire

dfosterf (15h) : My guess is the Packers floated the concept of a reworked contract via his agent and agent got a f'

Zero2Cool (16h) : Yes, and that is why I think Rob worded it how he did. Rather than say "agent"

dfosterf (16h) : Same laws apply. Agent must present such an offer to Jaire. Cannot accept or reject without presenting it

Zero2Cool (16h) : I'm thinking that is why Rob worded it how he did.

dfosterf (16h) : The Packers can certainly still make the offer to the agent

dfosterf (16h) : Laws of agency and definition of fiduciary responsibility

dfosterf (16h) : Jaire is open to a reduced contract without Jaire's permission

dfosterf (16h) : The agent would arguably violate the law if he were to tell the Packers

Zero2Cool (16h) : That someone ... likely the agent.

Zero2Cool (16h) : So, Jaire has not been offered nor rejected a pay reduction, but someone says he'd decline.

Zero2Cool (16h) : Demovksy says t was direct communication with someone familiar with Jaire’s line of thinking at that moment.

Zero2Cool (16h) : Demovsky just replied to me a bit ago. Jaire hasn't said it.

dfosterf (18h) : Of course, that depends on the definition of "we"

dfosterf (18h) : We have been told that they haven't because he wouldn't accept it. I submit we don't know that

dfosterf (18h) : What is the downside in making a calculated reduced offer to Jaire?

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Packers are receiving interest in Jaire Alexander but a trade is not imminent

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Jalen Ramsey wants to be traded. He's never happy is he?

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : two 1sts in 2022 and two 2nd's in 2023 and 2024

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Packers had fortunate last three drafts.

dfosterf (15-Apr) : I may have to move

dfosterf (15-Apr) : My wife just told the ancient Japanese sushi dude not enough rice under his fish

Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : I think a dozen is what I need

dfosterf (14-Apr) : Go fund me for this purpose just might work. A dozen nurses show up at 1265 to provide mental health assistance.

dfosterf (14-Apr) : Maybe send a crew of Angels to the Packers draft room on draft day.

Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : I am the Angel that gets visited.

dfosterf (14-Apr) : Visiting Angels has a pretty good reputation

Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : what

Martha Careful (14-Apr) : WINNING IT, not someone else losing it. The best victory though was re-uniting with his wife

Martha Careful (14-Apr) : The manner in which he won it was just amazing and wonderful. First blowing the lead then getting back, then blowing it. But ultimately

Zero2Cool (12-Apr) : I'm guessing since the thumb was broken, he wasn't feeling it.

dfosterf (10-Apr) : Looking for guidance. Not feeling the thumb.

Mucky Tundra (10-Apr) : If they knew about it or not

Mucky Tundra (10-Apr) : I don't recall that he did which is why I asked.

Zero2Cool (10-Apr) : Guessing they probably knew. Did he have cast or something on?

Mucky Tundra (10-Apr) : Did they know that at the time or was that something the realized afterwards?

Zero2Cool (9-Apr) : Van Ness played most of season with broken thumb

wpr (9-Apr) : yay

Zero2Cool (9-Apr) : Mark Murphy says Steelers likely to protect Packers game. Meaning, no Ireland

Zero2Cool (8-Apr) : Struggling to figure out what text editor options are needed and which are 'nice to have'

Mucky Tundra (8-Apr) : *CHOMP CHOMP CHOMP*

Zero2Cool (2-Apr) : WR who said he'd break Xavier Worthy 40 time...and ran slower than you

Mucky Tundra (2-Apr) : Who?

Zero2Cool (2-Apr) : Texas’ WR Isaiah Bond is scheduled to visit the Bills, Browns, Chiefs, Falcons, Packers and Titans starting next week.

Zero2Cool (2-Apr) : Spotting ball isn't changing, only measuring distance is, Which wasn't the issue.

Zero2Cool (2-Apr) : The spotting of the ball IS the issue. Not the chain gang.

Mucky Tundra (2-Apr) : Will there be a tracker on the ball or something?

Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2024 Packers Schedule

Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM

Eagles

29 - 34

Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM

COLTS

16 - 10

Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM

Titans

30 - 14

Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM

VIKINGS

29 - 31

Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM

Rams

24 - 19

Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM

CARDINALS

34 - 13

Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM

TEXANS

24 - 22

Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM

Jaguars

30 - 27

Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM

LIONS

14 - 24

Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM

Bears

20 - 19

Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM

49ERS

38 - 10

Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM

DOLPHINS

30 - 17

Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM

Lions

31 - 34

Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM

Seahawks

30 - 13

Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM

SAINTS

34 - 0

Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM

Vikings

25 - 27

Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM

BEARS

22 - 24

Sunday, Jan 12 @ 3:30 PM

Eagles

10 - 22