Things I find interesting in no particular order,

2 RBs, 8 WRs and 4 TEs. It tells us they are going to open it up. More 3 and 4 receivers sets.

5 of the 8 WR have numbers in the Tens instead of the Eighties.

I expected 8 OL instead of 9. So many guys can play multiple positions. Makes me wonder about the health of the starters.

With 5 DL they will rotated them and everyone will get playing time.

8 LB instead of the previous 10 shows how the MLB position has changed. Factor in Burks it's even more amazing.

Raven Greene? really?

---

After a day of discussing the Mack deal I would have though the sarcasm was evident but I guess not.

I see

---

I'm a little flummoxed at their decision to only keep two running backs. I can't remember the last time this team entered the regular season with only two backs on the 53-man roster -- and one of them a converted wide receiver at that. With all the nagging injuries they've had at that position in recent years, I hope this decision doesn't come back to bite them in the ass. Montgomery's health is especially suspect.

That being said, with all the pass catchers they're keeping, I wonder if they've planning to call a ton of screens and play action this year -- or, given that they're keeping four tight ends, if they're more worried about the condition of the offensive line than they're letting on and if they're counting on the tight ends to help out on pass protection. I didn't get a chance to watch much of the preseason action. Can anyone shed some light on how the tight ends looked in pass pro compared to the halfbacks?

---

They already had a ton of 3 WR sets, Nelson, Adams and Cobb all played more than 70% of the offensive snaps last year. And would they really want to take Graham off the field? (or are we counting Graham as a WR?) ... but I'm thinking we could see lots of 3 WRs/1TE and 2WRs/2TEs sets.

Also speaking of that 70% of the snaps, only two defenders total, and they have to rotate in and out more, so I'm a bit shocked they're going with only 24 and I think they could change in the coming days, because they need more edge rushers... they only have four and two of them are injury prone.



I heard an interesting suggest of why we kept so many OTs, is because right now there seems to be an OT shortage of talent in the NFL and so they're in demand and the Packers wanted to protect Alex Light because he did very well in preseason games, but isn't ready right now.


Yeah that was my biggest surprise right there... I looked up Pettine's normal rosters, and he normally keeps 7 DL, so I thought the Packers would keep at least 6.


Lately the Packers have been going with 6 OLBers, 3 ILB and 5 Safety.
This year, they went with 4 OLBers, 4 ILBers and 5 Safeties.

So I think the lower number of LBers have more to do with the OLBers than MLB.

Also S Evans has really struggled at Safety... Greene out played him... but I'm a bit surprised they kept 5 but hey, they need back-up FS... and who knows, SS Jones might be used as a physical slot edge rusher some, that's sorta where he looked best last year.

---

Although it is probably purely a defensive move to keep him from being scooped up by another team, it's also possible that the decision to hold on to Boyle is a sign that Kizer hasn't developed as fast as the team might have hoped and that the coaching staff felt the need for an insurance policy behind him. My guess, though, is that they're just waiting for the dust to settle and that they'll try to sneak him onto the practice squad in a week or two. If another team comes calling, they can always match or exceed the offer and then promote him back to the 53-man roster.

---