November 19, 2019, 08:49:13 PM

Author Topic: josh jackson  (Read 2102 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline mancl

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 786
  • Karma: +8/-1
josh jackson
« on: October 21, 2019, 06:37:15 AM »
Currently he is at best the 4th safety and will drop even lower when/if they activate Campbell.  No idea how low he is on the cornerback chart.  It doesn't seem he has much of a future in Green Bay

On the other hand he was a 2nd round pick a year ago so he does have some value.  I think it is in the best interest of both parties if he gets traded.  What kind of value does he have? I'd take a 3rd rounder for him without a doubt.

Offline scoremore

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1677
  • Karma: +27/-8
Re: josh jackson
« Reply #1 on: October 21, 2019, 06:49:01 AM »
Don't get it he looked promising early on.  Lack on confidence?  Packers should figure out a role for this guy.  He was pretty green coming in maybe that's all it is.  He needs to get it going and soon.  We won't get any value for him in a trade. 

Offline RT

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3613
  • Karma: +63/-18
Re: josh jackson
« Reply #2 on: October 21, 2019, 11:01:59 AM »
Maybe their is nothing wrong with his skill level and he just happens to be at the bottom of a very deep depth chart. People complain forever about a lack of depth and then when they have it they want to trade it away and weaken the position. Maybe the CB room is just fine right where it is.

Offline Pack2SB

  • Starter
  • ***
  • Posts: 120
  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: josh jackson
« Reply #3 on: October 21, 2019, 12:32:52 PM »
Watched him close last year. He really shy'd away from contact and was late to a tackle. Saw some more of the same this year although he hasn't really played much on the defensive side of the ball, mainly ST. I was really hoping he would be an excellent CB but he was even having trouble staying with the TE's last year, which is where they put him most of the time. Doesn't look good since he hasn't been injured, that we know of.

If he wants to hang around, he's gonna have to engage and ramp it up.

Offline dannobanano

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5342
  • Karma: +44/-2
Re: josh jackson
« Reply #4 on: October 21, 2019, 01:21:32 PM »
Jackson did not look good yesterday, especially against TE Waller.

Of course, nobody looked good against Waller yesterday.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j2n_IFhpS2Q

Offline RT

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3613
  • Karma: +63/-18
Re: josh jackson
« Reply #5 on: October 21, 2019, 03:03:38 PM »
Jackson did not look good yesterday, especially against TE Waller.

Of course, nobody looked good against Waller yesterday.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j2n_IFhpS2Q

In all those clips he was in on one of those plays and we are going to say he didn't look good yesterday off of that? In the past 2 weeks Jackson has played 5 snaps on defense and 43 on ST's. Not sure we can judge anyone off of 5 snaps in 2 weeks.

Online ricky

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6285
  • Karma: +73/-21
Re: josh jackson
« Reply #6 on: October 21, 2019, 03:09:14 PM »
Maybe their is nothing wrong with his skill level and he just happens to be at the bottom of a very deep depth chart. People complain forever about a lack of depth and then when they have it they want to trade it away and weaken the position. Maybe the CB room is just fine right where it is.

Kyler Fackrell redux? We'll see. Some players just catch on more quickly. And then again, some players flash early then fade. And RT, I totally agree that judging a player on a very small sampling is not a good idea.
"My hopes are not always realized, but I always hope." Ovid

Offline mancl

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 786
  • Karma: +8/-1
Re: josh jackson
« Reply #7 on: October 22, 2019, 10:18:20 AM »
Mc Ginn does a post game grading for the Athletic.  He noted that Jackson's roster spot might be in danger-' looks like a lost cause in coverage.'

Will he lose his spot and be replaced by Campbell?

Online The GM

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2941
  • Karma: +75/-4
Re: josh jackson
« Reply #8 on: October 22, 2019, 10:39:05 AM »
The knack on him coming out was his speed.  When you cant hang with Jason Witten you got problems.  Too early to get rid of him though, he has tools, but needs a role, focus and some tweaking. 

Offline RT

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3613
  • Karma: +63/-18
Re: josh jackson
« Reply #9 on: October 22, 2019, 10:40:37 AM »
Mc Ginn does a post game grading for the Athletic.  He noted that Jackson's roster spot might be in danger-' looks like a lost cause in coverage.'

Will he lose his spot and be replaced by Campbell?

They are not giving up on a 2nd round pick in his second year who (along with Ty Summers) leads the Packers in ST's snaps.

When Campbell is activated it is probably Baylis who is removed from the 53 and go's back to the PS. 

Online craig

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3970
  • Karma: +22/-4
Re: josh jackson
« Reply #10 on: October 22, 2019, 08:32:15 PM »
They are not giving up on a 2nd round pick in his second year who (along with Ty Summers) leads the Packers in ST's snaps.

When Campbell is activated it is probably Baylis who is removed from the 53 and go's back to the PS.

I agree with all of your points. 

But just a personal view:  I don't think draft-status should directly factor into any such roster decisions.  If he's kept, it should be for football reasons:  ST play; current value; potential/projected future value.... football stuff like that. 

What round he was drafted in should make zero impact. 

*IF* the football evaluation is that he's not good enough now and doesn't project to become effective later, his 2nd-round status shouldn't differentiate him from an UDFA.  If he'd been a UDFA and you wouldn't keep him, then his draft status shouldn't change that. 

Again, I'm not saying he's no good or won't become useful.  He may be earning his spot on ST; or perhaps they view his potential as excellent; maybe he's not healthy.  Not for me to scout or evaluate any of that stuff.  Just saying each guy should be evaluated on his merits, not on his draft status. 

I also realize, of course, that whatever physical qualities made a GM like a guy enough to use a draft pick on him where he did in the first place, that GM may continue to see those qualities, and may continue to project good future potential based on those aspects that he liked to start with. 

Online ricky

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6285
  • Karma: +73/-21
Re: josh jackson
« Reply #11 on: October 22, 2019, 10:02:16 PM »
They are not giving up on a 2nd round pick in his second year who (along with Ty Summers) leads the Packers in ST's snaps.

When Campbell is activated it is probably Baylis who is removed from the 53 and go's back to the PS.

I agree with all of your points. 

But just a personal view:  I don't think draft-status should directly factor into any such roster decisions.  If he's kept, it should be for football reasons:  ST play; current value; potential/projected future value.... football stuff like that. 

What round he was drafted in should make zero impact. 

*IF* the football evaluation is that he's not good enough now and doesn't project to become effective later, his 2nd-round status shouldn't differentiate him from an UDFA.  If he'd been a UDFA and you wouldn't keep him, then his draft status shouldn't change that. 

Again, I'm not saying he's no good or won't become useful.  He may be earning his spot on ST; or perhaps they view his potential as excellent; maybe he's not healthy.  Not for me to scout or evaluate any of that stuff.  Just saying each guy should be evaluated on his merits, not on his draft status. also realize, of course, that whatever physical qualities made a GM like a guy enough to use a draft pick on him where he did in the first place, that GM may continue to see those qualities, and may continue to project good future potential based on those aspects that he liked to start with.

This may be the most intelligent and insightful post I've read on here for a while. The idea that a GM may keep a guy around he drafted too high, rather than admitting a mistake and moving on, is particularly apt. Not in the particular case of Jackson, but overall. All too often there are posts that equate draft position with ability. But TT used to thrive on those "diamonds in the rough" he'd find. And as far as guys who took a while to blossom, remember the lamentably short career of Nick Collins. It took him about three years for the proverbial light to come on. But when it did, it burned exceedingly bright, but cut short by another of those freak neck injuries that seem to particularly plague Packers players.
"My hopes are not always realized, but I always hope." Ovid

Offline dannobanano

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5342
  • Karma: +44/-2
Re: josh jackson
« Reply #12 on: October 23, 2019, 06:13:18 AM »
What happens with Josh Jackson between now and next season will be telling.

Unlike TT, Gute has shown a willingness to admit a mistake on a player and move on from him, regardless of his draft status.

Gute wants the best players on his team and doesn’t care about keeping unproductive draft picks just because he’s afraid cutting one of those will reflect negatively on him as a GM.

I hope Jackson’s “light bulb” comes on and he can settle in at a spot and be productive.

His approach/performance between now and next March may well determine his future in Green Bay.

Offline RT

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3613
  • Karma: +63/-18
Re: josh jackson
« Reply #13 on: October 23, 2019, 06:45:56 AM »
What happens with Josh Jackson between now and next season will be telling.

Unlike TT, Gute has shown a willingness to admit a mistake on a player and move on from him, regardless of his draft status.

Gute wants the best players on his team and doesn’t care about keeping unproductive draft picks just because he’s afraid cutting one of those will reflect negatively on him as a GM.

I hope Jackson’s “light bulb” comes on and he can settle in at a spot and be productive.

His approach/performance between now and next March may well determine his future in Green Bay.

Just what mistakes has Gute shown a willingness to admit? TT got rid of 2nd round pick Jerel Worthy after 2 seasons. Brian Brohm also a 2nd round pick was on the roster his rookie season, signed to the PS for his 2nd year and was gone by mid season that year. Or is it that TT didn't get rid of players that fans had false expectations for, but yet were contributors to the team? Two years after the guy who was largely responsible for a decade of success and you are still taking false cheapshots at him. That is classless crap! 

Online craig

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3970
  • Karma: +22/-4
Re: josh jackson
« Reply #14 on: October 23, 2019, 01:35:05 PM »
....Gute wants the best players on his team and doesn’t care about keeping unproductive draft picks just because he’s afraid cutting one of those will reflect negatively on him as a GM.....

Tangent comment.  But I think any GM, whether football, baseball, or basketball, would be nuts to keep unproductive draft picks, bad free agent signings, or bad trade pickups for fear that cutting one will reflect negatively.  PR shouldn't ever drive anything, of course. 

But *if* a GM is concerned about PR, the worst thing is to keep a mistake.  If a baseball GM signs an expensive FA rotation pitcher and he stinks, does keeping him and letting him remind people every fifth of what a mistake it was help the PR?   

Josh Jones, J'Mon Moore, they're cut and forgotten.  If we'd kept them, and Jones was giving up explosive plays and Moore was dropping passes or punts, the PR negativity would be much worse. 

I just checked on Google, it appears that Moore has not gotten picked up for any practice squad employment yet.