Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Casey Hayward to FS?
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Green Bay Packers
View previous topic :: View next topic  

Would he fit as a Free safety?
yes
2%
 2%  [ 1 ]
no
45%
 45%  [ 16 ]
stop making threads
51%
 51%  [ 18 ]
Total Votes : 35

Author Message
CornOnDaCobb


Joined: 16 Jan 2013
Posts: 519
Location: Tampa, FL
PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2013 1:05 am    Post subject: Casey Hayward to FS? Reply with quote

How would Casey Hayward do at free safety? I heard coming out of college that he was excellent in zone coverage as opposed to man and he has the ball skills to be a ballhawk back there. So how would he do?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jfinley88


Joined: 08 Feb 2010
Posts: 11156
PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2013 1:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I voted option 3 Very Happy

No reason to consider moving him
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
General_Bean


Joined: 07 Sep 2007
Posts: 1274
Location: Crossroads of CT
PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2013 1:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

He'd be the next Ed Reed. Awwww yea
_________________
Packers fan since 93.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
TheGreatZepp


Joined: 27 Jan 2010
Posts: 2844
Location: Brookfield, WI
PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2013 1:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I want someone with tremendous range at FS so they're going to need serious on field wheels. Nick Collins was sub 4.4, Hayward was almost 4.6. That's the difference of a couple yards on the field.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MNPackfan32


Joined: 22 Sep 2010
Posts: 7964
PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2013 1:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think Hayward is quicker than fast, the guy has the ideal set up as a slot corner and has some real God given ability to find the ball. You keep those skills at CB IMO.
_________________



Duff Man wrote:
MNPackfan32 wrote:
Josh Sitton, Mike Daniels

Average at best
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CornOnDaCobb


Joined: 16 Jan 2013
Posts: 519
Location: Tampa, FL
PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2013 1:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

TheGreatZepp wrote:
I want someone with tremendous range at FS so they're going to need serious on field wheels. Nick Collins was sub 4.4, Hayward was almost 4.6. That's the difference of a couple yards on the field.


Yea that makes a lot of sense, cant really be a ballhawk if your not getting to the ball I guess.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CentralFC


Joined: 03 Feb 2011
Posts: 4194
Location: Evanston, IL
PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2013 3:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

No. Hayward is going to be a top tier cornerback (if he isn't already).

This is like moving Matthews to ILB. Sure, he could do it, but why?
_________________
Simian07:
Quote:
I'd argue Jordy is probably around the 30th-40th best receiver in the NFL, maybe 50th.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CornOnDaCobb


Joined: 16 Jan 2013
Posts: 519
Location: Tampa, FL
PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2013 4:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

[quote="CentralFC"]No. Hayward is going to be a top tier cornerback (if he isn't already).

This is like moving Matthews to ILB. Sure, he could do it, but why?[/quote]

That question was purely hypothetical if you read the OP. This one was practical though.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CentralFC


Joined: 03 Feb 2011
Posts: 4194
Location: Evanston, IL
PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2013 4:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

[quote="CornOnDaCobb"]
CentralFC wrote:
No. Hayward is going to be a top tier cornerback (if he isn't already).

This is like moving Matthews to ILB. Sure, he could do it, but why?[/quote]

That question was purely hypothetical if you read the OP. This one was practical though.


They're both hypothetical and they're both impractical.
_________________
Simian07:
Quote:
I'd argue Jordy is probably around the 30th-40th best receiver in the NFL, maybe 50th.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
justo


Joined: 05 Aug 2012
Posts: 13168
PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2013 4:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'd rather have Woodson out there full time than Hayward IMO.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
CornOnDaCobb


Joined: 16 Jan 2013
Posts: 519
Location: Tampa, FL
PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2013 5:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

[quote="CentralFC"]
CornOnDaCobb wrote:
CentralFC wrote:
No. Hayward is going to be a top tier cornerback (if he isn't already).

This is like moving Matthews to ILB. Sure, he could do it, but why?[/quote]

That question was purely hypothetical if you read the OP. This one was practical though.


They're both hypothetical and they're both impractical.


That wasn't my intent though, I knew that there was no point in moving Clay to the inside, I just wanted to know if he could play it. This one I thought that maybe we could move Casey to free since we're set at corner and was great as a zone coverage guy. Maybe you didn't read the OP on that Clay post.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
spilltray


Joined: 09 Jan 2006
Posts: 10397
Location: Green Bay, WI
PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2013 7:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

[quote="CornOnDaCobb"]
CentralFC wrote:
CornOnDaCobb wrote:
CentralFC wrote:
No. Hayward is going to be a top tier cornerback (if he isn't already).

This is like moving Matthews to ILB. Sure, he could do it, but why?[/quote]

That question was purely hypothetical if you read the OP. This one was practical though.


They're both hypothetical and they're both impractical.


That wasn't my intent though, I knew that there was no point in moving Clay to the inside, I just wanted to know if he could play it. This one I thought that maybe we could move Casey to free since we're set at corner and was great as a zone coverage guy. Maybe you didn't read the OP on that Clay post.


How are the Packers "set" at CB? Tramon is getting older and his newfound lack of physicality is disturbing. Shields shows promise but is pretty up and down, and House is OK, but doesn't look to be anything special. Hayward is the brightest rising star they have at CB, IMO. Even then, you need to be able to go at least 3 deep, and preferably 4 at CB to be able to line up against 4 and 5 WR sets that are fairly common against high powered offenses. Right now, I think Hayward is easily the 3rd best CB on the team, and could vie for the #2 spot pretty easily. Moving him to FS would open up a hole at that nickle CB spot which as easily as important as the FS spot since the Packers pretty much run more nickle than base 3-4.

What is your fascination with moving guys from positions they are showing to be successful at to just create holes in the spots they left?
_________________
Wilfred wrote:
Memory is like the Packers when they are behind by two touchdowns in the 4th quarter... It comes back.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
GBPackers79


Joined: 20 Jan 2007
Posts: 19790
Location: New Jersey
PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2013 11:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

^^ I think we're pretty set at CB.

Tramon is 29, Shields is 25, Hayward is 23, House is 23. I think most teams probably envy what we have at the position.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Ketchup


Joined: 13 May 2009
Posts: 13914
Location: Milwaukee, WI
PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2013 1:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

House would be a much better candidate to move to S then Hayward. Hayward and Shileds are by far our best CB's neither is moving anywhere.
_________________

Kempes on the custom sig!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
NCPackFan


Joined: 12 Jan 2013
Posts: 2159
Location: Kinston, NC
PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2013 1:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

How are the Packers "set" at CB? Tramon is getting older and his newfound lack of physicality is disturbing.[/quote]

Slowpoke's physicality was originally reserved for mugging the receiver when he was able to. Take away Nick Collins to bail him out and add new coverage rules and Slowpoke is useless.

Someone else mentioned Hayward as being more "quick" than "fast" and I completely agree. Hayward's 40 time was .03 seconds faster than Slowpoke's which seriously concerned me when we drafted him. However, unlike Slowpoke, Hayward is much more careful and intelligent in space than Slowpoke. Hopefully we don't get a sophomore slump from Hayward.

If there's any CB I'd move back to Safety, it'd probably be House.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Green Bay Packers All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
Page 1 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group