D Line

Nerd

Member
Member
Messages
1,489
Reaction score
715
I love Kenny Clark. He's got the skills, but he's also a technician. It has seemed to me that he has always been improving using his hands, feet, leverage.

Was always gonna be good. He's now very good, verging on great.

Problem is, he needs a supporting cast. Not to jinx, but if he goes down, we're in trouble.

 
Packers DL without Clark would easily be the worst in the NFL.
 
Something that always concerns me. If Clark is the best, does that actually mean he's close to a super star, or is he just above average, and the rest of the guys we have are actually so bad that he looks better than he is?

Our D line just doesn't tell me much. But, at the same time, there are a lot of guys who should be hitting their peak years at this time, so it could be considerably better than it was.
 
Something that always concerns me. If Clark is the best, does that actually mean he's close to a super star, or is he just above average, and the rest of the guys we have are actually so bad that he looks better than he is?

Our D line just doesn't tell me much. But, at the same time, there are a lot of guys who should be hitting their peak years at this time, so it could be considerably better than it was.
I think Clark is near that superstar level and would be better had he better talent to help him out. Packers want to keep him he is going to end up likely a top 5 paid DL in the NFL.
 
Curious to see how they employ Gary this year. Could he find a role helping out with his hand in the dirt from time to time?
And will Keke show some growth as a player?
I just don’t know enough about the FA pick ups to have any option on them.
 
I think Clark is near that superstar level and would be better had he better talent to help him out. Packers want to keep him he is going to end up likely a top 5 paid DL in the NFL.
I’ve always thought superstars transcend the talent around them by making them look better than they are.
Rodgers has done that with WR’s.
I consider Clark very good bordering on elite.
But I’m not ready to classify him as superstar quite yet.
 
I’ve always thought superstars transcend the talent around them by making them look better than they are.
Rodgers has done that with WR’s.
I consider Clark very good bordering on elite.
But I’m not ready to classify him as superstar quite yet.
Clark though often takes on double teams on the DL I think it's more of how poor the talent is around him. I think the rest of the DL on the Packers you might get 1-2 that would serve backup roles but many would not even find that in the NFL.
 
Something that always concerns me. If Clark is the best, does that actually mean he's close to a super star, or is he just above average, and the rest of the guys we have are actually so bad that he looks better than he is?

Our D line just doesn't tell me much. But, at the same time, there are a lot of guys who should be hitting their peak years at this time, so it could be considerably better than it was.
I'll decent with the rest and say he's above average but I've seen him get his ass handed to him vs better Offensive lines. I am not sure GB has had a dominating DL since Reggie, some very good ones but no studs.
 
I think Clark is near that superstar level and would be better had he better talent to help him out. Packers want to keep him he is going to end up likely a top 5 paid DL in the NFL.
He’s inconsistent. When he flashes he can be very dominant. Really any player would be better with talent surrounding them, nature of the game. Near superstar level? I think that’s a bit of a reach at least now.
 
Back
Top