SCOUTS NOTEBOOK ON NICK COLLINS by PFW

[Bretsky]

Just got my PFW and they feature Nick Collins today. Here are the comments

POSITIVES
has excellent speed, good range, and can get over the top and close fast to the ball from the back half. Shows play making ability. Very aggressive run defender. Gets downhill in a hurry to fill the alley. Can drop the lumber on ball carriers. Has enough athletic ability and cover skills to handle manning up with the WR's and can be used as an emergency cover corner. Has shown he can take the concepts from the board to the field and answered questions about his intelligence from scoring low on Wonderlific. Easily tracked down Reggie Bush four times in the open field and could not be shaken by quickness

NEGATIVES
Technique and footwork are raw, and he will take some false steps and get out of position. Looks like he is thinking too much instead of reactive and getting to spots. Route recognition can improve. Still shows hesitancy defending the pass and does not have great instincts. Will fight the ball instead of making easy interceptions, and hands are inconsistent. Loses awareness with back to the ball

SUMMARY
A better than average starter right now, Collins brings CB speed and LB toughness to center field.

He is a blue chip athlete with hybrid DB potential in the mold of Brian Dawkins. Although still raw and developing, Collins can be used in a lot of ways and his best football is ahead of him

[RashanGary]

Wow..

They obviously watch him play. That is a very good analysis.

[Bretsky]

For this defense to get above average, we need to find some playmakers. Last year I thought Nick Collins was one of them; Green Bay needs him to develop to the Darren Sharper Mold.

When I look at Collins strengths and weaknesses, one can see he has the ability to excel.

When I started reading all of those weaknesses, those are things that should be corrected by good coaching. A bit scary with my views on our Secondary coach and DC.


B

[Tarlam!]

...Easily tracked down Reggie Bush four times in the open field and could not be shaken by quickness....

That's my boy! I will never forget the day we selected him and 99% of you dingbats at the time calling TT out over it.

[Packnut]

I think this guy could be a real stud IF he were allowed to play in the box. However, instead of taking advantage of his skills, TT signs a FA that could'nt cover his own mother which forces Collins to be a cover guy. There is just to much of trying to fit a round peg in a square hole right now.

[Bretsky]

I think this guy could be a real stud IF he were allowed to play in the box. However, instead of taking advantage of his skills, TT signs a FA that could'nt cover his own mother which forces Collins to be a cover guy. There is just to much of trying to fit a round peg in a square hole right now.


This is a decent point; I too think Collins would be a solid blitzer and could be a playmaker in the box like Butler/Sharper. But I'd think we'd want to surround him with a speed/coverage safety on the other side so we can let him go wild. That is not Manuel.


B

[Packnut]

I think this guy could be a real stud IF he were allowed to play in the box. However, instead of taking advantage of his skills, TT signs a FA that could'nt cover his own mother which forces Collins to be a cover guy. There is just to much of trying to fit a round peg in a square hole right now.


This is a decent point; I too think Collins would be a solid blitzer and could be a playmaker in the box like Butler/Sharper. But I'd think we'd want to surround him with a speed/coverage safety on the other side so we can let him go wild. That is not Manuel.


B

Nope, and Manuel is TT's boy so he ain't going no-where.

[RashanGary]

There are 2 really good CB's in the up coming draft. I think both look to be pretty incredible. Fresno and Michigan both have a guy who should go top 10.

Maybe we draft one and put Woodson at Safety.

Harris/Collins/Woodson/Leon Hall

Then in 2008 we put Carroll in there for Harris and call it a secondary.

[ahaha]

It seems like the coaches are really trying to use him more in the gameplan. Last year, with Collins being a rookie, they kept him back a lot. I think this year they're trying to make him more of a focal point of the defense. That could be why he's struggled in pass coverage. If that's the case, it's not surprising that he's made some mistakes. He's young and awfully talented.

[ahaha]

Advertisement




Posted September 30, 2006

Packers still are confident in Collins

By Pete Dougherty
pdougher@greenbaypressgazette.com

The Green Bay Packers' defensive backs in general and safeties in particular having harbored a good share of the blame for the team's No. 31 ranking in pass defense in the NFL after three games.


Among the issues is whether second-year safety Nick Collins has made any improvement from his rookie year, when the second-round draft pick had a promising season.


This year's Collins has played a major role in at least three of the 20 explosive passes (16 yards or more) the Packers have allowed, including twice getting beaten on jump-ball throws in one-on-one coverage against New Orleans, and being largely responsible for 42-yard touchdown pass against Detroit.


But the Packers coaches and players maintain that Collins is a star in the making, despite those early season problems. They say he's one of the best overall athletes on the team and point to his sound tackling (he leads the team with 25 tackles), team-high five passes defensed and his ability to chase down players to prevent even bigger plays as assets that are lost in his costly big-play errors.


Even a scout for another NFC North Division team this week, while discussing various matters with a reporter, brightened up when asked about Collins. The scout, who's never bashful about criticizing players, said he'd trade the Packers a second-round pick for Collins in a heart beat, and that even promising second-year safeties are going to look bad at times.


The Packers sound just as convinced Collins still will be an outstanding player soon, perhaps as early as this year.


"He's fast, he's got what it takes," cornerback Al Harris said. "I played with (Pro Bowl safety Brian) Dawkins, I played with (Pro Bowler John) Lynch. I think the world of the dude."


This week, Collins will face a major test in Philadelphia's dual-purpose halfback Brian Westbrook, just as he did two weeks ago against New Orleans' Reggie Bush. Both are ultra-quick halfbacks who also have rare wide-receiver type skills in the passing game and line up in the slot regularly.


Defending premier double threats such as Bush and Westbrook never fall on one player, but the brunt probably will go to Collins and linebackers A.J. Hawk and Nick Barnett, just as it did against the Saints and Bush. The Packers did a more-than-respectable job on Bush, holding him to 74 yards on 14 touches from scrimmage — five yards rushing, 68 yards receiving.


They probably will need a similarly effective performance against Westbrook to have a chance to defeat the 11-point favored Eagles, who will be harder to defend because their quarterback, Donovan McNabb, is much more mobile than New Orleans' Drew Brees and thus can spread out the linebackers and safeties as an added running threat on any given play. Westbrook is listed as questionable (50 percent chance of playing) on the Eagles' injury report this week because of a knee injury, but reports out of Philadelphia say he's expected to play.


Westbrook is the NFL's early leader in yards from scrimmage (140 yards per game) and is averaging 5.8 yards a rush and 10.9 yards a reception. He's scored four touchdowns this season, including on a 71-yard run last week against San Francisco and a 31-yard reception against Houston in the regular-season opener. So, the big play, which has been the Packers' failing early on, is a major threat.


When Westbrook lines up at receiver, the Packers will do everything they can to avoid matching up a linebacker with him, which means Collins or perhaps safety Marquand Manuel often will be covering him in those settings. Collins also will be matched up with receivers, both in base defense as a deep help defender, and in the dime, where he moves into the slot as a cover cornerback.


His misplays in one-on-one coverage the last two weeks have left pundits questioning or outright declaring that he can't cover well enough to be used in that role regularly, but the Packers are adamant that his problems aren't unusual for a second-year pro, even one with what they consider outstanding talent.


"He's very, very good one-on-one, and that will be proved out as the season goes on and as he continues to work," said Bob Sanders, the Packers' defensive coordinator.


Kurt Schottenheimer, the Packers' defensive backs coach, also is sold on Collins' cover abilities, even though Collins fell on a 33-yard pass to a pedestrian tight end (New Orleans' Mark Campbell) and was in OK position but failed to play the ball on the 25-yard jump-ball touchdown to the Saints' Devery Henderson.


In fact, Schottenheimer said while he was coaching with St. Louis for the 2005 draft, the Rams' staff projected Collins as a cornerback, put a second-round grade on him and strongly considered selecting him with the No. 50 pick overall. The Rams rated Howard cornerback Ronald Bartell slightly higher and drafted him instead.


The Packers selected Collins with the next pick.


"He's fast, powerful, he's an outstanding talent," Schottenheimer said.

[RashanGary]

It seems like the coaches are really trying to use him more in the gameplan. Last year, with Collins being a rookie, they kept him back a lot. I think this year they're trying to make him more of a focal point of the defense. That could be why he's struggled in pass coverage. If that's the case, it's not surprising that he's made some mistakes. He's young and awfully talented.

I was thinking the exact same thing. He's being asked to do more this year. They just had him playing deep last year and this year they're asking him to be a playmaker.

He just might over come it. He is so strong. I don't know of any secondary players that are as fast and agile as him also hit as hard as he does.

[Patler]

First of all, Sharper was never good "in the box" or close to the line of scrimmage. They tried to channel him into the Leroy Butler role, and it did not work out. He struggled with it, and it magnified his weaknesses. Sharper is best as a centerfielder type of safety.

Putting Collins in Butler's type of role would not be taking advantage of his athleticism and speed. Bates' philosophy, of essentially splitting the field with the safeties, who are essentially interchangeable and both play the same position, is ideal for Collins, especially if you can find another safety with comparable skills.

[Bretsky]

First of all, Sharper was never good "in the box" or close to the line of scrimmage. They tried to channel him into the Leroy Butler role, and it did not work out. He struggled with it, and it magnified his weaknesses. Sharper is best as a centerfielder type of safety.

Putting Collins in Butler's type of role would not be taking advantage of his athleticism and speed. Bates' philosophy, of essentially splitting the field with the safeties, who are essentially interchangeable and both play the same position, is ideal for Collins, especially if you can find another safety with comparable skills.


Than why did we target Manuel again ?

[RashanGary]

I thought they were going to use Collins liek they did last year and just have him roaming the deep middle. I expected that those close plays that he almost made last year would be INT's and fumbles this year.

I don't think they needed to amplify his role and have him doing everything. I think he could have made enough big plays just sitting deep and using his speed and power to get int's, force fumbles and prevent the big play.

I don't mind how they're using him now, but it leaves Manuel in bad positions with his skill set and Collins is learning all over again. I thought Manuel would play up more and Collins back. I guess tha tis not the case.

It might be wise to get Woodson over to safety ASAP.

[Patler]

Than why did we target Manual again ?

I have said all along that Manuel was brought in for the same reason as Earl Little was last year. Both have reputations as extremely knowledgeable players, the "coach on the field" so to speak. The Packers need someone to take charge of the back end of the defense, and they don't want Collins to have to worry about it. Manual was brought in to be solid in run support, and "OK" in coverage. So far I think he has supplied the run support, but the whole backfield is out of sync in coverage, not just Manual. All five (I'm including Carroll) have looked bad several times. No reason to single out Manual in that regard.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Patler, you are being awfully generous to Manuel, he has looked particularly bad.

They have two very experienced corner backs, I'm not sure they need another grey beard back there, if that is indeed Manuel's role.

[Patler]

Patler, you are being awfully generous to Manuel, he has looked particularly bad.

They have two very experienced corner backs, I'm not sure they need another grey beard back there, if that is indeed Manuel's role.

And on some of the plays that Manual has looked the worst, it was screwups in front of him that caused it. Harries admitted it was his coverage error against the Bears. Poppinga fails to force receivers toward the safeties. Carroll releases a WR two steps too soon. Ultimately, all of these make Collins and Manual look bad, being a step or two away from making the play. In reallity, many are caused in front of the safeties by failures of other players.

[Patler]

Patler, you are being awfully generous to Manuel, he has looked particularly bad.


Naw, no worse than Collins.
Manual has been good in run support.

It's easy to criticize the safeties, because their failures are usually out in the open, and if caused by a corner or LB screwing up, the responsible player is often no where to be seen. It only looks like the safeties fault at the end of the play. In reallity, often he is covering up for someone else.

[mraynrand]

Can I just repeat: Woodson is not, nor ever shall be, a decent safety. The guy doesn't like contact and doesn't tackle all that well.

If bringing in Manuel was supposed to generate that needed leadership and 'coach of the backfield' aspect, it failed miserably - so far. How many times do we have to see defensive backs looking at each other wondering where the help went?

[Patler]

Can I just repeat: Woodson is not, nor ever shall be, a decent safety. The guy doesn't like contact and doesn't tackle all that well.

If bringing in Manuel was supposed to generate that needed leadership and 'coach of the backfield' aspect, it failed miserably - so far. How many times do we have to see defensive backs looking at each other wondering where the help went?

I disagree, Woodson has always been a good and willing tackler. He had a reputation for it.

Some of the problem with the DBs has been lack of doing things corectly, not staying with the receiver long enough, not forcing the receiver toward the sidelines or toward the coverage support. In short, letting the receiver do what the receiver wants to, rather than forcing the receiver. That has nothing to do with Manuals calls or leadership. It may have more to do with the training and repetitions in practice, especially with virtually an entirely new backfield, with only Harris and Collins in the same positions as last year.

Calls can be correct and performace inadequate.

[mraynrand]

I disagree, Woodson has always been a good and willing tackler. He had a reputation for it.


I think he's looked like a wuss so far this season. And I'd say that his biggest problem (and the reason the Packers aren't getting a lot out of him so far) is that most of his skill assessment at this point is based on reputation, and not production.

[mraynrand]

BTW,

Starting with the original thread topic - I think Collins is pretty good. One reason Collins, and Manuel at times may look worse than they actually are is that they are spying around, thinking they need to help others (Pop for example) instead of taking care of their primary coverage responsibilities. Even Woodson, who looks like he can still cover pretty well, might look a lot better once the overall performance improves, confidence level improves and guys can concentrate on their first responsibilities. If guys just play a little better individually against Philly, it could be a watershed moment for the season. If they play a little worse, it could destroy their confidence for a long time.

[ahaha]

Can I just repeat: Woodson is not, nor ever shall be, a decent safety. The guy doesn't like contact and doesn't tackle all that well.


When Woodson was being courted by the Packers there were numerous reports and scout opinions that said Woodson should be and would be a good safety. That's what Tampa wanted him for. We were the only team interested in paying him big bucks to play corner. I probably haven't anylized Woodson's Packer performance as closely as you, but I haven't seen him shying away from tackling or whiffing on any easy tackles. I would love to have the Packers move him to safety next year, with the hopes we draft a good corner and Blackmon shows us something to get excited about.

[Patler]

I don't think Woodson has looked worse than Harris, and he has made some nice tackles. Manual hasn' been appreciably worse than Collins.

This is simply a defensive backfield that is not working well togther. It is not a well-choreographed unit, so on any one play any one individual player might look bad. In short, it looks exactly like 2004, with one player out of position, or not doing exactly what he should. It didn't improve in 2004, and actually may have gotten worse as the season went on. I'm not expecting anything different this season, and I expect to see Schottenheimer sent packing, again, in the off-season.

[mraynrand]

I expect to see Schottenheimer sent packing, again, in the off-season.

After the Williams TD in Detroit, 3-4 guys from the defensive coaching staff were standing around looking at pictures of the play(s) (I think Shottenheimer was in the group, but he was sheilded from my view), and it looked like they didn't have a damn clue what was going on - just arguing with each other. I watched to see if they would then go talk to ANYONE in the secondary and NEVER did before the Packer D took the field on the next Detroit possession. Maybe they corrected some things at half, but it looked like they were really confused, and they weren't talking to the guys that were screwing up on the field. WTF?

[Guiness]

Some of the problem with the DBs has been lack of doing things corectly, not staying with the receiver long enough, not forcing the receiver toward the sidelines or toward the coverage support. In short, letting the receiver do what the receiver wants to, rather than forcing the receiver. That has nothing to do with Manuals calls or leadership. It may have more to do with the training and repetitions in practice, especially with virtually an entirely new backfield, with only Harris and Collins in the same positions as last year.

Calls can be correct and performace inadequate.

You're right Patler, and that's where we get back to poor coaching. Guys not finishing their assignment, or not knowing it, IMO.

Truth is, this is the NFL. Let a receiver do what he wants, and be at the spot the QB expects him to be at the right time, and ANY NFL QB will hit him in the numbers with a beautiful pass, no problem at all. Make a guy like Losman look All-Pro for a day.