Packers Sign Draft Pick Rouse; Release Barry, Bourke

[Jimx29]

[swede]

Thanks Cy,

It's like a family reunion for me in this thread.

[Tarlam!]

I hope Rouse turns out to be like Troy Polamalu!

During the Steelers run two years ago, I saw all their Play Off games and TP was a beast!

We could use that type of force in our secondary.

[Fritz]

I'm more surprised by the Bourke cut than the Barry cut. What I don't understand is what the harm would be in keeping Bourke for another six weeks to see if his back improves. By cutting him now, another team with a sharp GM can sign the guy and see if he heals for training camp. Why cut him now?

As for Barry, I am surprised the article did not mention that in Shermy's last two years, with the injuries on the offensive line, Barry did not start although he appeared to be the most logical candidate to many. He never got past being the specialty guy in the U-71.

I wonder if the Texans will sign him and if Shermy can convince Kubiak to run the U-71 formation. But what I also don't understand is this: if Kubiak's from Denver, why isn't he running a zone scheme?

[MJZiggy]

I thought they were running a version of the zone scheme. That was part of the confusion when Samkon went there because they were keeping him in a scheme that's not the best fit for him.

[Fritz]

Yes, maybe that's where my confusion stems - the Pack traded Gado because he didn't fit the zone scheme, but they traded him to a team that (apparently) runs some kind of zone scheme.

This would suggest that in fact, Barry will possibly end up in Houston.

Sure seems like Shermy's got a lot of pull down there. Anybody taking bets on how long before Fergy's wearing the red-and-blue of the Houston Texans?

[Patler]

I'm more surprised by the Bourke cut than the Barry cut. What I don't understand is what the harm would be in keeping Bourke for another six weeks to see if his back improves. By cutting him now, another team with a sharp GM can sign the guy and see if he heals for training camp. Why cut him now?

Lots of possible reasons:

There is a roster size limit they have to meet before the start of TC (I think it is 85). With all the draft picks they will have to release several more between now and then.

They probably have as many or more O-lineman than they can work with effectively in practices anyway. Their depth chart is pretty long.

Maybe they are worried about re-injury to his back, and would sooner move on to someone else.

They might be as impressed with a healthy new player as they were with a still-recovering Bourke, and would sooner work with him.

Maybe they aren't happy with his recovery, and don't expect him to be ready for TC anyway. SInce he has no experience to fall back on, why waste more time with him now. If he does recover, they could always try to e-sign him.

[pbmax]

I have read that its a hybrid of the Denver Zone and Sherman's power scheme. Its got to be hard to find lineman who can do both.

I thought they were running a version of the zone scheme. That was part of the confusion when Samkon went there because they were keeping him in a scheme that's not the best fit for him.

[TopHat]

UPDATE

According to TK at Scout.com, Barry failed the team's physical. We will miss the U-71 man. Hopefully, new talent depth along with a year's experience will lead this mobile line to be stronger and more consistent. Even Starr said it.

http://story.scout.com/a.z?s=61&p=2&c=650324

Barry failed team's physical

Offensive lineman Kevin Barry was released by the Packers on Friday because he failed the team's physical, PackerReport.com has learned. Barry missed all of last season with a quadriceps....
__________________________________________________ __________________________________

http://www.acmepackingcompany.com/

An Unsurprising Cut

It's not a surprise, but the Packers finally parted ways with T Kevin Barry. He initially showed some promise at the beginning of his career, but never showed up when Mike Sherman actually gave him a chance. However, GM Ted Thompson gave him a two year deal in March 2006, probably because the Packers were so thin at OL that he felt he needed to keep who he already had, but it was known that they were switching to a zone blocking scheme and keeping a 330 lb. immobile tackle seemed like a bad idea. After missing the 2006 season with an injury and the drafting of three quality offensive linemen in 2006 (Daryn Colledge, Jason Spitz, and Tony Moll), plus Allen Barbre in 2007, it is time to part ways with the man. Hopefully his release in June will give him enough time to find a home before training camp. Maybe a team that employs a power running game is looking for a giant right tackle.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I have read that its a hybrid of the Denver Zone and Sherman's power scheme. Its got to be hard to find lineman who can do both.

I think they pretty much run the ZBS. Like other teams, they'll run some plays that aren't traditional ZBS plays (the Packers even do that), but my understanding is that Sherman is there more to teach Kubiak how to be a head coach than to make major changes to the scheme Kubiak helped run in Denver.

[pbmax]

Re: UPDATE

Unless this is an item in his contract, this cannot be the offical reason. Teams cannot cut players due to football injuries.

There may be an announcement of an injury settlement later, but the agent said nothing like that.

Even if he failed the physical, they would have had to construct another reason to release him.

According to TK at Scout.com, Barry failed the team's physical. We will miss the U-71 man. Hopefully, new talent depth along with a year's experience will lead this mobile line to be stronger and more consistent. Even Starr said it.

http://story.scout.com/a.z?s=61&p=2&c=650324

Barry failed team's physical

Offensive lineman Kevin Barry was released by the Packers on Friday because he failed the team's physical, PackerReport.com has learned. Barry missed all of last season with a quadriceps....
__________________________________________________ __________________________________

http://www.acmepackingcompany.com/

An Unsurprising Cut

It's not a surprise, but the Packers finally parted ways with T Kevin Barry. He initially showed some promise at the beginning of his career, but never showed up when Mike Sherman actually gave him a chance. However, GM Ted Thompson gave him a two year deal in March 2006, probably because the Packers were so thin at OL that he felt he needed to keep who he already had, but it was known that they were switching to a zone blocking scheme and keeping a 330 lb. immobile tackle seemed like a bad idea. After missing the 2006 season with an injury and the drafting of three quality offensive linemen in 2006 (Daryn Colledge, Jason Spitz, and Tony Moll), plus Allen Barbre in 2007, it is time to part ways with the man. Hopefully his release in June will give him enough time to find a home before training camp. Maybe a team that employs a power running game is looking for a giant right tackle.

[pbmax]

best I could find, looking for something more authoritative: blog from AOL FanHouse:

After interviewing with the Cardinals for a head coaching position, and having his name mentioned with other head coaching positions, Mike Sherman is staying put with the Texans.

His title is getting longer though. With the departure of offensive coordinator Troy Calhoun to coach at Air Force, Sherman's new title is "assistant head coach/offensive coordinator." Trying putting that on a business card.

Kyle Shanahan is moving from being in charge of the wide receivers to being the new quarterbacks coach.

Update: Here's what the official website says about the changes.

What do these changes mean and how will this effect the team? Here are my thoughts...

Mike Sherman

Sherman had been very hands on with the offensive line on the field. I am guessing that this means he will be moving up in the booth. Gary Kubiak, as I have understood it, made all the play calls go through him and sometimes changed them up. He also experimented with letting Calhoun and Sherman call series of plays, but he is supposed to be very controlling of the offense.

In my mind, it sometimes appeared last season that the running game and passing game were not in sync together. Some games the run blocking would look good and pass blocking would look bad, and vice verse. There were few games where everything came together.

From my fan eyes, it appears that the form of blocking that Sherman and offensive line coach John Benton taught is not the type of Denver zone blocking scheme that keeps the defenses off balance. I did not observe the cut blocking that the Denver line is infamous for, and often it looked like they were working more power blocking schemes.

Though Sherman's experience is certainly helpful, I wonder if some of the power philosophy that Sherman employs is inconsistent with what Kubiak is trying to do with his offensive scheme.

In other words, can you do stuff out of the Denver playbook if you don't have the same sort of blocking? I worry some about whether the Sherman-Kubiak pairing leads to a better form of offense, or just creates a mish-mash of inconsistent philosophies.

Once again, I will reiterate that these are just some concerns I personally have, but nothing that has been reported as being a problem in traditional media sources. I hope this isn't an issue at all.

I have read that its a hybrid of the Denver Zone and Sherman's power scheme. Its got to be hard to find lineman who can do both.

I think they pretty much run the ZBS. Like other teams, they'll run some plays that aren't traditional ZBS plays (the Packers even do that), but my understanding is that Sherman is there more to teach Kubiak how to be a head coach than to make major changes to the scheme Kubiak helped run in Denver.

[pbmax]

from a Houston Chronicle blog (last paragraph was like deja vu):

Offensive Line Blocking Scheme If you watch the way that the Texans have been attempting to run the ball, you might have noticed that the Texans zone blocking scheme doesn't look like Denver's. From what I've heard from a source, the major difference is the direction of the push.

To simplify, the Denver scheme pushes opposing linemen in diagonals. They block the same way whether it is a run or a pass, so that it gets defensive linemen in the wrong positions when they start either overpursing or getting too conservative. This direction of the push helps open up the Denver bootleg game..

The Texans blocking scheme teaches the linemen to at first push diagonally, but then square the linemen up perpendicular to the line. I'm not sure if from a technique perspective, it effects how the flow of the offensive play calling goes, but I believe it is something worth pointing out. If you are pushing at the line more north/south, I would think it would (1) require bigger linemen) (2) not push the defense the right way for making the bootlegs work.

In a Texans FanHouse post, I noted how the Texans had been using some Green Bay style power I formations, and how I didn't think that flowed very well with the rest of the offense. I don't believe I saw any of those formations this last game against Dallas--wisely, I suppose, as I am not sure you run into the teeth of the Dallas D.

Can't really talk much about the infamous Denver-style cut blocks because often the running plays are over by the time the backs have run into the backsides of their blockers.

[pbmax]

same source as last two, posted on AOL fanhouse:

Coming out of the bye week, the Texans have signed ex-Packer fullback, Vonta Leach. He spent two seasons with Green Bay before being released last month and then playing for the Saints for 11 days. The Texans have been struggling with their running game, and Leach is primarily a blocking fullback who is larger than Jameel Cook. (and probably most relevantly, Mike Sherman is familiar with him from Green Bay).

Moran Norris was let go in the offseason because the Texans wanted a fullback that could catch the ball. This is why they acquired Cook. Now it appears as though they got a back up who is more of a Moran Norris type, when they could have kept Moran Norris. (someone who did a great job run blocking on past Texans teams).

During the bye week, the Texans have been evaluating all aspects of the team, including why the passing game seems to work but the running game isn't. Says Gary Kubiak:

"Really for us, we just feel like we just have to get better on what we're doing. We've had some opportunities to run the ball and we haven't run it well. There's no excuse, we've got to do a better job up-front, better job with our backs. We're bringing in a new fullback today; we've got to get better with Jameel (Cook) and him as far as our two-back offensive scheme. But we've done some good things throwing the ball. We've got to get better at running the football to help our team out."

I have a theory about the failure of the running game. From what I have heard, the offense is a blend of the Denver style zone blocking and the Green Bay power blocking. It's my understanding from attending a Texans coaching clinic that what makes the Denver system effective is that you cannot tell from the formation or the blocking, whether the play is going to be a run or a pass. That eventually if you keep getting blocked the same way each time for a run, you anticipate run, even if it is a pass.

If you are mixing Denver style formations and Green Bay style formations, I would think it would be harder to use the run to set up the pass and vice versa. I can't say that I know the stats on the formations, but it seems to me that just about every time the Texans line up in a power I formation, they run the ball. For the power run game, you would want a fullback more like a Leach, and for a Denver style run game, you would want a fullback who can catch, like Cook, or preferably somebody who could do both. Does any one else see that or is it just me?

I would think it is difficult for someone like Mike Sherman who has been a executive vice president and head coach to defer to a first time head coach. He has admitted it is a transition, and that sometimes he would do things differently than Kubiak, but that he believes Kubiak is doing a good job.

From Gary Kubiak's point of view, he has an experienced guy in Sherman running his offensive line for him, and Sherman is nominally the assistant head coach, offense, so I am guessing this is part of meshing the Green Bay and Denver systems. It would be hard to have someone that experienced working for you and not allow him to run any of the stuff he likes doing.

I'm still uncertain whether this can work. Samkon Gado and Vonta Leach are no longer Packers partially because their games were not well suited to the zone blocking system the Packers were instituting this year. Yet, they both end up with the Texans who are trying to institute a Denver style offense. I hope my theory about this stuff is completely wrong, and we start to see an actual running game soon. I don't think this is the only problem, but it could be a major contributor.

I think the former Packers and Broncos are on the team as just short term solutions until they have another season to get more of the guys they want. If you are trying to institute your systems in the shortest time possible, you want to get guys you believe are players and can learn what you are doing quickly.

To make room for Leach, the Texans cut Bennie Joppru, the hard luck tight end who missed his first couple seasons due to injuries. He still has practice squad eligibility, so if he clears waivers, he may be reclaimed. From a roster perspective, they felt uncomfortable with four tight ends on the roster and only one true fullback.

[Patler]

Re: UPDATE

Unless this is an item in his contract, this cannot be the offical reason. Teams cannot cut players due to football injuries.

Yes, they can, for failure to pass the pre-season physical of the year following the injury. Teams do it all the time. What they can't do is release a player who passes the yearly physical and then is injured. That is when you hear about injury settlements, or when individual protection has been negotiated into the player's contract.

If a player is injured, follows rehabilitation requirements and fails to pass the preseason physical the next season, the club can waive him. If the club waives him he falls under an "insurance provision" of the CBA:

(c) The player must have failed the pre-season physical examination given by the Club physician for the season following the season of injury because of such injury and as a result his Club must have terminated his contract for the season following the season of injury. This pre-season physical may be given by the Club physician prior to the beginning of pre-season camp, so long as such fact is clearly communicated to the player at the time of the physical exam. The past understanding of the parties concerning a Club releasing a player who otherwise qualifies under (a) and (b) above prior to the pre-season physical examination will apply during the term of this Agreement (see Appendix B).
Section 2. Benefit: A player qualifying under Section 1 above will receive an amount equal to 50% of his contract salary for the season following the season of injury, up to a maximum payment of $275,000, if he is released pursuant to Section 1(c) above in the 2006-08 League Years unless he has individually negotiated more injury protection or a larger guaranteed salary into his contract. This amount shall be increased to $300,000 in the 2009 League Year and, if they are Uncapped Years, in the 2010-11 League Years; to $325,000 in the 2010-11 League Years, if they are Capped Years; and to $350,000 in the 2012 League Year. A player will receive no amount of any contract covering any season subsequent to the season following the season of injury, except if he has individually negotiated injury protection into that contract. The benefit will be paid to the player in equal weekly installments commencing no later than the date of the first regular season game, which benefit payments will cease if the player signs a contract for that season with another Club. A player will not be entitled to such benefit more than once during his playing career in the NFL, and such benefit shall be reduced by any salary guaranteed to the player for the season following the season of injury.