Casey Hayward played 87% of the defensive snaps in his final season with the Packers. Basically, the Packers knew exactly what kind of player Hayward was and let him walk. Excellent decision made by people who have a plethora more information than we do.

A few other defensive backs defensive back snap percentages for those who love stats ...

99.7% Ha'Sean Clinton-Dix
87.0% Casey Hayward
71.8% Demarious Randall
66.3% Sam Shields
65.0% Morgan Burnett
62.0% Micah Hyde
30.7% Quentin Rollins


I think playing SLOT is more difficult than playing on the outside. In the slot your opponent can go left or right whereas out on the edge, you can use the sideline to blanket your opponents direction. However, covering the slot receiver usually means you're covering the teams 3rd best receiving option.

---

Yeah we had some young talent behind him but neither were proven. They played ok for rookies last year but were still a level below Hayward and it's fine to me to let a vet go for some younger/cheaper proven talent if the vet gets too big of an offer elsewhere. My problem is Haywards contract could easily have fit into the cap and at worst could have cost us some older player(s) for a good AND young player at an important position. Nothing bad would have happened development wise had Rollins spent another year as the dime, he still needs some polish.

If Haywards mental lapses last year are considered "numerous" then there is no word for the amount we still see out of Rollins and Randall this year. You are way overstating the amount of mistakes Hayward had.

I am not deceiving anyone by calling Haywards contract 5m in fact I just assume it's implied that that's the average. That's what it costs against the cap all 3 seasons of it and that's what matters the most. He could have gotten a 20m contract but if it's over 2 seasons it sucks where if it's a 7 year deal it's fantastic. Me saying 5m is just skipping having to explain that.

"a "slot CB" is by definition a guy who is not good enough to play CB" That is not the definition of "slot CB" at all. The slot CB is better suited to players with great insincts and quickness where a boundary CB is better for guys with speed or length. In your scenario if the #4 player is better playing inside then yeah he would be the guy coming in. If one of the top 2 starters was better in the slot than Sherman that guy would move over and Sherman would play the boundary as the #3 to get the best 3 on the field.

Charles Woodson won DPOY playing the slot and our 2010 SB team did exactly what I said above. Williams/Woodson played the boundary and when we used 3 CB Shields took Woodsons spot who went into the slot beause Shields skillset doesn't work as well in there.

As far as Hayward he CAN play outside in fact last year he played outside as well or better than anything we've had on the boundary this season but he's exceptional in the slot because he has great instincts and since this teams most used defense has either 3 or 4 CBs yeah he's a starter.

I don't know where you are getting his hyper-rage crap from either. I'm not even mad that we let Hayward go and I don't feel like I've projected any anger so lets leave stuff like that out of it. I'm just saying my opinion that it's a mistake to let good young players walk unless they get some cap straining deal or you've got some legit proven talent behind them. One of those 2 things is possibly true but to me for 5m(I'll specify that I mean APY here so as to not be "decieving") we didn't need to take the risk since neither of the young talents behind them need to be resigned before Haywards contract is even up.

Even with a healthy Shields, Randall, Rollins and Gunter, I thought the Packers lacked quality CB depth... which is why I wanted to keep Hayward if he was cheaper than House (really cheaper than $6 million per year) and I thought/think Hayward was better than House.

So I was disappointed when Hayward got away for $5.1 million per year, and I thought it was a mistake by the Packers even with a group of healthy CBs.

There are certain positions which are extremely valuable and if you struggle at that position, other positions almost can't make up for... those certain positions include QB, OT, Pass rushers and CB... I prefer staying well stocked at those positions... because other positions almost can't make up for them.

The Packers biggest problem under Thompson has been not staying well stocked on the important defense positions... though not all his fault... like DE Jenkins got pissed at the Packers and decided he rather sign for less elsewhere than stay with the Packers. Or I believe in 2007? When the Packers DL rotation was doing great... and then injuries hit and they lost the rotation and Corey Williams had to play more snaps, couldn't stop the run and became a lot less effective in his pass rushes.

The Packers had very good depth at CB... but to keep it, the Packers had to resign one of their CBs in Williams, House and Hayward.... Williams clearly got paid huge and not worth the Packers paying, House got overpaid... which just left Hayward, and he got paid the most reasonable of the 3. The Packers decided to risk it, and were no longer very good at CB depth... which has cost them due to injuries this season.

And the Packers seriously could of used another slot CB in the Redskins game, because their outside CBs didn't f'n know how to stop the Redskins WRs from cutting to the inside and getting open in the middle. So poor mental and physical CB play basically let the Redskins have three slot positions, instead of the normal one... that game was just horrible.

---

In Seattle Champ game, in OT, 3rd and 7, Hayward took inside position and moronically opened-up his hips right at LOS ,which allowed Baldwin to run outside WIDE OPEN for 35 yards. I remember this vividly; because it felt it was like a boxer taking a dive; this guarantees failure if Baldwin runs outside. Next play the game ended.

One year later, 2nd play of AZ playoff game; he takes outside position exactly the same way and his WR is open by 6-8 yards. Lucky Palmer threw the other way; but I, Ted and 31 other GMs saw that too.

Hayward makes these massive worse-than-Janis-like mental blunders; but on top of that he makes a handful of subtle technique errors per game. After playing well for a handful of plays; he’ll back-peddle too high, take false or missteps, open his hips too late or early, he’d jam but reach or plant his feet, or he’d “weave” without keeping his shoulders square to WR, etc.

Hayward has the tools to be a borderline probowl player, even jamming he’s average. Ted and I had a plan for his contact year: Casey pulls his head out of his rear, gets a contract for 10M per and we get a 3rd round comp pick. But Casey screwed us over. He was proven, proven to never pull his head out of his rear. This is not a guy you sign to a LT deal, unless ya got nothing. Don’t know if he’s better in SD or just lucky; but whatever improvements he has made occurred ONLY because he changed scenes-if he stayed he’d continue to refuse to stop the rookie mistakes.

And on top of all that; if it was a run or a throw to anyone other than Hayward’s WR, our D was 10 trying to stop 11.

Steve, blanketly saying Randall, Rollins and Gunter were not proven is sound-bite fan crap. Parts of their game were proven; parts not. I, like Beast [and I’m guessing Steve too] felt our depth was suspect. But, we don’t have the info the staff has. Having judged their leap from years 1 to 2 IN PRACTICE; proves/establishes to the staff beyond any reasonable doubt that what they will likely do in year 2. They knew Gunter could play. Did you see that play today on Rollins INT…Gunter is the best I’ve ever seen reading a WR’s eyes, the best Jerry, the best! It’s as if he’s watching the game on the jumbo tron when he looks into their eyes. The staff knew that after projecting the youngsters' improvements, they were proven to be as good or better than Hayward.

I’ve written pages on various characteristics and skills that separate poor CBs from elite ones. There is not a single trait amongst these pages that makes a player better as a slot CB over an outside CB. NOT ONE.

Z2C mentions it’s easier for slot CB because his guy isn’t constrained by sideline. There is some truth to this though an outside receiver can still run an In or an Out; just can’t go as far out as a slot WR. The substantial difference is the outside CB has to use perfect technique every time because on a short route he has no help and if his guy goes deep the help is further away or in some schemes unavailable. Look at Rodgers perfect SL throws Adams today; it is impossible for a safety even playing quarters to stop those passes.

A slot guy can be more aggressive stopping the shorter pass because if he gets beat deep the ILBs and/or safeties are already in the center of the field to cover. If he gets beat underneath, the ILBs are there and the QB often needs a throwing lane, so bad coverage doesn’t always end up as a catch. If the slot CB is 5 yards behind his guy it’s a 15 yard completion if the QB has a lane and no other defenders happen to be there. If OCB is 5yards behind it is a minimum 20 yard completion.

Steve brings up the Woodson/Shields situation; but this distinction has nothing to do with pass defending. If it was just defending the pass, Shields would have been in the slot because he just not as good at covering as Charles. The reason why Charles played inside was for his ability to support the run and blitz, things Hayward is allergic to.

I didn’t notice that GB couldn’t stop Wash WR from going inside; but I trust ya Beast. But, what I do know is that Hayward playing like he did last year, wouldn’t have changed that.