The Packers tweak roster to address biggest defensive weakness
The Packers need help at safety, but how much can they realistically expect from the newly signed Jonathan Owens?
Good morning!
In past years, this part of the calendar hasn't meant a ton to the Green Bay Packers. Aaron Rodgers largely wouldn't have participated in the offseason activities, attending only those required by rule. And as a team built around Rodgers would have to look a certain way for competitive reasons, the last major additions would have arrived via the draft.
Not quite so for the 2023 Packers. The front office made a post-draft veteran signing that, at least one paper, could affect multiple phases of the team. That speaks as much to the composition of the roster prior to the move as it does the player arriving in Green Bay.
Today's edition of The Leap puts the new addition and the safety position into perspective as well as a look around the NFC North.
Thank you for reading and supporting our coverage. You can also support our work by following us on social media:
Jason B. Hirschhorn: @by_JBH / @JBH@mastodon.social / Spoutible.com/by_JBH
Peter Bukowski: @Peter_Bukowski / @Peter_Bukowski@mas.to / Spoutible.com/Peter_Bukowski
The Leap: @TheLeapGB / @TheLeap@mas.to
If you appreciate thoughtful, independent coverage of the Packers and NFL, please consider becoming a paid subscriber. Your support allows us to serve this community with the stories and reporting it deserves.
As always, thanks for making The Leap a part of your day.
What are reasonable expectations for the Packers' newly signed safety, Jonathan Owens?
Jason B. Hirschhorn: The Packers' overall lack of proven options at safety can make a signing like defensive back Jonathan Owens seem more important and impactful than his track record suggests.
For reference, Owens did serve as a full-year starter in 2022. However, he did so for the Houston Texans, the second worst team that season by record and probably the bottom of the league in overall talent. The Texans chose not to bring Owens back for 2023.
Few starting safeties struggled as significantly as Owens in 2022. He allowed three touchdowns on 36 targets in coverage while racking up 11 missed tackles, most on run defense, according to Pro Football Focus. He did not register a turnover of any variety and produced just two total pressures. If the Texans had a viable alternative, it seems fair to assume they would have benched Owens or significantly reduced his role at some point during the season.
But Owens' poor 2022 doesn't paint the complete picture. The Texans lacked talent virtually everywhere last year. The defense couldn't generate a pass rush and, with two rookie defensive backs serving in starting roles, the secondary had little hope for success. Houston did not put Owens in a position to thrive.
Rewind further back and Owens didn't appear so woebegone. As a spot starter in 2021, he demonstrated some competency in multiple safety roles. He provided solid run support when called upon and provided more positive plays in coverage (an interception of Los Angeles Chargers quarterback Justin Herbert that helped the Texans flip the lead for good).
So which version of Owens should the Packers expect? The supporting cast in Green Bay will look better than what he had in Houston even if/when Rashan Gary begins the season on the physically unable to perform list. Should Owens have to play from scrimmage, he probably won't have to cover for quite as long as in years past.
At the same time, the Packers could have totally different starters at safety in 2023. Though Darnell Savage remains on the roster, the team has hinted that he might spend most of his time closer to the line of scrimmage. That situation still looks preferable to the one from which Owens just left, but it still put a lot of pressure on the safeties nonetheless.
Ultimately, Owens will work behind the starters to begin camp. Barring injury, that probably won't change unless he takes a De'Vondre Campbell-like leap in performance. But Owens has as good a shot as anyone to serve as the first safety off the bench come Week 1. In that role, the Packers can expect him to perform better than he did in 2022, but expecting more than just spot starts doesn't seem reasonable.
What chance, if any, does Adrian Amos have of returning to Green Bay?
JBH: Given the Packers' aforementioned lack of proven options at safety, the still-unsigned Adrian Amos holds some appeal. Even coming off his worst season, Amos offers more reliably competent play than any of the team's current players at the position. And during his four-year run in Green Bay, Amos provided key leadership for a secondary that features just one starter over the age of 26.
As readers of The Leap already know, the best time to sign Amos has already passed. The Packers could have avoided a meaningful dead-cap hit had they reached an agreement prior to the start of the new league year. By choosing not to do so, Amos will cost nearly $8 million against the salary cap despite walking earlier this offseason.
The decision not to more seriously pursue a new contract during the winter strongly suggests the Packers have moved on from Amos. And while Amos remains on the market, he hasn't stayed idle. He took a meeting with the Baltimore Ravens in March and could still conceivably sign there following the draft. As an eight-year veteran, Amos can bide his time and wait until closer to training camp (or perhaps even later) to avoid the tedium of offseason workouts.
So while the Packers could use a veteran like Amos, it appears highly unlikely they'll go down that road this offseason.
In terms of NFC North coverage, which reaction seemed the most questionable to you?
JBH: A popular podcast covering the Chicago Bears suggested, among other things, that the Dallas Cowboys don't exist:
"The Bears are the Bears. They're the largest draw in football even when they stink."
The same podcast also said Chicago's Week 3 tilt with the Kansas City Chiefs "should be a fun matchup between two great quarterbacks."
Perhaps Justin Fields will provide proof of concept during the 2023 season. He certainly possesses the talent and the Bears have improved his supporting cast from arguably the worst in the NFL last season to competent. But too many people in the media have downplayed or outright ignored Fields' floor.
As Peter has previously pointed out, Fields has yet to throw for 300 yards in an NFL game. Over the past quarter of a century, not many signal-callers have failed to reach that threshold over their first 25 starts. Some of those passers subsequently developed into good or better NFL starters, but several didn't.
Fields can reach the upper tier of that group, but that doesn't mean he will. Furthermore, the hype developing around him suggests that he has already sniffed that territory, a notion without any basis at this point. Fields quarterbacked the worst team in football last season and has struggled mightily as a passer since arriving in the NFL. Until that changes, the type of discussions such as the one from the aforementioned podcast falls squarely in wish-casting territory, not reality.