The Green Bay Packers did not have a sparkling cast of cornerbacks before they released Jaire Alexander. His effectiveness, anyway, has been hindered by constant injuries over the past two seasons. Sure, the Packers signed former Raiders cornerback Nate Hobbs in the offseason, but he isn’t a stud. He’s solid, a good descriptor of the team’s CBs as a whole. Green Bay’s secondary strength comes from its safeties, led by All-Pro First Teamer Xavier McKinney.
Pedestrian CB talent, however, won’t hold this team back, says team analyst Peter Bukowski. That isn’t how pass coverage works.
Unextraordinary, Unproblematic
On the surface, concern is justified. “There are fans, there are media, there are folks who are still worried about the Green Bay Packers cornerback room,” Bukowski says. “And they do it because they look at the depth chart and they go, ‘Carrington Valentine. Nate Hobbs. Keisean Nixon. Question mark? Is that really the group they’re going to trot out as an NFC contender?'”
He admits that he can “understand why it breaks people’s brains” to feel good about said depth chart. Rather surprisingly, Valentine earned the best PFF grade among the above trio: 70.3, good for 45th out of 222 qualified cornerbacks. Nixon graded out a bit above average. Hobbs was middle of the pack. None of these guys are really qualified to take on an opposing WR1.
Over at safety, McKinney is legitimately elite, ranking 6th at the position. Evan Williams graded out among the top 20%. Center field is plenty well covered. Those guys can also slide over to help corners with their receiver matchups.
Among Packers defenders, says Bukowski, their cornerbacks sit at the bottom. But there’s an important distinction between lacking stars and having absolute duds. Hobbs, Nixon, Valentine – all those guys are capable.
“Coverage is a weak link system. … It is not how good your best players are. It’s how bad your worst players are.”
Green Bay Packers Secondary One Without Many Chinks
Bukowski actually likes Green Bay’s starting corners. “I think Nate Hobbs was a really nice player. I think Javon Bullard in year two is going to take a step forward as the nickel.” Most of the time, Nixon “was fine, was not actively hurting the team,” although certain matchups gave him issues.
Thus, alongside one of the best players in the game in McKinney, the Packers have a serviceable stable of guys. The possible exception to that is Bullard, who, at least by PFF grade, was awful as a rookie last season, ranking 141st/171 among safeties. Expecting a major leap is probably not realistic.
As a unit, though, the Packers performed statistically as one the league’s best coverage teams last year. Bukowski cites their 4th-place PFF grade and top 10 DVOA ranking. Griping about Green Bay CBs is perhaps more narrative-based than reflective of actual performance.
Biggest Games Can Require Elite Play from Non-Elite Players
Plenty of people disagree with the lack of concern. One fan by the name Jesper EU dropped an intriguing tidbit in the comment section:
Against playoff teams packers on average allowed 270 passing yards, that’s not good at all as the worst passing D in the league( Jaguars) allowed 275 passing yards/game against playoff teams, the only reason packers secondary looked good is that packers faced a ton of shitty QBs last season while this season they’ll be facing a lot more good QBs.
The comment should specify that this stat refers only to NFC playoff opponents, throwing out a game against Houston in the AFC. But it does fit the notion that the Packers underachieved against good opponents. At no point in the regular-season was this on more painful display than in Green Bay’s Week 17 loss to Minnesota, 27-25, in a game pivotal to playoff seeding. Vikings quarterback Sam Darnold threw for 377 yards.
The weak-link theory makes a lot of sense, but the Packers also need to step up their game against better competition, and that includes the cornerbacks. Being “good enough” often isn’t enough when facing high-level passing attacks.
