Packers claim Derrick Jones off waivers

Getty Images

The Packers brought in some more depth for their secondary Sunday.

According to Rob Demovsky of ESPN.com, the Packers claimed cornerback Derrick Jones off waivers from the Jets.

The 2017 sixth-rounder has played in four NFL games. He played both cornerback and wide receiver when he was at Ole Miss.

The Packers just signed safety Ibraheim Campbell late last week, so they clearly felt they needed a few extra bodies there.

12 responses to “Packers claim Derrick Jones off waivers

  1. The Packer continue to churn the bottom of their roster looking for players with upside to stash on their practice squad.
    Meanwhile other teams are giving away valuable draft picks for roll of the dice, never performed under fire, future scapegoats.
    Just a tale of two franchises.

  2. I’m not sure you can find a franchise who isn’t churning the bottom of the roster to get depth for camp and keeping their fingers crossed that they might find a keeper. Sorry Waffle it’s not a Packer/Viking thing, it’s a football thing. All our teams are doing it.

  3. Waffle is talking about trading a pick for a kicker no one has see do it. Not really sure what his or her point is tho cuz it’s not a good one. And jones sucks by the way

  4. Derrick Jones was claimed because he has potential. The Packers have their starters and back ups in place. Jones will be a practice squad project. He was a receiver. He’s learning the ropes as a d back. It takes a couple years of coaching.
    Meanwhile the Vikings are trading draft picks for place kickers ???? Really ? Desperation ?

  5. #The-Best-Fans-in-the-NFL says:
    August 11, 2019 at 8:32 pm
    Derrick Jones was claimed because he has potential. The Packers have their starters and back ups in place. Jones will be a practice squad project. He was a receiver. He’s learning the ropes as a d back. It takes a couple years of coaching.
    Meanwhile the Vikings are trading draft picks for place kickers ???? Really ? Desperation ?
    —————————————

    I know a 5th round pick sounds like a lot to a rebuilding team like the Packers. A stacked team like the Vikings, not so much.

  6. Michael Gertz of Pro Football Logic assembled some very interesting charts and data, which demonstrates the optimum value a player represents to a team. It’s a defined balance between cost and production.

    His analysis is not an opinion. It confirms fifth round picks are the best…….from a business perspective. That’s where you’ll find your productive journeymen at a reasonable salary, including many “diamonds-in-the-rough.” Makes a lot of sense. We already know there’s no guarantees with first round picks.

    “Fives” are indeed valuable. No question.

  7. A stacked team like the Vikings, not so much.

    ++++

    This old saw. You’ve been saying the team was stacked for three years now, and the team made the playoffs once.

    If the team is as stacked as you all pretend, then I guess Zim can’t coach his way out of a paper bag.

  8. Vikings appear to be stacked with good players – but a certainty is they’re stacked with huge salaries.

  9. milkcan44 says:

    they’re (the Vikings) stacked with huge salaries.
    ###

    Have you seen Aaron Rodgers new contract?

  10. stellarperformance says:
    August 12, 2019 at 12:22 pm

    Michael Gertz of Pro Football Logic assembled some very interesting charts and data, which demonstrates the optimum value a player represents to a team. It’s a defined balance between cost and production.

    His analysis is not an opinion. It confirms fifth round picks are the best…….from a business perspective. That’s where you’ll find your productive journeymen at a reasonable salary, including many “diamonds-in-the-rough.” Makes a lot of sense. We already know there’s no guarantees with first round picks.

    “Fives” are indeed valuable. No question.
    ___________

    I guess that must be why the Packers only offered a high sixth. That and you don’t really need to worry about making big kicks when you’re planning on finishing below .500.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!