Welcome Guest! You can login or register.
Login or Register.
#1
Posted
:
Tuesday, October 2, 2012 10:33:23 AM(UTC)
Joined: 9/26/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 69
Applause Received: 1,420
Just some off the wall thinking.
One of the issues for our defense in coverage I believe is the loss of Collins. He had the speed to play sideline to sideline. Giving out CB confidence that they can play more aggressive off the line, trail coverage and know Nick would be there deep to help if needed. We don't have that anymore. If we want to protect the CB deep, we need 2 guys where Nick managed himself.
Now with the NFL rules today, having a hard hitting FS isn't that important. Because it ends up in penalties. Shields is the fastest guy we have, and he has shown his ability to close on plays. Often to bail himself out. I'm wondering how it would work having Sammy sitting in center field, it would again give us that sideline to sideline presence in the secondary for deep help to break up plays, or go for the ball and get picks.
#2
Posted
:
Tuesday, October 2, 2012 10:39:31 AM(UTC)
Joined: 8/22/2009(UTC)
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Applause Given: 445
Applause Received: 829
I think we'd have more speed with shields, but adjusting to a new position in the middle of the season without any obvious replacement for Shields doesn't make sense to me. Another thing Collins had was reliability - Unless I'm remembering things wrong, it was fairly rare that he'd blow coverage and be out of position.
#3
Posted
:
Tuesday, October 2, 2012 10:44:24 AM(UTC)
Joined: 10/13/2006(UTC)
Location: Green Bay, WI
Applause Given: 2,802
Applause Received: 4,980
Nick Collins didn't blow many coverages because he wasn't really assigned to cover someone and was faster than everyone lol ... that's not a knock on Collins, it was a helluva an asset for the Packers.
Considering how much Sam Shields like to scope out the backfield, maybe being Safety would be a good thing for next season? I too don't think changing positions after 5 games when he's starting to come into his own is a wise decision. As for replacing Shields, easy, that guy Charles Woodson.
#4
Posted
:
Tuesday, October 2, 2012 10:59:30 AM(UTC)
Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 7,632
Applause Received: 1,601
McMillian's got speed. He's coming along pretty nicely.
#5
Posted
:
Tuesday, October 2, 2012 11:01:13 AM(UTC)
Joined: 8/22/2009(UTC)
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Applause Given: 445
Applause Received: 829
Zero2Cool said: 
Nick Collins didn't blow many coverages because he wasn't really assigned to cover someone and was faster than everyone lol ... that's not a knock on Collins, it was a helluva an asset for the Packers.
Considering how much Sam Shields like to scope out the backfield, maybe being Safety would be a good thing for next season? I too don't think changing positions after 5 games when he's starting to come into his own is a wise decision. As for replacing Shields, easy, that guy Charles Woodson.
In base defense, you restrict what you can do with Woodson a lot more by tying him to the cornerback position. That's not to say it would strictly be a bad thing though, Chuck can certainly do a lot for you as a CB. In nickel/dime, he'd be a corner anyways so if Woodson is going to be #2 (or #3, I forget which Shields is), who's going to take HIS spot? And that person's spot?
#6
Posted
:
Tuesday, October 2, 2012 11:12:41 AM(UTC)
Joined: 10/13/2006(UTC)
Location: Green Bay, WI
Applause Given: 2,802
Applause Received: 4,980
Porforis said: 
In base defense, you restrict what you can do with Woodson a lot more by tying him to the cornerback position. That's not to say it would strictly be a bad thing though, Chuck can certainly do a lot for you as a CB. In nickel/dime, he'd be a corner anyways so if Woodson is going to be #2 (or #3, I forget which Shields is), who's going to take HIS spot? And that person's spot?
You're making this more difficult than it truly is, or I'm freaking missing the boat!
Current
LCB - Tramon Williams
RCB - Sam Shields
FS - Morgan Burnett
SS - Charles Woodson
Proposed
LCB - Tramon Williams
RCB - Charles Woodson
FS - Sam Shields
SS - Morgan Burnett
That is the end of the trickle down effect. The nickel back is still Casey Hayward and the dime back is still ... shit whoever it is.
#7
Posted
:
Tuesday, October 2, 2012 11:42:58 AM(UTC)
Joined: 8/7/2008(UTC)
Location: San Francisco
Applause Given: 778
Applause Received: 495
No.
Shields is a damn good coverage CB but an average at best tackler.
#8
Posted
:
Tuesday, October 2, 2012 11:48:37 AM(UTC)
Joined: 8/22/2009(UTC)
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Applause Given: 445
Applause Received: 829
Blah blah I'm a stupid idiot that spends 10 minutes writing an in-depth explanation then realizes I'm completely misreading things.
#9
Posted
:
Tuesday, October 2, 2012 11:58:40 AM(UTC)
Joined: 10/13/2006(UTC)
Location: Green Bay, WI
Applause Given: 2,802
Applause Received: 4,980
Porforis said: 
Blah blah I'm a stupid idiot that spends 10 minutes writing an in-depth explanation then realizes I'm completely misreading things.
I've got about 21,000 examples of that myself.
#10
Posted
:
Tuesday, October 2, 2012 12:04:49 PM(UTC)
Joined: 8/22/2009(UTC)
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Applause Given: 445
Applause Received: 829
Zero2Cool said: 
I've got about 21,000 examples of that myself.
Posts: 20,924
At least you're consistent.
#11
Posted
:
Tuesday, October 2, 2012 12:24:30 PM(UTC)
Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 7,632
Applause Received: 1,601
Zero2Cool said: 
You're making this more difficult than it truly is, or I'm freaking missing the boat!
Current
LCB - Tramon Williams
RCB - Sam Shields
FS - Morgan Burnett
SS - Charles Woodson
Proposed
LCB - Tramon Williams
RCB - Charles Woodson
FS - Sam Shields
SS - Morgan Burnett
That is the end of the trickle down effect. The nickel back is still Casey Hayward and the dime back is still ... shit whoever it is.
Davon House, hopefully.
#12
Posted
:
Tuesday, October 2, 2012 12:30:35 PM(UTC)
Joined: 8/8/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 4,862
Applause Received: 2,487
no.
I don't think Sheilds would be good in support of the run.
He really has shied away from making the tackle in the past. (He is doing better this year.)
Woodson does a pretty good job in his current role as jack of all trades but to line him up outside against speed all game long is a detriment to his current abilities.
It weakens the CB position. It could bring Bush on to the field sooner. I would rather see McMillian and Jennings see more playing time than Bush.
Shields would have to practically start all over on the learning curve as a safety. Granted he probably knows more about safety now than he did about CB when the Packers signed him but that isn't saying a whole lot.
#13
Posted
:
Tuesday, October 2, 2012 2:27:23 PM(UTC)
Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 7,632
Applause Received: 1,601
Woody's the slot corner. He's more suited there, because he's lost a step. Hayward is the backup slot guy. He's more suited there, because of his size. Bush is the third slot corner.
Williams, Shields and House can play the outside better than those other guys.
Then you have the S's.
I don't ever expect to see anyone as good as Nick Collins. He was the best I've ever seen.
But McMillian's got a TON of potential.
#14
Posted
:
Tuesday, October 2, 2012 3:23:15 PM(UTC)
Joined: 10/13/2006(UTC)
Location: Green Bay, WI
Applause Given: 2,802
Applause Received: 4,980
wpr said: 
no.
I don't think Sheilds would be good in support of the run.
He really has shied away from making the tackle in the past. (He is doing better this year.)
Woodson does a pretty good job in his current role as jack of all trades but to line him up outside against speed all game long is a detriment to his current abilities.
It weakens the CB position. It could bring Bush on to the field sooner. I would rather see McMillian and Jennings see more playing time than Bush.
Shields would have to practically start all over on the learning curve as a safety. Granted he probably knows more about safety now than he did about CB when the Packers signed him but that isn't saying a whole lot.
It would not weaken any position unless you think Shields is better than Woodson at CB.
Shields to S
Woodson to CB
The packages and everything stay the same.
#15
Posted
:
Tuesday, October 2, 2012 3:51:00 PM(UTC)
Joined: 11/18/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 55
Applause Received: 113
Zero2Cool said: 
It would not weaken any position unless you think Shields is better than Woodson at CB.
Shields to S
Woodson to CB
The packages and everything stay the same.
I'm not sure if it's really worth the discussion of moving guys to other starting position, as they do not play anything near the starting formation for most of the game. IIRC Woodson played only a few snaps as a real SS early in the game, other than that he was mostly lined up near the LOS. Not wondering at all about that as the Packers constantly played multiple DB sets throughout the game and McMillian/Jennings and Burnett did well back there. So why shift Woodson into the backfield if he can line up where he's best?
#16
Posted
:
Friday, October 5, 2012 7:47:46 AM(UTC)
Joined: 10/15/2008(UTC)
Location: Chicago, IL
Applause Given: 219
Applause Received: 395
At this point in time, I'd say no because I love the way McMillian is playing. That kid is going to do some work back there for years to come. Shields plays well where he is at now and asking him to learn another new position would be a lot to ask for. CB is becoming his natural position now.
#17
Posted
:
Friday, October 5, 2012 8:01:05 PM(UTC)
Joined: 9/26/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 69
Applause Received: 1,420
G-Force said: 
At this point in time, I'd say no because I love the way McMillian is playing. That kid is going to do some work back there for years to come. Shields plays well where he is at now and asking him to learn another new position would be a lot to ask for. CB is becoming his natural position now.
He isn't going to be Collins or Ed Reed even playing well. He is actually more of a SS than FS. It means we have to play 2 deep which makes the holes in the zones bigger. If we could get somebody deep that can cover the entire deep field, it makes it possible for the others to tighten coverage underneath.
#18
Posted
:
Sunday, October 7, 2012 6:01:20 AM(UTC)
Joined: 8/18/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 1,069
Applause Received: 2,136
Until Shields is beaten out of his corner slot, you can't even think of moving him to safety. And right now he is a starter with House getting closer to getting back on the field. When House eventually supplants Shields, then Haywood has to do the same. When Shields is our dime corner - then you can entertain those thoughts. But until then, he's a corner.
I'm not sold on Woodson at safety yet. He does not have the speed to play center field. Wood is a man without a traditional position - and basically is a wild card for Capers to play with.
#19
Posted
:
Sunday, October 7, 2012 6:08:30 AM(UTC)
Joined: 3/16/2007(UTC)
Location: North Central Wisconsin
Applause Given: 444
Applause Received: 1,252
No.
I don't think he has the physicality to play the position.
Shields had a rough week, but for the most part I think he has played decently this season. Let's see how it works today, I have a feeling that this may be a week where the Packers defense gets to work on some things during the game.
#20
Posted
:
Sunday, October 7, 2012 6:28:46 AM(UTC)
Joined: 10/13/2006(UTC)
Location: Green Bay, WI
Applause Given: 2,802
Applause Received: 4,980
DakotaT said: 
Until Shields is beaten out of his corner slot, you can't even think of moving him to safety. And right now he is a starter with House getting closer to getting back on the field. When House eventually supplants Shields, then Haywood has to do the same. When Shields is our dime corner - then you can entertain those thoughts. But until then, he's a corner.
I'm not sold on Woodson at safety yet. He does not have the speed to play center field. Wood is a man without a traditional position - and basically is a wild card for Capers to play with.
Are you over rating Davon House, or under appreciating Sam Shields here?
Sam Shields > Davon House ... just watch them play ... its a clear as can be.
Users browsing this topic
Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.