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.

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.

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.

McMillian's got speed. He's coming along pretty nicely.

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.

No.

Shields is a damn good coverage CB but an average at best tackler.

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.

Posts: 20,924

At least you're consistent.

Davon House, hopefully.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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.

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.

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.