Green Bay Packers Forum

Welcome to your Green Bay Packers Online Community!

Since 2006, PackersHome has been providing a unique experience for fans.
Your participation is greatly anticipated!
Login or Register.
2 Pages12>
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline RajiRoar  
#1 Posted : Tuesday, February 5, 2013 12:58:56 AM(UTC)
Rank: Senior Member

United States
Joined: 9/30/2009(UTC)
Applause Given: 50
Applause Received: 371
Nothing's goin on till April so I was just thinking...

DE: Kampman
DT: Pickett, Muir, Harrell
DT: C.Williams, Jolly
DE:C.Jenkins, KGB

Muir has had success as a starter, jolly too.

OLB:Poppinga
MLB:Barnett, Bishop
OLB: Hawk

CB: Harris
CB: Woodson, Tramon
S: Collins
S: Bigby

ST: Tracy white, Jarrett "the cockroach" Bush.

This on paper looks like a pretty stacked D, especially the DL... How did Sanders screw it up?
Offline Rockmolder  
#2 Posted : Tuesday, February 5, 2013 4:22:54 AM(UTC)
Rank: Veteran Member

FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Bronze: 2010

Netherlands
Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 245
Applause Received: 384
RajiRoar said: Go to Quoted Post
Nothing's goin on till April so I was just thinking...

DE: Kampman
DT: Pickett, Muir, Harrell
DT: C.Williams, Jolly
DE:C.Jenkins, KGB

Muir has had success as a starter, jolly too.

OLB:Poppinga
MLB:Barnett, Bishop
OLB: Hawk

CB: Harris
CB: Woodson, Tramon
S: Collins
S: Bigby

ST: Tracy white, Jarrett "the cockroach" Bush.

This on paper looks like a pretty stacked D, especially the DL... How did Sanders screw it up?


Muir played in three games, had four tackles, can't get to the QB to safe his life and was waived after the season.

I'm not quite sure what success as a starter means to you, but that's not doing it for me.

Desmond Bishop was a raw, sixth round rookie. Poppinga has always been very average. Tramon joined the team just a year earlier as an udfa. He wasn't ready to start at that point. Not even ready to play nickel, really. He was little more than our kick returner that year.

Next to that, we have a pretty good defense in 2007, didn't we? That pass rush was what made Sanders' defense work. We were 6th in points given up that year, 11th in yards given up, a 75.6 QB rating against us which was 6th in the league, notching 19 intercetions and 36 sacks.

Admittedly, it's all a tad away from an elite defense, but Sanders far from screwed it up.

The big downfall came the next year, when KGB became ineffective, Corey Williams leaving for Seattle, Cullen Jenkins being injured most of the season, losing Bigby, Al Harris going down later that season, Barnett getting injured for half the season etc...
Offline Zero2Cool  
#3 Posted : Tuesday, February 5, 2013 5:58:36 AM(UTC)
Rank: Premier Member

Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Gold: 2015Yahoo! Fantasy Football - Gold: 2009FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Silver: 2010Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Silver: 2011FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Bronze: 2016ESPN NCAA March Madness - Bronze: 2010Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Bronze: 2013

United States
Joined: 10/13/2006(UTC)
Location: Green Bay, WI
Applause Given: 2,504
Applause Received: 4,058
RajiRoar said: Go to Quoted Post


This on paper looks like a pretty stacked D, especially the DL... How did Sanders screw it up?


How many of those guys played starter roles two years after Bob Sanders was let go?
Offline play2win  
#4 Posted : Tuesday, February 5, 2013 6:56:13 AM(UTC)
Rank: Registered

United States
Joined: 3/29/2012(UTC)
Location: Milwaukee
Applause Given: 1,076
Applause Received: 724
I miss the 4-3 too. Now.

Back, before the switch, for years, I was hoping we would switch to a 3-4. Made a lot of sense with so few teams running this effective scheme, and so many players available to run it. We failed, over time, to keep our 3-4 stocked with the players necessary to run an effective 3-4. Meanwhile, other teams have piled in and made that switch to a 3-4, All those tweeter DEs that were plentiful are now being scooped up by those other teams.

NE forsaw this and switched back. I think we should decide on our level of commitment in restocking our 3-4, or if we wouldn't be better off going back to a 4-3. Seems we have some good fits right now for the latter. Either way, we are going to need a DE, a NT, a LB and a S. at the very least.

BTW, NE's switch back to a 4-3 wasn't without some pain. I think they did that in 2011 and we were the only D worse than they were in the NFL. They improved quite a bit in 2012, but, so did the Packers. This is a tough call. We need some real maulers added to our defense. Plain and simple.

A 3-4 won the SB.
Offline wpr  
#5 Posted : Tuesday, February 5, 2013 9:34:30 AM(UTC)
Rank: Select Member

PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Gold: 2012PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Gold: 2013FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Silver: 2014FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Bronze: 2013

Joined: 8/8/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 4,000
Applause Received: 2,049
Maybe it is being more familiar with a 4-3 than a 3-4. I like it better.

You have 4 big bodies taking on 5. Seems to make more sense to me than to have 3 take on 5 and then mix in a LB from the outside. It just doesn't seem to get much pressure on the running game or a pass rush.

I suppose if you have 3 real studs at LB you can get by with a 3-4 but GB doesn't have that luxury.
Offline Pack93z  
#6 Posted : Tuesday, February 5, 2013 10:14:29 AM(UTC)
Rank: Select Member

PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Bronze: 2012

United States
Joined: 3/16/2007(UTC)
Location: North Central Wisconsin
Applause Given: 437
Applause Received: 1,237
I grew up going camp to camp switching from principle to principle in the Midwest way back in the 80's. Both have strength's and weaknesses, both can be attacked offensively via scheme. There are times I think both would be a better choice to run based on situation.

One of the things that I believe hurt us in either choice of alignment is that this staff places emphasis on special teams in terms of roster makeup. At times this sacrifices depth along the defensive front over more multi-faceted athletes to construct more options in special teams. Keeping an extra backer or TE over another DL player that could rotate in and keep the trenches on the Defensive front more fresh. Over the course of a season, that pays dividends or it taxes a defense greatly.

Sorry.. tangent.. but personally, I would like to see more commitment on the depth of the defensive line and allow Capers and company at times to mix the defensive fronts and alignments even more. Play a 4-3 under or over and still allow a player like Matthews be along the LOS. Keep the 3-4 base but vary into a 4 man front at times early in downs... make the offenses plan for different blocking schemes within the same game. When we have to go smaller, because 3-4 lineman are again in demand, counter with a 4 man front.

But no.. I don't miss the 4-3 any more than I missed the 3-4.. the issue for us right now is too many teams are running the 3-4 and consuming the talent required to effectively run it and spreading it across the league. When teams start to buy into concepts.. it dilutes the talent base that is available. This happens when teams try and chase a concept instead of fitting the concepts to the talent on hand. Like this seasons fascination with the running QB will devalue the pocket QB for a while.. so smart team is going to catch a talent that slipped because he doesn't fit a current theme. Those are the teams that prosper.. the ones that collect talent then scheme to fit the talent.
thanks Post received 1 applause.
play2win on 2/5/2013(UTC)
Offline nerdmann  
#7 Posted : Tuesday, February 5, 2013 11:09:04 AM(UTC)
Rank: Preferred Member

Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 6,413
Applause Received: 1,424
I prefer the 3-4.

It's a more aggressive philosophy. It also incorporates more surprise.

I look for us to run more of a hybrid though, with the players we have.
Offline warhawk  
#8 Posted : Tuesday, February 5, 2013 11:21:56 AM(UTC)
Rank: Senior Member

Joined: 8/7/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 2
Applause Received: 294
wpr said: Go to Quoted Post
Maybe it is being more familiar with a 4-3 than a 3-4. I like it better.

You have 4 big bodies taking on 5. Seems to make more sense to me than to have 3 take on 5 and then mix in a LB from the outside. It just doesn't seem to get much pressure on the running game or a pass rush.

I suppose if you have 3 real studs at LB you can get by with a 3-4 but GB doesn't have that luxury.


I think when we get Bishop and Perry back a player that could help us might be Minter out of LSU. Big hitter and tackling machine.
We line up CM3, Bishop, Minter, and Perry I see alot of the problems we ran into late this year going away.
I want to note that we have had too many good players sidelined. Bishop/Perry on D, Sherrod/Bulaga on O. That's a lot of talent on crutches and they didn't miss a little time they were out all or most the year.
When your picking in the last five or six spots in the draft and then you lose those guys it's got to hurt. It's bad enough when you watch the draft and see the top 4 or five OL and DL gone and get lucky to grab a decent player and then they get knocked out it really sucks.

thanks Post received 1 applause.
play2win on 2/5/2013(UTC)
Offline Rios39  
#9 Posted : Tuesday, February 5, 2013 12:02:41 PM(UTC)
Rank: Member

Joined: 8/9/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 1
Applause Received: 30
The 3-4 D in 2010 was the best we've had. And a 3-4 D is not 3 against 5 lineman cause you're really always rushing 4 or 5. The 49ers, Ravens AND Falcons are played aggressive styled 3-4 D's. The difference is that they have better personel for it. We need to fix the DL and the OLB and ILB should improve, especially with Bishop back but we could use a few better cover LB's.
Offline wpr  
#10 Posted : Tuesday, February 5, 2013 12:10:06 PM(UTC)
Rank: Select Member

PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Gold: 2012PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Gold: 2013FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Silver: 2014FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Bronze: 2013

Joined: 8/8/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 4,000
Applause Received: 2,049
Rios39 said: Go to Quoted Post
The 3-4 D in 2010 was the best we've had. And a 3-4 D is not 3 against 5 lineman cause you're really always rushing 4 or 5. The 49ers, Ravens AND Falcons are played aggressive styled 3-4 D's. The difference is that they have better personel for it. We need to fix the DL and the OLB and ILB should improve, especially with Bishop back but we could use a few better cover LB's.


Rios you missed my point. I said they have 3 bodies going up against 5 big bodies. (in the 3-4) Certainly the defense brings at least one more person, typically a LB, but he is not as big as the OT he is usually facing. You have discounted that the offense many times is bringing another blocker, be it a RB, FB or TE, into the mix to counter the 4 or 5th rusher.
Rss Feed 
Users browsing this topic
Guest
2 Pages12>
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.

Notification

Icon
Error


Fan Shout
uffda udfa (now) : I grew up in Wisconsin. Don't u see you created your own irony?
uffda udfa (4m) : Or pecans or walnuts? That is nuts.
uffda udfa (5m) : That's hilarious. No GM talk says u but let's talk cooking appliances?
uffda udfa (6m) : Meanwhile, you're talking turkeys, crock pots and pressure cookers.
uffda udfa (6m) : Smokey...U complained about too much Eliot Wolf talk not game talk.
uffda udfa (7m) : Disagree. He choose to roll into endzone. Safety was right call.
Smokey (7m) : U2, take your Texas redneck thinking and serve it with your pot of beans .
uffda udfa (8m) : Said maybe 1 yard line but no control until on goal line.
uffda udfa (9m) : Claimed momentum carried into endzone.
uffda udfa (9m) : Claimed it could never been ruled a safety.
uffda udfa (10m) : Mike Pereira explained on Twitter what he should've on FOX.
Smokey (10m) : Keeping them thread separated is the key. Fan Shout is for any and all members to post as they please. No one voted you King U2 .
uffda udfa (10m) : This is for NFL stuff. Not crock pots or crack pots.
uffda udfa (11m) : Shout is not back alley. Not your forum either.
Smokey (12m) : Cooking, or travel, or our favorite movie have every right in this forum.
Smokey (14m) : It is not, YOUR FORUM . Even politics is tolerated in the Back Ally .
uffda udfa (23m) : I love cooking but this is a Packers forum not Iron Chef.
Smokey (25m) : Anyone, man or woman, that can cook does not need to always depend upon others to cook their food for them.
Smokey (29m) : The greater majority of successful restaurants are owned/and run by Men.
Smokey (32m) : Making fun of the art of cooking only demonstrates a lack of sophistication.
Smokey (34m) : Most of the finest chefs in the world are men.
hardrocker950 (2h) : lol
uffda udfa (2h) : Best pressure cooker talk on the net!
hardrocker950 (3h) : Time to get the CB situation sorted out
Smokey (3h) : DON'T DELAY, JOIN TODAY !
musccy (5h) : Sorry, but no to shields. 9 mil better spent elsewhere.
uffda udfa (6h) : Sam Shields still having headaches but wants to continue playing.
uffda udfa (6h) : Not harsh. Another failure and playoff embarrassment.
uffda udfa (6h) : Aaron cried a little when asked about Jordy playing today.
GoPack1984 (6h) : Dismal season? I think that's too harsh.
uffda udfa (6h) : Packers should have never been 4-6. Dismal season.
GoPack1984 (6h) : ...with the current defense.
GoPack1984 (6h) : Good season. Great rebound from 4-6. Would have loved to have seen them go to the Super Bowl and win, but I don't know if that was realistic
uffda udfa (6h) : •thanks Shakespeare.
The_Green_Ninja (6h) : Mike at the end of the day is with the team every day and knows what is needed and not needed. Don't be surprised if Mike helps push the cha
Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2016 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 11 @ 12:00 PM
at Jaguars
Sunday, Sep 18 @ 7:30 PM
at Vikings
Sunday, Sep 25 @ 12:00 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Oct 2 @ 12:00 AM
BYE
Sunday, Oct 9 @ 7:30 PM
GIANTS
Sunday, Oct 16 @ 3:25 PM
COWBOYS
Thursday, Oct 20 @ 7:25 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Oct 30 @ 3:25 PM
at Falcons
Sunday, Nov 6 @ 3:25 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Nov 13 @ 12:00 PM
at Titans
Sunday, Nov 20 @ 7:30 PM
at Redskins
Monday, Nov 28 @ 7:30 PM
at Eagles
Sunday, Dec 4 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Dec 11 @ 3:25 PM
SEAHAWKS
Sunday, Dec 18 @ 12:00 PM
at Bears
Saturday, Dec 24 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Jan 1 @ 7:30 PM
at Lions

Think About It
Think About It

Recent Topics
9m / Green Bay Packers Talk / mojaveson

17m / Green Bay Packers Talk / mojaveson

23m / Around The NFL / mojaveson

26m / Green Bay Packers Talk / mojaveson

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / uffda udfa

3h / Green Bay Packers Talk / uffda udfa

5h / Fantasy Sports Talk / Smokey

6h / Around The NFL / mojaveson

6h / Green Bay Packers Talk / luigis

7h / Green Bay Packers Talk / uffda udfa

8h / Green Bay Packers Talk / dhazer

8h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

8h / Announcements / wpr

8h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Nonstopdrivel

8h / Green Bay Packers Talk / mojaveson


Packers Headlines