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: 49
Applause Received: 338
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: 202
Applause Received: 330
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: 2011ESPN NCAA March Madness - Bronze: 2010Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Bronze: 2013

United States
Joined: 10/13/2006(UTC)
Location: Green Bay, WI
Applause Given: 2,247
Applause Received: 3,297
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: 3,311
Applause Received: 1,607
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: 410
Applause Received: 1,134
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)
Online nerdmann  
#7 Posted : Tuesday, February 5, 2013 11:09:04 AM(UTC)
Rank: Preferred Member

Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 4,915
Applause Received: 1,155
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: 257
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: 3,311
Applause Received: 1,607
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
Cheesey: THANK YOU again for all you do.
Cheesey: You do all the work, while some think they don't have to honor your few rules.
Cheesey: Kevin, you KNOW how much I appreciate this site.
uffda udfa: Nope. Too much pressure for them.
Zero2Cool: NFL MVP's don't seem to win the Super Bowl the same year, do they?
Zero2Cool: Panthers played uninspired and predictable, actually (and sadly) reminded me of the Packers. :(
Zero2Cool: Thanks 68md, good to know some notice and appreciate.
Zero2Cool: Holding a different or less than popular view is perfectly fine. You fail to understand this even though I repeatedly tell you. It's annoyin
uffda udfa: Good night, Smokey.
Smokey: good night uffda.
uffda udfa: Wonder how Colts fans feel, and Mr. Irsay?
uffda udfa: Today, anyway.
Smokey: DEFENSE DOES WIN CHAMPIONSHIPS TT !
uffda udfa: Carolina will never be back to a SB under Cam Newton.
uffda udfa: Denver D just dominated the current MVP and the former this year.
uffda udfa: Cam for LVP in the SB. No character.
uffda udfa: Newton is a wuss. MVP? LOL.
uffda udfa: #VonFire
uffda udfa: People who have passion and expectations aren't A words. Accepting less than the best doesn't make you not one either.
uffda udfa: Sorry, Kevin...maybe you called Dakota an A word and not me? Had to be one of us.
uffda udfa: Marshawn Lynch announced his retirement in a cool way via twitter. What could've been in Green Bay, Marshawn!
uffda udfa: It's okay... you called me the "A" word. All because I don't tickle the ears. I get it.
uffda udfa: So someone like Buck deserves privileges because he's a better fan than me due to his flattering opinions?
68md: wet blanket ? He works his ass off to keep the place going for you ?
Smokey: Zero, Why are you such a wet blanket host ? A real SB "Chat" should have been a priority for this site. Wet Blanket strikes again.
Zero2Cool: BTW, I'm not saying you're an asshole. I'm stating a fact, that's all.
Zero2Cool: You don't get it. You confuse right and privilege. Assholes don't deserve privileges. Get it, got it, good.
uffda udfa: Talib playing a Burfict half so far.
uffda udfa: You have an R rated section on a Packers board. I think moving the guys you really don't want rocking the boat to their own forum is a great
uffda udfa: I think the same was likely said at KFAN when it was suggested they have a Packers show. I believe they still have it. I used to produce it
Zero2Cool: Seriously think what you're asking and do so before asking. Unreal.
uffda udfa: Aaron walking gingerly in that SB MVP introduction thing.
uffda udfa: May I suggest something? How about a "Packers Cynics" sub forum. A place for the Dakota's and me. I would exclusively post there.
Zero2Cool: One way or another, there is going to be a big change coming to PH.
uffda udfa: I don't want to be difficult but you do for some reason. I know you've been dealing with a lot.
Please sign in to use Fan Shout

Road To Super Bowl 50
Sunday, Sep 13 @ 12:00 PM
at Bears
Sunday, Sep 20 @ 7:30 PM
SEAHAWKS
Monday, Sep 28 @ 7:30 PM
CHIEFS
Sunday, Oct 4 @ 3:25 PM
at 49ers
Sunday, Oct 11 @ 12:00 PM
RAMS
Sunday, Oct 18 @ 3:25 PM
CHARGERS
Sunday, Oct 25 @ 12:00 AM
- BYE -
Sunday, Nov 1 @ 7:30 PM
at Broncos
Sunday, Nov 8 @ 12:00 PM
at Panthers
Sunday, Nov 15 @ 12:00 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 22 @ 3:25 PM
at Vikings
Thursday, Nov 26 @ 7:30 PM
BEARS
Thursday, Dec 3 @ 7:25 PM
at Lions
Sunday, Dec 13 @ 3:25 PM
COWBOYS
Sunday, Dec 20 @ 3:05 PM
at Raiders
Sunday, Dec 27 @ 3:25 PM
at Cardinals
Sunday, Jan 3 @ 7:30 PM
VIKINGS

Think About It
Think About It

Recent Topics
1m / Green Bay Packers Talk / uffda udfa

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / PackFanWithTwins

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / PackFanWithTwins

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / PackFanWithTwins

3h / Green Bay Packers Talk / FLORIDA PACKER88

21h / Green Bay Packers Talk / uffda udfa

8-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / PackFanWithTwins

7-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / uffda udfa

7-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / uffda udfa

7-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

7-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / uffda udfa

6-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

6-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

6-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / uffda udfa

5-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / musccy


Tweeter