Discussion Board
Welcome Guest! You can login or register. Login or Register.
4 Pages123>»

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
MintBaconDrivel  
#1 Posted : Wednesday, February 12, 2014 7:14:01 PM(UTC)

The comment about Dom Capers "image" is interesting. Why not add players to his "image" in 2009, or 2010, or 2011, or 2012 or 2013? Why wait until year six?
PackFanWithTwins  
#2 Posted : Wednesday, February 12, 2014 7:21:47 PM(UTC)
Overall average I would expect them to be smaller. Not the Jolly,Pickett,Raji front. But I'm not certain they are going to let Raji go, rather move him back to NT while having smaller DEs. I think BJ could afford to drop a few tons also.
nerdmann  
#3 Posted : Wednesday, February 12, 2014 8:34:12 PM(UTC)
"Smaller and quicker?" That didn't work out on our Oline, and it didn't work out on our Dline under Sherman. Remember that year Grady Jackson fell out of the sky and saved our season?

I don't like the sound of this.

That was also Rumsfeld's idea for Iraq. LOL
steveishere  
#4 Posted : Wednesday, February 12, 2014 8:54:25 PM(UTC)
Dont care what size they are they just need good football players
DakotaT  
#5 Posted : Wednesday, February 12, 2014 8:58:36 PM(UTC)
I'm going to start being mean to TexasPackerBacker if we resign Raji; Buckeye too! I swear to God, I'll blow a gasket if that happens.
beast  
#6 Posted : Wednesday, February 12, 2014 9:19:30 PM(UTC)


IF this is true... I think it means we're going to see the more aggressive and real Dom Capers system come back... the one we saw from 2009 to 2011. They got burned in 2011, so the Packers (because of their lack of pass rush / DB play in one on one) moved to a more conservative style (less risk) in 2012.

This could be the perfect time for it, with the run defenders being FAs, and the pass rushing being fairly young and possible to break out and have huge years.
mi_keys  
#7 Posted : Wednesday, February 12, 2014 11:09:42 PM(UTC)
MintBaconDrivel said: Go to Quoted Post

The comment about Dom Capers "image" is interesting. Why not add players to his "image" in 2009, or 2010, or 2011, or 2012 or 2013? Why wait until year six?


HE SPEAKS!
Mucky Tundra  
#8 Posted : Thursday, February 13, 2014 6:36:53 AM(UTC)
mi_keys said: Go to Quoted Post
HE SPEAKS!


HEAR, AND BE ENLIGHTENED!

I've been sorta wondering who would be a better fit between Nix and Hageman if both were available at #21 in the draft. I found myself thinking that if it was 2006 or 2007, I'd go with Nix. But then I also thought that an athletic guy like Hageman at NT and turning him loose to make plays is more what we need in 2014. Texaspackerbacker has mentioned several times that the Cowboys ran a 3-4 with Jay Ratliff doing something similar. It might be what they're trying to go for.
steveishere  
#9 Posted : Thursday, February 13, 2014 12:07:11 PM(UTC)
MintBaconDrivel said: Go to Quoted Post

The comment about Dom Capers "image" is interesting. Why not add players to his "image" in 2009, or 2010, or 2011, or 2012 or 2013? Why wait until year six?


It makes no sense at all considering Dom has talked about how much he likes the big bodies along the d-line and has used the bigger guys so often even though our most successful guys have been the smaller faster ones for the most part. It seems like Dom has no clue what he wants at that position.
nerdmann  
#10 Posted : Thursday, February 13, 2014 12:29:09 PM(UTC)
steveishere said: Go to Quoted Post
It makes no sense at all considering Dom has talked about how much he likes the big bodies along the d-line and has used the bigger guys so often even though our most successful guys have been the smaller faster ones for the most part. It seems like Dom has no clue what he wants at that position.


Could also be pre-draft disinfo.
DoddPower  
#11 Posted : Thursday, February 13, 2014 1:27:04 PM(UTC)
nerdmann said: Go to Quoted Post
Could also be pre-draft disinfo.


Yeah, there's no real reason to believe any of this.
User is suspended until 4/29/2043 11:56:55 PM(UTC) texaspackerbacker  
#12 Posted : Thursday, February 13, 2014 4:45:05 PM(UTC)
DakotaT said: Go to Quoted Post
I'm going to start being mean to TexasPackerBacker if we resign Raji; Buckeye too! I swear to God, I'll blow a gasket if that happens.


Did you mistype that - meaning to say "stop" instead of "start"? It's kinda like a mosquito bite on my ass whenever you post hahahaha.

I think you and I are the top two detractors in here regarding Raji and Pickett - which is saying a lot, since they are so widely hated.

Finally one of the talking heads is putting it into print what I have been saying for a long time now - Daniels, Worthy, and D. Jones, with Boyd and Jolly also in the rotation, would amount to a very decent D Line. I question whether that would represent a change in Capers type personnel, as I recall when he was with other teams, he generally had athletic LBs with big clods in the line acting almost like O Linemen for the LBs. Whatever about that - I like it a lot better having D Linemen who actually can function on their own.

beast  
#13 Posted : Friday, February 14, 2014 9:29:39 AM(UTC)
steveishere said: Go to Quoted Post
It makes no sense at all considering Dom has talked about how much he likes the big bodies along the d-line and has used the bigger guys so often even though our most successful guys have been the smaller faster ones for the most part. It seems like Dom has no clue what he wants at that position.


I think a lot of people are missing the context that the DL have been used differently. The big bodies have been more often been askd to control the OL, not let there be running gaps on the inside and pass rush less. While the smaller guys have been asked to pass rush more, try to control the OL less and running game less. So what they were being asked to do was some what different and so their over all goals aren't the same. Those big guys could of been very successful and most wouldn't noticed as they were being asked to do the dirty works which rarely gets notice.

Example, everyone seems to remember Clay Matthews fumble in the Super Bowl...but how did he get that shot at the RB like that? Pickett pushed the OL backwards and he took away the inside run forcing him to outside and they basically sandwiched the RB. But that was one of the more clear cases of it... it happens a lot more in less clear cases where those big guys are successful in what they were asked to do (the dirty work) and fans are complaining that they aren't successful.


But a lot of those big bodies are in FA... so this might be the right time to get away from them some and ask the DL to do more pass rushing and less of the dirty work, and LBers more of the dirty work and less of the rushing.
beast  
#14 Posted : Friday, February 14, 2014 9:34:09 AM(UTC)
texaspackerbacker said: Go to Quoted Post
I like it a lot better having D Linemen who actually can function on their own.


You seems to like it when all the non-coverage guys have the same role... get to the ball ASAP and don't worry about anything else. You would probably really like Cover 2 and Tampa 2 style then.


I agree with you that it would probably be nice having DL being allowed to be more aggressive... it's easier to read how well the players are doing. Then clogging/protecting and stuff and more exciting... though they'll have to get better against the run.

steveishere  
#15 Posted : Friday, February 14, 2014 10:00:56 AM(UTC)
beast said: Go to Quoted Post
I think a lot of people are missing the context that the DL have been used differently. The big bodies have been more often been askd to control the OL, not let there be running gaps on the inside and pass rush less. While the smaller guys have been asked to pass rush more, try to control the OL less and running game less. So what they were being asked to do was some what different and so their over all goals aren't the same. Those big guys could of been very successful and most wouldn't noticed as they were being asked to do the dirty works which rarely gets notice.

Example, everyone seems to remember Clay Matthews fumble in the Super Bowl...but how did he get that shot at the RB like that? Pickett pushed the OL backwards and he took away the inside run forcing him to outside and they basically sandwiched the RB. But that was one of the more clear cases of it... it happens a lot more in less clear cases where those big guys are successful in what they were asked to do (the dirty work) and fans are complaining that they aren't successful.


But a lot of those big bodies are in FA... so this might be the right time to get away from them some and ask the DL to do more pass rushing and less of the dirty work, and LBers more of the dirty work and less of the rushing.


The problem with our big guys lately though is they don't get that penetration and cause any disruption. They engage the o-lineman and then stay in 1 place while there are still running gaps to either side of them. They don't disengage and disrupt they play all they do is simply take on the 1 blocker in front of them. I've always liked the phrase "disruption is production". There isn't a stat for simply screwing up the play but it's a great thing to do. I don't necessarily need to see more tackles/sacks from the d-line but I would certainly like to see less standing there hand fighting at or beyond the LOS.

I don't really believe that their job has just been to stand there at the LOS and play patty cake without trying to cause any other disruption. If that's the case then we may as well ditch the base scheme all together.
Wade  
#16 Posted : Friday, February 14, 2014 2:25:12 PM(UTC)
Until last year, Pickett consistently occupied two blockers and performed the messing-things-up role as well as anyone. Last year, alas, he showed his age. I'd like to think he was slowed by some injuries, but the reality likely is that he's on the downside and is now just a guy. But until 2013 he was a stud, IMO.

Raji, on the other hand....don't get me going. To me he had 2 thirds of seasons that were good. The last third of 2010 and the first third of 2013. The rest of his tenure he's been average or less.

Great personality, but just not as good as one expects from a first rounder. Or, for most of his tenure in GB, a fifth rounder.
nerdmann  
#17 Posted : Friday, February 14, 2014 4:13:34 PM(UTC)
Wade said: Go to Quoted Post
Until last year, Pickett consistently occupied two blockers and performed the messing-things-up role as well as anyone. Last year, alas, he showed his age. I'd like to think he was slowed by some injuries, but the reality likely is that he's on the downside and is now just a guy. But until 2013 he was a stud, IMO.

Raji, on the other hand....don't get me going. To me he had 2 thirds of seasons that were good. The last third of 2010 and the first third of 2013. The rest of his tenure he's been average or less.

Great personality, but just not as good as one expects from a first rounder. Or, for most of his tenure in GB, a fifth rounder.


Problem is, we as fans have no idea how healthy he was or wasn't.
User is suspended until 4/29/2043 11:56:55 PM(UTC) texaspackerbacker  
#18 Posted : Friday, February 14, 2014 8:05:21 PM(UTC)
beast said: Go to Quoted Post
You seems to like it when all the non-coverage guys have the same role... get to the ball ASAP and don't worry about anything else. You would probably really like Cover 2 and Tampa 2 style then.


I agree with you that it would probably be nice having DL being allowed to be more aggressive... it's easier to read how well the players are doing. Then clogging/protecting and stuff and more exciting... though they'll have to get better against the run.



As they say in military intelligence, it ain't so much about intent; It's about capability. Having the big fatties doing that clogging/protecting stuff basically put all the pressure on the LBs. Matthews even when he wasn't hurt got double teamed because the damn fatties weren't capable of doing the protecting of his lanes to pass rush, and whoever played opposite of Matthews generally didn't even need to be double teamed. Similarly, on runs, the fat fools in the D-Line couldn't even eat up blockers to allow our ILBs to stop people for short or no gains. Unless you have Donterrio Poe or somebody like that, and LBs like the Niners, you are better off with a front seven that is ALL moderately capable of making plays.

I don't see what that has to do with Cover Two v Man Coverage, as the back 4 or 5 has less pressure on them either way if the front seven has decent capability.

beast  
#19 Posted : Friday, February 14, 2014 8:39:14 PM(UTC)
steveishere said: Go to Quoted Post
The problem with our big guys lately though is they don't get that penetration and cause any disruption. They engage the o-lineman and then stay in 1 place while there are still running gaps to either side of them. They don't disengage and disrupt they play all they do is simply take on the 1 blocker in front of them. I've always liked the phrase "disruption is production". There isn't a stat for simply screwing up the play but it's a great thing to do. I don't necessarily need to see more tackles/sacks from the d-line but I would certainly like to see less standing there hand fighting at or beyond the LOS.

I don't really believe that their job has just been to stand there at the LOS and play patty cake without trying to cause any other disruption. If that's the case then we may as well ditch the base scheme all together.


You can disrupt with out penetrating, like Pickett, he was great at disrupting by going side to side, east and west, while he struggled to penetrate.

Wade said: Go to Quoted Post
Until last year, Pickett consistently occupied two blockers and performed the messing-things-up role as well as anyone. Last year, alas, he showed his age. I'd like to think he was slowed by some injuries, but the reality likely is that he's on the downside and is now just a guy. But until 2013 he was a stud, IMO.


I COMPETELY AGREE!!! ... though Pickett was on the injury report some and so it could of been injuries, but we can't tell for sure from the outside.


beast  
#20 Posted : Friday, February 14, 2014 8:48:26 PM(UTC)
texaspackerbacker said: Go to Quoted Post
As they say in military intelligence, it ain't so much about intent; It's about capability. Having the big fatties doing that clogging/protecting stuff basically put all the pressure on the LBs. Matthews even when he wasn't hurt got double teamed because the damn fatties weren't capable of doing the protecting of his lanes to pass rush, and whoever played opposite of Matthews generally didn't even need to be double teamed. Similarly, on runs, the fat fools in the D-Line couldn't even eat up blockers to allow our ILBs to stop people for short or no gains. Unless you have Donterrio Poe or somebody like that, and LBs like the Niners, you are better off with a front seven that is ALL moderately capable of making plays.

I don't see what that has to do with Cover Two v Man Coverage, as the back 4 or 5 has less pressure on them either way if the front seven has decent capability.



You just blindly throwing blame around now... of course the best passer is going to get doubled team. It's call chip blocking when a TE, FB or RB chip in to help... that has NOTHING to do with the big fatties job. They're not suppose to cover the light guys until the ball is in their hand (which it wasn't when they were chip blocking Matthews). Teams scheme their offense to slow Matthews down... there really is nothing they can do about it other than get a pass rusher that's better than him to take attention off of him.


People just don't get understand or care about the dirty work inside linemen are asked to do... Sad
Rss Feed
Users browsing this topic
Guest
4 Pages123>»
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
Zero2Cool (5h) : QB Mark Sanchez joining the Bears.
Zero2Cool (8h) : double it up
Zero2Cool (8h) : I'm kidding, relax....
Zero2Cool (8h) : and now he has been cut
uffda udfa (23-Mar) : Per Schefter: Former Skins DT Ricky Jean Francois signed a one-year, $3M deal with Packers, per source.
uffda udfa (23-Mar) : Per Schefter: FormerSkins DT Ricky Jean Francois signed a one-year, $3M deal with Packers, per source.
Zero2Cool (23-Mar) : lol by .01 not what i thought
Zero2Cool (23-Mar) : he's faster than Montgomery
uffda udfa (22-Mar) : Packers re-sign Christine Michael
Smokey (22-Mar) : Easier said than fixed .
Nonstopdrivel (22-Mar) : The web version lists who started the thread; the mobile version lists who last updated it.
Nonstopdrivel (22-Mar) : Also, there's a weird disparity between the web version and online version of this site.
Nonstopdrivel (22-Mar) : ;-)
Zero2Cool (21-Mar) : Packers wanted D. Ware in 2005. Thank you Cowboys!
Zero2Cool (21-Mar) : lol Rourke
Nonstopdrivel (21-Mar) : I HATE HATE HATE the way all threads get marked as read after viewing a few of them in one session. It's obnoxious.
Smokey (21-Mar) : Check out this site, NFLdraftscout.com , a great resource site.
Smokey (20-Mar) : Jared Cook signs with Raiders .
Smokey (20-Mar) : I did watch SB 45 on YouTube the other night, very eye opening .
Smokey (20-Mar) : Watching Spring Training Baseball, Nationals vs Yankees, very interesting .
Zero2Cool (19-Mar) : B1G making some noise in that bracket
Zero2Cool (19-Mar) : The more join, the more talk, the better. including John
Zero2Cool (19-Mar) : no forum should need one person, we have others, speak up!
gbguy20 (19-Mar) : slow forum needs more uffda
Smokey (19-Mar) : There's always next year .
Smokey (18-Mar) : Virginia is still in it !
Smokey (18-Mar) : On Wisconsin
Zero2Cool (18-Mar) : Down goes Villanova!! Badgers!!!
Zero2Cool (18-Mar) : Might have went into your SPAM or JUNK folder??
yooperfan (18-Mar) : Funny I never got the invite
wpr (17-Mar) : Ignoring the Signing Bonus, Jones' base is only $725K above the vet min
Zero2Cool (16-Mar) : Not many seem interested, but I did invite those from last year.
dhazer (16-Mar) : no bracket challenge Kevin?
Zero2Cool (16-Mar) : Blame twitter on the /home page here lol
Zero2Cool (16-Mar) : Datone Jones Vikings deal $3.75M, $1.6M signing bonus, $1.5M salary, $31,250 per game active, $150K workout bonus, $1.25M sacks-pt incentive
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
18m / Green Bay Packers Talk / buckeyepackfan

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / DoddPower

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / PackFanWithTwins

18h / Green Bay Packers Talk / sschind

19h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

23-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / PackFanWithTwins

23-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

23-Mar / Announcements / Zero2Cool

23-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

23-Mar / Fantasy Sports Talk / wpr

23-Mar / Fantasy Sports Talk / Smokey

22-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Nonstopdrivel

22-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

20-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / gbguy20

17-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / yooperfan

Headlines