I think this is the defensive alignment we'll see the Packers in more often than any other this season.

[list=1]

Raji

Pickett

Matthews III

Hawk

Bishop

Perry

Hayward

Woodson

Burnett

McMillian

[*]Williams[/list]

---

So you're thinking a permanent nickle package, but with mostly 3-4 personel?

I think that this is the year that we'll actually see a lot more 3-4 fronts. You have to cover up your weaknesses and it was quite obvious that, after all the injuries and Jenkins' departure, we had just two starting caliber D-linemen on the roster. With that solved, we should see some more base 3-4's.

I'm going to go with....

1. Pickett
2. Raji
3. Muir/Worthy 'till Hargrove and Neal come back, then the rotation gets really interesting.

4. Matthews
5. Bishop
6. Hawk
7. Perry

8. Woodson/Shields
9. Burnett
10. Peprah/Woodson
11. Williams

The real interesting thing to me in this base package is whether they try to get the most talent on the field at once, with Woodson going to safety and Shields taking over at CB or go with their best corner tandem out there.

I'm pretty certain that McMillian is at least a year away from being a starting caliber safety and that, at least this year, Peprah will have a better shot at winning the starting job than he has.

As for your package... I can't imagine that they'd go with Pickett there. It seems like a package that's designed against the pass, with the extra DB and losing a big guy. Pickett eats up some blocks but offers absolutely nothing in the pass rushing department. If I where to call that package, I'd replace him with someone like Hargrove or Neal when they come back and with Worthy to start the season. I'm far from an expert, but that looks more sensible to me.

I agree with Zero's post for the most part. I expect to see much more subpackages than base 3-4, just like last season. That is mostly a result of teams being forced to score a lot of points on the Packers which generally involves lots of passing. I think I remember Dom saying at some point his goal is to get to sub packages as quickly as possible, and I don't think that's necessarily a personnel issue.

I also agree that Worthy should take Pickett's spot. If he does it will only be a good thing for the team. The one DL spot beside Raji will be occupied by Worthy/Hargrove/Neal/Daniels whenever all those guys are available. I'm still under the impression that Mike Daniels was specifically drafted to push the pocket from the inside on passing downs. I hope these rookies adjust quickly.

Another interesting point about Zero's depth chart is the absence of Shields as the nickle back. Hayward has that potential, but I still think Shields is the nickle back, at least for most of this season. He just has too much speed and raw talent to bench. It's worth giving him a shot for a bounce back season, although perhaps it won't happen. He was undrafted for SOME reason, I suppose. Either way, I think Hayward will be a great player in the future.

I'd be surprised to see McMillian starting early, but I think it may be worth it to "throw him out there." He can't possibly be much worse than Peprah, and at least he has room to grow. He also has much more speed than any of the other options. Throw him out there early and deal with the growing pains. They moved up to get him for a reason. I've said it before, but I really don't like Charlie "The Turtle" Peprah.

I think Dom has a box of tinker toys. He is going to have a lot of fun putting together a defense taking it apart and putting new pieces in place. 1,2,3 man fronts. 3-4 LBs. 4-6 DBs. He is going move them all around.

Raji, Picket and Worthy will line up all over the place.
Perry will be up on the line and OLB. Smith and Manning will get shots at ILB.
The backfield will most often have Williams, Woodson, Shields and Burnett. Peprah, Hayward and McMillian will see a lot of time on the field.

---

If Perry rushes the passer better with his hand on the ground I hope they let him do that often. Last evening there was a Philly player on ESPN that was getting 4 or 5 sacks a year, the last 2 years he has had double digit sacks. The differnce he said was splitting him wide and putting his hand on the ground. I only caught the tail end but it sounded like he is a LB.

---

My personal opinion (with the disclaimer that more than half of you know D better than I do), Rock's makes the most sense. I think #3 will have a heavy rotation and I see Woodson moving around, maybe even more than 2 positions in '12.

---

I'm a big Pickett fan and think he's over looked by a lot of fans. But I think he's a bad fit for the 2-4 nickel defense as they ask both DT to pass rush up the field in that set and that's Picketts weakness...




I'm not sure but it would make more sense to me if they're talking about a 4-3 DE (my guess is it was DE Jason Babin). I don't think the Eagles blitzed too much last year, and the Eagles played a wide 9 set up for their DL which means they spread their DEs way far out which gives them better angles against the OT and therefor better pass rushes and pressure. The weakness of that is your spreading your DL out which means it's easier to run on, and there for your defensive guys better be able to more than hold their own in the running game... (Lions also run the wide 9 set up at times, put they've got very talented DTs to pull it off and the more pass rush helps their weakness which is their DBs.).

But I agree with the idea, Kampman rushed better with his hand down, and I didn't understand why they didn't let him put his hand down while in the 3-4. Especially in the 2-4 nickel, where the 3-4 OLBers go up to the line and basically turn into undersized stand up 4-3 DEs with the two DTs on the inside.

---

I think Pickett is a little under rated as well. He is a great run stuffer and rarely gets pushed out of the way. But he does offer little in the passing game. Still a vital player though, especially against run heavy teams.

I also didn't understand the situation with Kampman either. Caper's seems to be overly strict and confined to his scheme most of the time, even though it doesn't fully utilize some players strengths, primarily someone like Kampman. He uses exotic packages at times, but doesn't seem interested in running any type of hybrid 3-4/4-3 system. Perhaps he feels it would just be too complicated on the players or something, I don't know, but it's frustrating at times. I'm curious as to how much he's going to force the scheme on Perry or if he'll transition him more slowly and allow him to put his hand on the ground some. As you said, there's really little difference in the nickle packages for DE's other than stance and therefore technique. If someone like Perry is clearly better rushing with his hand in the ground, let him do it sometimes.

What defense alignment will we see most from the 2012 Packers defense?

I believe the Packers have been running mostly nickel packages for years with normally taking a LB off the field while in the 4-3 and taking a DL out while in the 3-4 (then moving the OLBers up to the line to act like stand up 4-3 DEs) and last year I think they used 2-4 nickel a ton.

BUT MM and Capers both said their using the 3 DL sets more often this coming year, but that doesn't mean it will be the most often used... just used more than last year.

So my guess is the most used alignment will be a nickel 2-4 package but the players will rotate in it... but more often...

And the OLBers move up close to the OL.

OLB Perry
DT Raji
DT Worthy
OLB Matthews

ILB Bishop
ILB Jones (as a coverage LB)

CB/S/LB Woodson (all depends on the game play each week as what his role is)

CB Williams
FS Burnett
SS Peprah / McMillian
CB ????? CB battle


Shields won the nickel job the Super Bowl year but seemed to get benched for Bush at times late last year. House has a TON of physical talent and Hayward has a ton of great instincts for both coverage and the ball. Honestly I could see them going with the hot hand or switching based on the match-ups.

---

Beast - I like how you have Woodson lining up at LB occasionally. I can see that happening in obvious passing downs. Woodson will take out the TE.

---