Raji's Season Might Be In Trouble

[texaspackerbacker]

The old Okie 5-2 and the 3-4 are essentially the same. The major difference is whether or not your outside guys are in two-point - standing up or down in 3 or 4 point stances. Coaches always used to teach linemen/pass rushers to get down in the 3 or 4 point. I think the evolution of the way they call (or don't call) holding as well as cut blocks has made the down way less advantageous, and the two point makes sprinting around the corner easier. The 2-4-5 is basically a 4-2-5 with stand up pass rushers.

Not to turn this into another pro or con thread about Capers, but I much prefer all the creative pass rushing and run blitzes over the old plain vanilla way.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Defensive line is very hard for the fans to evaluate, especially when they are playing the 3-4. It is funny to me that so many people are sure that Raji is not much better than the guys on the bench, that TT gave Raji a big contract out of stupidity. TT only gives vets a contract when he thinks they are special.

[Rutnstrut]

Defensive line is very hard for the fans to evaluate, especially when they are playing the 3-4. It is funny to me that so many people are sure that Raji is not much better than the guys on the bench, that TT gave Raji a big contract out of stupidity. TT only gives vets a contract when he thinks they are special.

Or when he doesn't want to give up on one of his pets.

[pbmax]

Or when he doesn't want to give up on one of his pets.

Mind reading is a terrible analytical tool.

[Patler]

It is funny to me that so many people are sure that Raji is not much better than the guys on the bench, that TT gave Raji a big contract out of stupidity. TT only gives vets a contract when he thinks they are special.

What big contract? One year at $4 million max, but with only a $500,000 signing bonus and nothing else guaranteed? That wasn't much of a commitment by the Packers.

[HarveyWallbangers]

$4M isn't chump change. It's not like he got near vet minimum (Kuhn) or $4M for 2 years (Starks)

[Patler]

$4M isn't chump change. It's not like he got near vet minimum (Kuhn) or $4M for 2 years (Starks)

I think the key is the guarantee, only $500K. If he had come into camp and looked no better than last year, he might not have made the roster. They gave Starks a larger signing bonus than they gave Raji, $725K. Heck, they gave Quarless a $350K signing bonus.

The Packers committed very little to Raji.

[George Cumby]

I think the key is the guarantee, only $500K. If he had come into camp and looked no better than last year, he might not have made the roster. They gave Starks a larger signing bonus than they gave Raji, $725K. Heck, they gave Quarless a $350K signing bonus.

The Packers committed very little to Raji.

And apparently were wise in doing so.

Too bad for him and the Pack.

[Patler]

And apparently were wise in doing so.

Too bad for him and the Pack.

He will still get his salary, $3.1M because it was a football related injury during camp. Same situation as Cletidus Hunt a few years back. But they will save his weekly active roster bonus that totaled $300K. It will be interesting to see if he had a two tier salary like Cedrick Benson had, where his salary decreased when he went on IR.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I suspect Raji is a lot better than the backups, based on his distant past glories. He was out-of-position at end.

This is based on wishful thinking on my part. But sometimes wishes come true, Timmy.

[3irty1]

I disagree that Raji's injury isn't a big deal on the basis that we mostly play in the 2-4 anyways. When Dom first started using the 2-4 as an any-situation defense we'd just come off a 2009 campaign where we were the best rushing defense in the NFL by scoring and by yards but only the 28th in scoring pass defense. Among our best DL were Pickett and Jolly, both steady run stuffers plus a brand new Raji with a bright looking future. It was an unbalanced roster, much better at stopping the run than stopping the pass so the 2-4 was a way to achieve balance by putting your run stuffing personnel in a formation meant for pass defense. It was a good idea at the time and yielded phenomenal results.

As Woodson and Pickett aged, Jolly wore orange, and Raji's development stalled out it stopped being a good idea. Now its an impossible idea. Even with Raji we didn't have the beef to keep the beefy 2-4 viable this season. We now have the opposite kind of unbalanced roster that appears to have a strength in rushing the passer in guys like Daniels, Jones, Neal and Peppers. Applying the same philosophy as we did in 2010 we should be using our pass-rushing roster in run stopping formations to achieve balance. Those situations that called or a beefy 2-4 are now best filled by a lean 3-4... so we may miss our starting NT more than we thought.

[call_me_ishmael]

I disagree that Raji's injury isn't a big deal on the basis that we mostly play in the 2-4 anyways. When Dom first started using the 2-4 as an any-situation defense we'd just come off a 2009 campaign where we were the best rushing defense in the NFL by scoring and by yards but only the 28th in scoring pass defense. Among our best DL were Pickett and Jolly, both steady run stuffers plus a brand new Raji with a bright looking future. It was an unbalanced roster, much better at stopping the run than stopping the pass so the 2-4 was a way to achieve balance by putting your run stuffing personnel in a formation meant for pass defense. It was a good idea at the time and yielded phenomenal results.

As Woodson and Pickett aged, Jolly wore orange, and Raji's development stalled out it stopped being a good idea. Now its an impossible idea. Even with Raji we didn't have the beef to keep the beefy 2-4 viable this season. We now have the opposite kind of unbalanced roster that appears to have a strength in rushing the passer in guys like Daniels, Jones, Neal and Peppers. Applying the same philosophy as we did in 2010 we should be using our pass-rushing roster in run stopping formations to achieve balance. Those situations that called or a beefy 2-4 are now best filled by a lean 3-4... so we may miss our starting NT more than we thought.

Agreed. It's a pretty goofy DL to begin with. Lots of unknowns. I have a sinking feeling that it will be a disaster. I just don't see anything out of Datone Jones. I don't think Mike Daniels is suited to play end. I do like the idea of a 6'3" or 6'4" NT a lot. Hopefully what's-his-face can play well. I think they will keep 7 here because of so many unknowns. Let's hope it's not equivalent to the 2013 safety position.

[pbmax]

I place the confusion on the conundrum of pass coverage of three wides, or an athletic TE who will be split out.

The Steelers would stay base in many nickel situations versus 3 x 1 personnel because the base 3 D line could pressure and get home (including Hampton). At least one, if not two, OLBs could get home. Plus one of those OLBs and the safeties played good coverage.

For the Packers, especially absent Collins and Wood, the 2-4 is about coverage options and match ups. The pass rush, even with those guys, was still middle of the road, especially 4 on 5. You could blitz Wood to good effect. Whether by attrition or film, this became far less effective over time. Coverage by safeties got worse and pressure by the D line declined.

The new D line is longer and leaner even with Daniels starting. Daniels showed something last year and Jones has looked effective in getting pressure in this preseason.

If they can become the pass rushers their predecessors did not, then you could see more base and more D lineman (which you would hope would be better for run D). Capers might trust his coverage with base to hold IF he is generating pressure with the front 5. If not, its still going to be nickel to matchup and an unknown for run D.

But I think Capers has shown that for him 2-4 is about coverage, not pressure. Its going to take a marked difference in pressure to alter that plan.

[3irty1]

I place the confusion on the conundrum of pass coverage of three wides, or an athletic TE who will be split out.

The Steelers would stay base in many nickel situations versus 3 x 1 personnel because the base 3 D line could pressure and get home (including Hampton). At least one, if not two, OLBs could get home. Plus one of those OLBs and the safeties played good coverage.

For the Packers, especially absent Collins and Wood, the 2-4 is about coverage options and match ups. The pass rush, even with those guys, was still middle of the road, especially 4 on 5. You could blitz Wood to good effect. Whether by attrition or film, this became far less effective over time. Coverage by safeties got worse and pressure by the D line declined.

The new D line is longer and leaner even with Daniels starting. Daniels showed something last year and Jones has looked effective in getting pressure in this preseason.

If they can become the pass rushers their predecessors did not, then you could see more base and more D lineman (which you would hope would be better for run D). Capers might trust his coverage with base to hold IF he is generating pressure with the front 5. If not, its still going to be nickel to matchup and an unknown for run D.

But I think Capers has shown that for him 2-4 is about coverage, not pressure. Its going to take a marked difference in pressure to alter that plan.

The Steelers choices to me are more about defensive playcalling philosophy. Do you try to mirror whatever the offense is doing to minimize poor matchups or play the down and distance? It would seem to me the Steelers prefer the latter playing the situation rather than the offense which is why they play much more base and also much more dime than we do.

I think the beefy 2-4 wasn't about a pressure:coverage tradeoff but rather gap assignments. It was leveraging the fact that our best two defensive lineman were able two-gappers and our nickel corner could tackle like a linebacker allowing us to account for all the gaps while also giving better coverage options with Woodson in the slot.

Of course we'll still see nickel and dime in traditional nickel and dime situations but we don't have the beefy 2-gappers to keep a hat on a hat against those balanced offensive formations anymore while in nickel. Well, we could but it would mean giving snaps to Boyd, Guion, and Pennel over Daniels, Jones, Peppers, and Neal. Despite all his nicknames on this forum Capers is pretty good at getting his best guys in the place to be successful (see Woodson, Charles and Taylor, Jason). My guess is that instead of having a 2-gapping 3-4, a 2-gapping 2-4, and a 1-gapping 2-4 we'll have a 2-gapping 3-4, a 1-gapping 3-4, and a 1-gapping 2-4. Our OLB might not be the best coverage guys but at least their diversity should make zone blitzing and disguises easier than before. A safety shell you can trust would certainly go a long way.

[Freak Out]

Is there a snowballs chance in hell of TT working a trade for a DT/DL? Obviously with cut downs coming is there anyone we should target for the DL? Really worried about the loss of Raji....

[Pugger]

Is there a snowballs chance in hell of TT working a trade for a DT/DL? Obviously with cut downs coming is there anyone we should target for the DL? Really worried about the loss of Raji....

I'm hoping Boyd, Pennell and Guion can overcome the loss of Raji.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I'm hoping Boyd, Pennell and Guion can overcome the loss of Raji.

No, they won't overcome the loss of Raji. Those guys aren't as good as Raji, so the defense has been weakened. Platoons never replace a superior player, IMO.

But of course Raji wasn't going to play every down anyway, and he did have a down year in 2013.

Bill Scott said today that he thought Raji looked better in camp this summer than he's shown his whole pro career, both in terms of play and conditioning. Maybe the lack of free agency interest, plus the move to full time nose guard, lit a fire. Or maybe he would have another year like 2013. We'll never know.

I'm bummed by Raji not getting another shot this season, I had high hopes for some reason. But this is what it is to be a packer fan, this shit happens constantly.

[Pugger]

No, they won't overcome the loss of Raji. Those guys aren't as good as Raji, so the defense has been weakened. Platoons never replace a superior player, IMO.

But of course Raji wasn't going to play every down anyway, and he did have a down year in 2013.

Bill Scott said today that he thought Raji looked better in camp this summer than he's shown his whole pro career, both in terms of play and conditioning. Maybe the lack of free agency interest, plus the move to full time nose guard, lit a fire. Or maybe he would have another year like 2013. We'll never know.

I'm bummed by Raji not getting another shot this season, I had high hopes for some reason. But this is what it is to be a packer fan, this shit happens constantly.

But perhaps those 3 can soften the blow of losing Raji collectively. We all better hope so.

[Joemailman]

http://fansided.com/2014/08/25/green...-raji/#!bJ5qEw

The Green Bay Packers won’t be able to replace the production that B.J. Raji brings at nose tackle, after having lost Raji for the season thanks to a torn bicep injury, but they’ll have to find someone who comes close. Fortunately, it appears the team has plenty of options.

The first name on the list of players with a shot to take Raji’s spot on the roster is Josh Boyd, a jack-of-all-trades lineman who came to the team in the offseason from the Raiders.

Didn't TT draft that guy?

[Freak Out]

http://fansided.com/2014/08/25/green...-raji/#!bJ5qEw



Didn't TT draft that guy?

5th round pick last year. Do these wankers research at all?