Ha ha! Clinton Dix!Originally Posted by Joemailman
We've hashed (Hasean'd) this out a bunch of times here, it seems but they seem to have some stability back there for the first time since Collins.
The DL + OLBs also look improved. I think the growth of a few guys, the addition of Peppers, the surprising emergence of Guion latetly, and health has helped that unit as well. So where they had leaks at all 3 levels last year, they have now have 2 of those 3 functioning competently.
When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro ~Hunter S.
I'm happy with how the DL is playing, but seeing Pickett out there for the Texans made me wonder why the Pack didn't sign him when Raji went down. He looked pretty effective, and was staying on the field a lot.
Nice to see Guin playing, and I hope he holds the fort while they find out if Pennel can take over. I just don't have much faith in a guy who's been in the league for 7 years and is just now playing well. Maybe being behind the Williams Wall prevented him from getting an opportunities he needed?
--
Imagine for a moment a world without hypothetical situations...
I'd say its a combination of both.
It's a chicken egg question.
--
Imagine for a moment a world without hypothetical situations...
it's the runs up the middle that seem to bother me the most. everything else I'm good with.
What we saw against the Bears was a microcosm of what we should have been seeing for the past 2-3 years - and with the beefier DL we had in those years we could have used them in an effective rotation depending on opponent. Against run heavy teams like SF and Minnesota? go to a heavier 3-4; against the New Englands and Denvers of the world, rotate the smaller quicker guys.
The one thing that should never be done is abandon the middle of the field and simply concede the run - which is what dunderdummy has been doing forever.
Against the Bears, dunderdummy lined up primarily in the Elephant as his base - but it was the personnel and where they were playing that made it effective. Perry was playing elephant - at least in most of the snaps I saw (I wasn't able to watch every snap unfortunately), and Matthews was playing ILB - something I've suggested several times only to have PackerRat Nation scream HERESY!!!!
I assume MM and TT sat dunderdummy down and explained the facts of defense to that idiot, and they used the bye week to adjust - should have been done 2 years ago, if not before that!!!
We'll see if this was just a 1 week fart in the wind, or if MM and TT have demanded changes and enforced the law. If the changes stick, I think we can see an improvement to at least a 10-15 defensive ranking, and that might be enough to launch us back into contender status.
I would never have thought I'd see dunderdummy forced into making the necessary adjustments, but the Chicago game has given me hope.
We'll see.
wist
I think it goes back to MM's PC after the New Orleans game. He said " We need to tackle damn ball carrier and get him on the ground". Her sounded like he had finally had enough. Hopefully he doesn't relent because it was great seeing an ILB knocking people off their feet.
I'm not sure I see your point Wist. The Packers still played primarily nickel (they played exactly 1 snap of 3-4).
There was no great change in alignment, just moving CM3 inside and playing Perry in his spot. That's still a 2-4-5. In fact; wasn't your grand point earlier this year that, even when Peppers lines up in a 3 point stance on the line, he is still just a LB and not a DL and therefore Capers is conceding the run?
Go PACK
They played one down of 3-4 according to McGinn and according to Wilde, Matthews was not playing the 4-3 Quad they displayed earlier this year (he labeled it abandoned).
You saw the 2-4-5 nickel in action all night. Daniels and a rotation of Boyd/Guion/Jones.
The only additional beef was Perry instead of Jones/Lattimore/Barrington.
Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.
So maybe it's not scheme at all, it's talent? That sounds like crazy talk.
Maybe it's not scheme or talent, but talent utilization. It seems it took them half a season to figure out that Matthews could be a better ILB than LBJ (Lattimore/Barrington/Jones).
Hopefully if they stay with CM3 at ILB, it won't present a fix one thing, break another type situation. That said, fixing the run defense was of highest concern. I guess they are not as concerned about the pass rush depth, and they can be creative with how they bring pressure with CM3 just from a different place on the field.
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." -Daniel Patrick Moynihan
Collingsworth said early in the game that he thought the Claymaker switch was an attempt by the Packers to get their 11 best defensive players on the field at the same time. I don't know if that was their motive, but it seemed to be the end result. I hope they continue with it and continue to perfect it.
One time Lombardi was disgusted with the team in practice and told them they were going to have to start with the basics. He held up a ball and said: "This is a football." McGee immediately called out, "Stop, coach, you're going too fast," and that gave everyone a laugh.
John Maxymuk, Packers By The Numbers
I think it was more desperation at 'backer than an ideal starting 11, but the calculus involved, Perry starting at OLB instead of Lattimore/Barrington at ILB probably makes it their best 11.
JSO's story said it was Capers idea, and Wilde said they had practiced this in camp. Which means another midseason change for McCarthy after giving the original plan a good 8 games to straighten itself out.
Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.
It really makes sense. Perry can hold point on the strong side, Peppers ain't no slouch on the other side, Captain Steady Eddie in the middle next to arguably one of the best defenders in the league.
It's talent and scheme - that's the point!! And it's what I've been saying all along.
I find it amazing how some of you guys try to spin this stuff - Max
Dunderdummy did play some 2-4 - note: SOME 2-4, not 24/7 2-4; and then he played it with more size and athleticism on the field, and players positioned better (as opposed to his old formula of 2 fat guy non-pass rushers; 2 upfield wingmen who rush upfield and out of the play; and 2 substandard ILB's).
Out of what he had on the field Sunday night he added odd man rushes into it, and the results were encouraging; but on base downs, he was in the Elephant more often than not early in the game when running the ball was a legitimate threat.
Substituting Perry/Neal/DJones for one of the slug ILB's has been one of my longstanding arguments. What I saw on Sunday night was a much better thought out, and logical approach to utilizing the talent available.
I would still argue that we were better positioned last year with the players we had to be a more complete defense - but that is water under the bridge, and what we have now is what we have.
It will be interesting to see if dunderdummy is forced to keep with the changes. I would imagine the gameplan we saw on Sunday night was not of his doing, but rather the result of pressure from above.
Like I said, we'll see.
wist
Well, 2 down linemen is 2 down linemen, otherwise why have any designation at all?? Just call it a bunch of guys on defense - defense!!It's talent and scheme - that's the point!! And it's what I've been saying all along.
I find it amazing how some of you guys try to spin this stuff - Max
Dunderdummy did play some 2-4 - note: SOME 2-4, not 24/7 2-4; and then he played it with more size and athleticism on the field, and players positioned better (as opposed to his old formula of 2 fat guy non-pass rushers; 2 upfield wingmen who rush upfield and out of the play; and 2 substandard ILB's).
Sounds familiar
wist
Perhaps this is something Dom has wanted to do for a while; I'm surprised everybody is on the domderdummy wagon. I think this move was Domgenius and he should be getting a ton of credit for this. It's no secret MM doesn't exactly embrace change easily.
LIFE IS ABOUT CHAMPIONSHIPS; I JUST REALIZED THIS. The MILWAUKEE BUCKS have won the same number of championships over the past 50 years as the Green Bay Packers. Ten years from now, who will have more championships, and who will be the fart in the wind ?
I agree trading the healthy version of Perry for Lattimore/Barrinton was a talent upgrade. Not as good as a D lineman with his hand in the dirt of course, but better none-the-less ....
However, the question still being begged by this alignment: can Matthews play ILB when the 49ers send Iupati at him? McGinn noted Matthews ran around a few blocks (which he can do better than most because he might be The Flash). Baranczyk noted his footwork was all over the place (again, less of an issue if you have his takeoff speed). So an evaluation won't be finished until teams get to scout him and run right at him.
The bonus, regardless, is that he will help Hawk immensely.
Also noted by the GBPG, Capers, after having his lineman hold gaps against the Bears in the first game, had them moving and stunting this game. That helps Boyd who also has a quick takeoff.
Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
