The Defense - Again, the Defense :(

[wist43]

Thx Boss. I was trying to remember the adjustments & you did the job listing 'em here. On pt 3, you mean Tramon covers the slot in nickel, right? that's getting to be the new move. Put your best coverman on the slot guy and eliminate the slants and sluggo's.

Wist I gotta get on your ass some. Capers isn't a ninny or a boob. He's a man trying to run a stable and he doesn't have all the horses. DC the DC did a masterful job in putting together the D gameplan for the Bears. Before we all break our arms patting ol Don on the back, it needs to be noted that we moved from 32 in the NFL vs the run to 30th. That still ain't gonna hack the program, passing league or not.

Claymat to ILB looks good, but you are still putting a guy in a position we should already have covered, but we don't. That chase ILB spot is well-suited to Clay, but you are still asking a thorobred to pull a milk wagon. Matthews is a great OLB, he will get dinged if we play him inside. Those ILB's have guys coming at them at all angles.

Sorry KY, but Dom is a ninny and a boob!!! lol...

As I said, what we saw on Sunday is in large measure a healthy dose of what I've been calling for forever...

Yes he ran some 2-4, but not that idiotic "jumbo 2-4" (not that that is an option now that they've jettisoned all the fat guys), and not in "either/or" situations. He ran the 2-4 as a subpackage, and in primarily pass-pass situations.

Given our personnel, I would still prefer running a 3-3, but given the personnel he had on the field, I view it as a gigantic step in the right direction.

In short, all dunderdummy did was utilize the personnel he has available to him much more effectively - it only took him 3 years to figure it out - or rather, it only took 3 years for MM and TT to pressure him to use them correctly. Any which way, what we saw was a flash of what our defense might could be - which is slightly better than average over the long haul, as opposed to last in run defense and getting repeatedly embarrassed.

We're going to struggle against the run to some extent - but there's no reason we can't be a top 1/2 defense, and that should be enough to give us a legitimate punchers chance.

[Bossman641]

Thx Boss. I was trying to remember the adjustments & you did the job listing 'em here. On pt 3, you mean Tramon covers the slot in nickel, right? that's getting to be the new move. Put your best coverman on the slot guy and eliminate the slants and sluggo's.

Wist I gotta get on your ass some. Capers isn't a ninny or a boob. He's a man trying to run a stable and he doesn't have all the horses. DC the DC did a masterful job in putting together the D gameplan for the Bears. Before we all break our arms patting ol Don on the back, it needs to be noted that we moved from 32 in the NFL vs the run to 30th. That still ain't gonna hack the program, passing league or not.

Claymat to ILB looks good, but you are still putting a guy in a position we should already have covered, but we don't. That chase ILB spot is well-suited to Clay, but you are still asking a thorobred to pull a milk wagon. Matthews is a great OLB, he will get dinged if we play him inside. Those ILB's have guys coming at them at all angles.

Previously, depending on whether Hayward or House were playing nickel, the slot CB would be Hayward or Williams (moves to slot when House plays).
On Sunday, Capers played Hyde as the nickel and kept Williams outside to have a better run defender in there.

[wist43]

You guys are so fickle... I suggest these things in days gone by and you literally scream heresy, and then go on to say that what Dom has been doing is the only way - if only the players would execute his brilliant gameplans!!!

'If Matthews is in the middle, who is going to rush on the outside'?? To you guys a nonstarter...

'If we're not in the 2-4, how can we possibly defend the pass'?? Any other alignment is ludicrous...

'If you remove one of the ILB's for Perry or Jones, who will cover the TE/RB'?? Nuts, insane, crazy...

'Lining up in base 3-4 against 3 wides is suicide'!!! Anyone who would suggest such a thing is a neophyte...

--------------------------------------------------------

So now dunderdummy makes some necessary, and IMO obvious, changes - and he's STILL a genius??

Good grief

[Bossman641]

You guys are so fickle... I suggest these things in days gone by and you literally scream heresy, and then go on to say that what Dom has been doing is the only way - if only the players would execute his brilliant gameplans!!!

'If Matthews is in the middle, who is going to rush on the outside'?? To you guys a nonstarter...

'If we're not in the 2-4, how can we possibly defend the pass'?? Any other alignment is ludicrous...

'If you remove one of the ILB's for Perry or Jones, who will cover the TE/RB'?? Nuts, insane, crazy...

'Lining up in base 3-4 against 3 wides is suicide'!!! Anyone who would suggest such a thing is a neophyte...

--------------------------------------------------------

So now dunderdummy makes some necessary, and IMO obvious, changes - and he's STILL a genius??

Good grief

Except they didn't go 3-4. They played 1 snap of 3-4, that's it.

They still played 2-4-5...your dreaded "Capers is a dumbass and has no interest in stopping the run" defense. You act like Capers scrapped the entire scheme and finally loaded the line up with DL when that's not what they did at all.

[wist43]

Except they didn't go 3-4. They played 1 snap of 3-4, that's it.

They still played 2-4-5...your dreaded "Capers is a dumbass and has no interest in stopping the run" defense. You act like Capers scrapped the entire scheme and finally loaded the line up with DL when that's not what they did at all.

He played SOME 2-4, but not in either/or situations - and he played an Elephant base, which is essentially a 3-4 - with I might add, personnel that I have been calling for in place of of the putrid ILB combos they've been going with for the last few years.

As I've said, you can play 2-4 once in a while as a subpackage, but I would only do it with personnel other than the way he had been running it, i.e. get one of those slug ILB's off the field, get more size into the front, and rush from everywhere/anywhere - which is what he did against the Bears.

Capers essentially did much of what I've been calling for for a long time now, substituting Elephant for the 3-4, which I don't have that much of a problem with. I do have a problem with their letting the fat guys go, and I think that will hurt us against run heavy teams, but at least what they showed against the Bears is a major step in the right direction.

[Tony Oday]

Well you are an unpaid, 72 year old, cabin living, tin hat wearing, doomsday Cultist and Dom is a Multimillionaire Coach in the NFL so yea he is a genius

[Zool]

Well you are an unpaid, 72 year old, cabin living, tin hat wearing, doomsday Cultist and Dom is a Multimillionaire Coach in the NFL so yea he is a genius

The hat is aluminum foil...thank you very much

[Tony Oday]

The hat is aluminum foil...thank you very much

lol nice. Obviously it was a joke Wist so don't get too mad!

[ThunderDan]

Interesting...

[pbmax]

Tramontana stayed outside actually. Hyde got the call as the nickel corner and played the slot. For run support and occasional assignment on Bennett.

[smuggler]

Dom looked pretty awesome for this one game. Let's see how he goes against the Eagles - a team in a groove - instead of the Bears (falling apart like Okonkwo).

[wist43]

I don't think Clay should become an ILB on a permanent basis - but I want to see it mixed up. He is a player that needs to be accounted for, so where he lines up requires adjustments by the OL in their blocking assignments. It creates opportunities for blown assignments and miscommunication by the OL.

Beyond that, of course you are getting one of the slug ILB's off the field, and replacing him with either Perry or Neal. Whether you are in a base or nickel, it gives us more size and power up front - something we have been sorely lacking, especially after ousting all the fat guys.

Given our personnel, dunderdummy needs ensure we are sound up the middle, and scheme to create mismatches along the OL - what he did against the Bears accomplished that. If he simply reverts back to his static alignments with the slug ILB's on the field 24/7, then they have learned nothing - on the other hand, if they have truly seen the light, then I think we have the makings of a functional and effective defense; maybe not a dominant one, but at least a competetive one.

[Carolina_Packer]

I don't think Clay should become an ILB on a permanent basis - but I want to see it mixed up. He is a player that needs to be accounted for, so where he lines up requires adjustments by the OL in their blocking assignments. It creates opportunities for blown assignments and miscommunication by the OL.

Beyond that, of course you are getting one of the slug ILB's off the field, and replacing him with either Perry or Neal. Whether you are in a base or nickel, it gives us more size and power up front - something we have been sorely lacking, especially after ousting all the fat guys.

Given our personnel, dunderdummy needs ensure we are sound up the middle, and scheme to create mismatches along the OL - what he did against the Bears accomplished that. If he simply reverts back to his static alignments with the slug ILB's on the field 24/7, then they have learned nothing - on the other hand, if they have truly seen the light, then I think we have the makings of a functional and effective defense; maybe not a dominant one, but at least a competetive one.

I think he's trying to get the most effective defensive players on the field at the same time, and is showing that he's willing to make adjustments not only based on personnel, but based on how certain personnel plays together; like mixing line mates in hockey, I guess.

[Maxie the Taxi]

I think he's trying to get the most effective defensive players on the field at the same time, and is showing that he's willing to make adjustments not only based on personnel, but based on how certain personnel plays together; like mixing line mates in hockey, I guess.

Get 11 of your most talented guys on the field at the same time and let them play. Substitute here and there to keep them fresh.

Wholesale substitution of situational personnel groups sounds good on paper, but I just don't think the Packers are deep enough talent-wise to pull it off. You lose cohesiveness, quality and consistency. Plus, you open yourself up to communication lapses and mistakes.

You have to fit the scheme to the talent you have, not the other way around. Schemes don't make plays, players do.

[pbmax]

Get 11 of your most talented guys on the field at the same time and let them play. Substitute here and there to keep them fresh.

Wholesale substitution of situational personnel groups sounds good on paper, but I just don't think the Packers are deep enough talent-wise to pull it off. You lose cohesiveness, quality and consistency. Plus, you open yourself up to communication lapses and mistakes.

You have to fit the scheme to the talent you have, not the other way around. Schemes don't make plays, players do.

I think they have that depth in the secondary and OLB. But there is a reason the ILBs only recently changed for the better.

[George Cumby]

Get 11 of your most talented guys on the field at the same time and let them play.

End of thread?

[Cheesehead Craig]

I don't think Clay should become an ILB on a permanent basis - but I want to see it mixed up. He is a player that needs to be accounted for, so where he lines up requires adjustments by the OL in their blocking assignments. It creates opportunities for blown assignments and miscommunication by the OL.

Beyond that, of course you are getting one of the slug ILB's off the field, and replacing him with either Perry or Neal. Whether you are in a base or nickel, it gives us more size and power up front - something we have been sorely lacking, especially after ousting all the fat guys.

Given our personnel, dunderdummy needs ensure we are sound up the middle, and scheme to create mismatches along the OL - what he did against the Bears accomplished that. If he simply reverts back to his static alignments with the slug ILB's on the field 24/7, then they have learned nothing - on the other hand, if they have truly seen the light, then I think we have the makings of a functional and effective defense; maybe not a dominant one, but at least a competetive one.

The emergence of Perry has really helped the defense. It allows a move like Matthews to the middle. I liked the Polamalu reference that Collinsworth made about Matthews in that he was all over the field and being put into positions to make plays.

Agree that I don't want him there full time, but what was done vs Chicago was a great start.

[ThunderDan]

The emergence of Perry has really helped the defense. It allows a move like Matthews to the middle. I liked the Polamalu reference that Collinsworth made about Matthews in that he was all over the field and being put into positions to make plays.

Agree that I don't want him there full time, but what was done vs Chicago was a great start.

Let him play ILB off and on the rest of the season. Look to the draft to find a replacement for next year and move Clay back outside.

[Carolina_Packer]

I'm not suggesting that what round a player is chosen in indicates how much success a player will have, but generally it can. What have the Packers acquired/kept on defense at ILB? Hawk who is solid, but not spectacular and has holes in his game. Jamari Lattimore can bring some nice game sometimes, but has about reached his ceiling. Sam Barrington is a 2nd year guy who was drafted in the 7th round and Brad Jones is a 7th rounder who started as an OLB, was moved to ILB and has had mixed results, and the Packers seem to have lost faith in him for good reason. I don't know what the GM guide to spending money on ILB's says, but you wouldn't say that what the Packers have at ILB is an overwhelming lot of players to solidify the middle of the field.

Ryan Shazier and C.J. Mosley would have looked awesome in Green and Gold, but it was not meant to be. I hope for Clay's sake that they shore up that spot in next year's draft or (dare I dream) a free agent ILB hits the market.

[Guiness]

Ryan Shazier and C.J. Mosley would have looked awesome in Green and Gold, but it was not meant to be. I hope for Clay's sake that they shore up that spot in next year's draft or (dare I dream) a free agent ILB hits the market.

I think Ha Ha has plugged a bigger hole than the one the Pack has at ILB. Not just him, but how much better Burnett has played with him there.