Count me in.Originally Posted by Bossman641
Count me in.
Perry has some attitude, liking his play the last 2 weeks.
All hail the Ruler of the Meadow!
Most likely he is finally healthy. Let's hope this is just the start of good things from him this year.
More of this 4-3 subterfuge, lol...
They are not running a 4-3, what you are seeing is a 3-4 Elephant.
Pete Carroll said the Seahawks run a 4-3 with 3-4 principles... define the principles however you want, at least he's telling the truth about the alignment b/c he always has 4 DL with their hand in the dirt.
What Capers has been running is an Elephant with only 3 DL having their hand in the dirt - it is a 3-4 with 4-3 principles.
At the end of the day, it comes down to gap responsibilities - and since the Packers no longer have any 2-gap DL, even when we are in a standard 3-4 alignment, it is going to be a 3-4 with 4-3 principles, i.e. each DL/LB is responsible for a gap, and staying disciplined and controlling their assigned gap is the key to winning the LOS.
The Packers managed to do that a little bit yesterday - after initially getting bitch-slapped; still, if not for Daniels, we would likely be looking at 0-2.
I still like our talent up front overall - but dunderdummy simply can't help himself. It's in his nature to abandon run defense; it's in his nature to abandon the middle of the field without any consideration for the LOS; and it's in his nature to play as small and passive as possible up front. That's who the guy is...
It's the Jets, and somehow dunderdummy and MM found a way to embarrass our team and make it a close game. The national sports talk guys are ripping the Packers today - calling us "pretenders". I don't think they understand why we're pretenders, but even the casual fan is catching on to the fact that something is wrong in Green Bay.
wist
People calling it the 4-3 are following the lead of the JS writers. A 4-3 under best describes the positioning and responsibilities of the players but a 3-4 describes the actual number of down lineman and standing linebackers. 4-3 or 3-4 Elephant communicates it although sometimes it looks like there is more than one Elephant. I hope opposing offenses have as much trouble with the vernacular as this board does.
At this point in the season a win is a win. The Jets aren't a layup, especially for us. There is a lot of room to improve and by season's end this could look like the team we hoped for. Or a decimated heap of losers. Everyone in the NFC except Carolina and Arizona has "something wrong."
70% of the Earth is covered by water. The rest is covered by Al Harris.
Funny, Pete Carroll doesn't agree with wist. http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2013/12/...-nfc-breakdown
And sbnation in same article:More generally, as Pete Carroll put it:
"Our defense is a 4-3 scheme with 3-4 personnel. It's just utilizing the special talents of our guys."
And Greg Cosell in same article:Cliff Avril and Chris Clemons can rush the passer and cover in the flats and do so from multiple angles and platforms (i.e., two- or three-point stances). Bruce Irvin can be a pass rusher one play and a run-in-coverage linebacker on the next. Their linebackers too can blitz, stop the run, cover and tackle.
And from FieldGulls, Seahawks blog:"With Irvin, a returning Chris Clemons, and newly signed Cliff Avril, the Seahawks have three players who can align anywhere in their nickel sub-package. They all have what we call "Joker" ability, the talent to line up in either three-point or two-point stances and rush from different positions and angles.
How will they get the four best rushers on the field considering only one (Michael Bennett) is really suited for the inside over a guard? Look for Cliff Avril at left end, Bennett inside over the center or a guard, Clemons at the right end and Bruce Irvin playing the "spinner" role. The "spinner" stands up and moves during the snap count, meaning he could rush from anywhere.
As for JSO being the source of the 4-3 confusion, let me introduce you to their source on the matter, McCarthy's press conferences:
GBPressGazette is on board:(On defense look) Whether three or four-man look. Lot of same concepts. Not trying to trick anybody. Just getting better at it. We practiced it in OTAs.
They are playing an under front almost all the time now, 3-4 or 4-3 personnel. Difference is who is OLB and role (backer or lineman). This is the less scheme, more personnel he was talking about.Wes Hodkiewicz @WesHod 2h
MM on 4-3: Schematically, it's a lot of the same concepts. We're not trying to trick anybody. We're utilizing personnel.
Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.
Nice informative post. I don't say this in defense of Capers. I am not trying to defend him. I want whatever is going to make the Packers a better team. If that's with Capers, fine. If it's without Capers, fine. I couldn't care less about who the coaches are, as long as they are helping the players get the job done. To that end, what are you seeing from the interior of the defensive line? Is Guion struggling because of Guion, or is he horribly miscast as a 3-4 NT? Doesn't it really challenge the linebackers if Guion can't hold the point of attack and the linebackers see more blockers in the second level?
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." -Daniel Patrick Moynihan
Packers D actually did some nice things against the run. Jets RB's averaged less than 3 YPC. Jets got 63 yards on 7 plays with Smith carrying or pitching the ball. Obviously there are some kinks to work out, but I see signs of improvement. It will be interesting to see what things look like in future weeks against QB's that aren't as mobile as Wilson and Smith.
Ring the bells that still can ring
Forget your perfect offering
There is a crack, a crack in everything
That's how the light gets in - Leonard Cohen
Frankly, if the pass rush can stay healthy, Perry providing run support is a great bonus. Rotate and be able to matchup as needed.
Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.
WTF is your point max?? The article itself says 4-3 with 3-4 personnel... They run a 4-3, we run a 3-4. They have outstanding personnel, with a lot of flexibility, but almost always have 4 down linemen, even if one of those down linemen is Irvin. We ran 4 down linemen once against Seattle; don't know how many times yesterday, but I didn't notice any.
Capers is your man, that is for sure... smallish up front, slow and uninstinctive ILB's, getting routinely gashed on the ground, unsound gap control, missed assignments over and over again - yep, Capers is ur man
wist
My point is that the Packers are running a 4-3 with 3-4 personnel. One guy is playing elephant in a two point stance. Just like Seattle does. Just as the post points out.
Its a 4-3 scheme, 4-3 techniques and 4-3 assignments. One guy in a 2 point stance.
You may not like the personnel as much, but its the same idea. BTW, its also the same idea that Belichick has been trotting out for 2 years.
Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.
It's an Elephant - an Elephant is not a 4-3. Period. Dallas ran the Elephant with Demarcus Ware standing up most of the time - they were always listed as a 3-4... where this nonsense about 3 down linemen actually being 4 came from I can't begin to fathom. 3 is actully 4, is actually 5, is actually 3... don't look now, but here comes the donut-ham-hamburger!!
Do you work for the government max?? 2+2=5 when it is handed to you by Big Brother??
As for New England - their defense has sucked for a while now... almost as epicly bad as ours.
wist
I don't know why you are trying to argue with me. Clearly your beef is with Pete Carroll who insists his 4-3 with a standing end is a 4-3 with 3-4 personnel. You must have missed the talking points email.
Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.
No scheme works without solid execution. On the other hand, there are plenty of different schemes that work with good execution.
Why we spend pages of posts about differences in schemes and what they should be called is beyond me. It may be coaching, but IMO it is poor execution that is the main problem.
The point about the 2-4 is we don't have the personnel to run it - so the coaching staff is asking them to execute an alignment for which they are completely ill-suited. That is lousy coaching.
The same applies to one of the supposed fixes dunderdummy and MM dreamed up - the 2-5. We have terrible ILB's, yet the coaching staff refuse to acknowledge that. Instead, they dream up a scheme that keeps those poor players on the field full-time. That is lousy coaching.
TT has done a horrible job of acquiring players that fit the style of play that Capers wants; and at the same time, Capers has done a terrible job of using the talent that TT has acquired. As I've been saying for a few years now - there is a complete disconnect between the GM and the coaching staff, and we can see the mess on the field.
On the other side of the ledger, in the world were 2+2=4; they've incorporated the Elephant, which for my money is a 3-4 that uses 4-3 principles; and they've been using more base 3-4, even though it is not a standard 3-4, as it uses 4-3 principles as well. So they have adjusted a little bit from last seasons endless debacles.
The Elephant is progress... a step in the right direction. Any 4-3 they throw out there is progress; and playing some actual 3-4 is progress - even though now we don't have the personnel to run a base 3-4 any longer. As long as it is a base 3-4 that uses 4-3 principles, we can get by with it, but it is not ideal given the players we have.
Now that we have 2 games under our belt to see what the dummies at 1265 have been up to this offseason, I can envision a middle of the pack finish in defense - don't think that's good enough to get past the good teams in the playoffs. Dunderdummy still wants to play as small as possible; our ILB's are still complete junk... the bottom line is, dunderdummy is still our DC - that alone is too much to overcome to get back to the SB.
wist
I live in a world where everyone accepts that 2+2=5... I gotta the memo, I just rejected it as being idiotic. The rest of you robots say, "... of course 2+2=5, and anyone who doesn't agree is a heretic".
wist
I live in the world where if the coach of the defense to which you are contrasting the object of your ire tells you its a 4-3 with 3-4 personnel and three or more people have spotted the fourth lineman in a two point stance, then you concede that the following statement:
is incorrect. Twice over.
Far more interesting is why is Capers still running a 3-4 with two standing OLBs rather than the 4-3 all the time? I presume its to get Matthews back on the LOS, but I would like to know more.
Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.
Everyone is against you. You see the light and everyone else is in the dark. Lead us to salvation!
You clearly never understood algebra.
When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro ~Hunter S.
It may be better than saying 2 + 2 = 3.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote