The Defense - Again, the Defense :(

[3irty1]

Every scheme needs a second level of linebackers at least to some degree you'll have to sink or swim with what's on the roster.

In pretty much any formation you can displace one of them by moving Clay into a second level role, but now you're building a scheme around getting your worst player in a position to sit on the bench rather than get your best player in a position to play their best. Is our ILB play so poor that its worth sacrificing a pro bowl pass rusher to mitigate? Any scheme that gets Hawk or Jones/Lattimore off the field without going into dime is basically saying yes to that question.

These questions are way above the paygrade of even the most infallible armchair coaches and GMs but I'd say no, the highest paid pass rusher in the league needs to be rushing the passer most of the time.

[pbmax]

Every scheme needs a second level of linebackers at least to some degree you'll have to sink or swim with what's on the roster.

In pretty much any formation you can displace one of them by moving Clay into a second level role, but now you're building a scheme around getting your worst player in a position to sit on the bench rather than get your best player in a position to play their best. Is our ILB play so poor that its worth sacrificing a pro bowl pass rusher to mitigate? Any scheme that gets Hawk or Jones/Lattimore off the field without going into dime is basically saying yes to that question.

These questions are way above the paygrade of even the most infallible armchair coaches and GMs but I'd say no, the highest paid pass rusher in the league needs to be rushing the passer most of the time.

And Clay hasn't been exactly reliable in the middle.

[3irty1]

What I thought for sure was coming this year was a 1-gapping 3-4 scheme. Ted loaded up on 1-gap 3-4 players, all the hints MM dropped hinted at a 1-gap 3-4 scheme, players talked about a more attacking style of defense. I'm happy with the 4-3/3-4 elephant/2-5 whatever-you-want-to-call-it as the answer, right now my issue is play calling.

Moving to a 1-gap scheme changes your whole defensive philosophy, the math up front is different. I don't care if your nickel is a 2-4, 3-3, 4-2, or 1-5, in a 1-gap front you can't trot that out against a balanced set and expect to stop the run with 7 vs 6 the way you can in a 2-gap front. On the other hand your base defense evens the math against the run and will be much better against the pass than its 2-gap counterpart. Plus with all the athletic lineman its zone-blitzing heaven. Against run-heavy offenses especially when your own offense is sucking balls we should have a front 7 more often than a front 6 so the back doesn't have a path to the secondary every play. I won't speak in absolutes, I think a Boyd-Guion 2-4 is fine once in a while as would be a base defense against a 3 WR set.

[ThunderDan]

What I thought for sure was coming this year was a 1-gapping 3-4 scheme. Ted loaded up on 1-gap 3-4 players, all the hints MM dropped hinted at a 1-gap 3-4 scheme, players talked about a more attacking style of defense. I'm happy with the 4-3/3-4 elephant/2-5 whatever-you-want-to-call-it as the answer, right now my issue is play calling.

Moving to a 1-gap scheme changes your whole defensive philosophy, the math up front is different. I don't care if your nickel is a 2-4, 3-3, 4-2, or 1-5, in a 1-gap front you can't trot that out against a balanced set and expect to stop the run with 7 vs 6 the way you can in a 2-gap front. On the other hand your base defense evens the math against the run and will be much better against the pass than its 2-gap counterpart. Plus with all the athletic lineman its zone-blitzing heaven. Against run-heavy offenses especially when your own offense is sucking balls we should have a front 7 more often than a front 6 so the back doesn't have a path to the secondary every play. I won't speak in absolutes, I think a Boyd-Guion 2-4 is fine once in a while as would be a base defense against a 3 WR set.

Good post, it was interesting to see what the NY Jets did on D. They stayed in base with 3 WR and shut Lacy down. They also allowed Jordy to go for over 200 yards. If you have a real good QB/RB combo defenses are going to have trouble defending you.

[3irty1]

Good post, it was interesting to see what the NY Jets did on D. They stayed in base with 3 WR and shut Lacy down. They also allowed Jordy to go for over 200 yards. If you have a real good QB/RB combo defenses are going to have trouble defending you.

I've seen that argument but I think that's the wrong way to look at it. Jordy was getting his yards no matter what, their boundary corners are just not good enough to stop him. The guy who had the most to gain from the Jets sitting in base was Cobb and he only gained 39 yards while being mostly covered by linebackers and safeties. Also our tight ends did nothing. They shut down a lot more than just Lacy.

[Carolina_Packer]

I've seen that argument but I think that's the wrong way to look at it. Jordy was getting his yards no matter what, their boundary corners are just not good enough to stop him. The guy who had the most to gain from the Jets sitting in base was Cobb and he only gained 39 yards while being mostly covered by linebackers and safeties. Also our tight ends did nothing. They shut down a lot more than just Lacy.

31, in some respects, would you agree that MM shut it down by not showing it? They can't defense what you don't throw at them. Only MM can explain why.

As for Cobb, it may have been you, possibly someone else, but I agree regardless, that he needs more YAC if he has a more favorable coverage matchup. I imagined that they would get even more imaginative with Cobb's touches, but so far have played it fairly straight, save for the running play I recall. How about a Percy Harvin-like jet sweet Cobb style?

[Bossman641]

31, in some respects, would you agree that MM shut it down by not showing it? They can't defense what you don't throw at them. Only MM can explain why.

As for Cobb, it may have been you, possibly someone else, but I agree regardless, that he needs more YAC if he has a more favorable coverage matchup. I imagined that they would get even more imaginative with Cobb's touches, but so far have played it fairly straight, save for the running play I recall. How about a Percy Harvin-like jet sweet Cobb style?

I'm not sure Cobb is fast enough to run sweeps. Harvin ran a 4.41 and Cobb a 4.46 but Harvin looks a hell of a lot faster. Cobb has me concerned a little bit. It feels like he has lost a bit of speed coming off his injury.

[3irty1]

31, in some respects, would you agree that MM shut it down by not showing it? They can't defense what you don't throw at them. Only MM can explain why.

As for Cobb, it may have been you, possibly someone else, but I agree regardless, that he needs more YAC if he has a more favorable coverage matchup. I imagined that they would get even more imaginative with Cobb's touches, but so far have played it fairly straight, save for the running play I recall. How about a Percy Harvin-like jet sweet Cobb style?

I've got no issues with how MM refused to run against a stacked front. A stacked front vs Aaron Rodgers is the kind of thing we've dreamed of ever since we got Lacy. But the fact that we still couldn't get much going, especially with Cobb in what would appear to be a great matchup for him shows the merit of a 1-gap defense perfectly IMO.

I think Cobb is way too slow to pull of the Harvin sweep type plays. I'd like to see Cobb outrun a linebacker before I ask him to outrun an entire defense.

[pbmax]

I've seen that argument but I think that's the wrong way to look at it. Jordy was getting his yards no matter what, their boundary corners are just not good enough to stop him. The guy who had the most to gain from the Jets sitting in base was Cobb and he only gained 39 yards while being mostly covered by linebackers and safeties. Also our tight ends did nothing. They shut down a lot more than just Lacy.

Single high safety helped his touchdown.

[gbgary]

Packers will be seeing more of a "regular" offense in the next three or four games. things should be better.

[Joemailman]

Packers will be seeing more of a "regular" offense in the next three or four games. things should be better.

With the exception of Carolina October 19, Packers may be done facing option QB's. Not sure about Bridgewater if he becomes the Vikings starter.

[gbgary]

With the exception of Carolina October 19, Packers may be done facing option QB's.

i'll be at that game. hopefully by then we'll be hitting on all cylinders.

[Freak Out]

http://www.packers.com/media-center/...2-3fb9dac5f0a3

[George Cumby]

Nice find, Freak. I've always liked his hustle and he's saying the right things.

[denverYooper]

Nice find, Freak. I've always liked his hustle and he's saying the right things.

That makes me think that part of the defensive design for this year was to feature Daniels's strengths.

[Fritz]

That makes me think that part of the defensive design for this year was to feature Daniels's strengths.

This is a big game for the whole defensive line. I am hoping Capers uses his linemen to create penetration. That could lead to some big runs on draws and big gains on screens, but may also lead to losses on runs and perhaps to turnovers on Matt Statford.

[Freak Out]

I like those kinds of video features...the game wasn't on here, and of course all the highlight reels just show Rodgers/Nelson so you miss a lot of good stuff.

[Guiness]

I like those kinds of video features...the game wasn't on here, and of course all the highlight reels just show Rodgers/Nelson so you miss a lot of good stuff.

Some good highlights of his work there. He really excels at shedding blocks, on the 2nd play they show he lines up on the inside shoulder of the guard, pushes him back, then released to the guards outside shoulder to make the tackle! He did something similar later, lining up directly over the guard, going outside then changing direction, leaving the guard blocking air while he went around his inside shoulder and hit Geno.

[Guiness]

If we're complaining about the 2-5 that gets thrown out there on occasion, imagine if Rob Ryan was the Pack's co-ordinator!



Yup, that's the vaunted 0-5-6 look, rushing 6!

[Fritz]

If we're complaining about the 2-5 that gets thrown out there on occasion, imagine if Rob Ryan was the Pack's co-ordinator!



Yup, that's the vaunted 0-5-6 look, rushing 6!

Wist is already teetering on the verge of major heart failure; if the Packers employed that look he'd have the big one and be gone. Don't let Capers unveil that look!