WHAT IS YOUR VIEW OF DOM CAPERS

[mraynrand]

My view of Capers is terrible - probably because he's hidden up in the coach's box.

[pbmax]

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packe...284424981.html

The Packers played 24 snaps in the 3-4.

I believe that is very close to the number of snaps AJ Hawk played.

So against a team with a stout running game that they are willing to use liberally, Capers adjusts by putting out a stouter front more often (though not exclusively). Same as he has done against the Jets, Atlanta, the Vikings, the 49ers and Seahawks. Its almost as if he watches film, maps tendencies and adjusts accordingly. Like any sane person would.

There is nothing unsound in the design of the approach. Yes, he leverages against the pass earlier than some other DCs, but we are talking 5-7 snaps a game of difference. There is a critique of Capers and why he hasn't been more consistent and successful with the Packers.

Unsoundness and lunacy aren't it.

[Maxie the Taxi]

Hawk played 26 snaps.

[Maxie the Taxi]

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packe...284424981.html



I believe that is very close to the number of snaps AJ Hawk played.

So against a team with a stout running game that they are willing to use liberally, Capers adjusts by putting out a stouter front more often (though not exclusively). Same as he has done against the Jets, Atlanta, the Vikings, the 49ers and Seahawks. Its almost as if he watches film, maps tendencies and adjusts accordingly. Like any sane person would.

There is nothing unsound in the design of the approach. Yes, he leverages against the pass earlier than some other DCs, but we are talking 5-7 snaps a game of difference. There is a critique of Capers and why he hasn't been more consistent and successful with the Packers.

Unsoundness and lunacy aren't it.

Neither is intentional wrongdoing. There is no reason to think Capers is not trying his best to do what's necessary for the Packers to win.

[Fritz]

I give credit to dunderdummy for doing what he should have been doing for at least the 3+ years - that doesn't buy him a pass for all of the misery he is responsible for visiting upon us in that time.

As I've said for a few years now - I like the players, and think we can have at least an effective defense if they are used properly. Obviously we have not had an effective defense for the last 3+ years - and since it seems obvious to me we have a decent amount of talent, doesn't it stand to reason that our failings then would have to be dunderdummy's doing??

He is using the players the way I've stated they needed to be used, and we are realizing some success. He may not have bracketed Gronk (I don't know, I'll have to look at the game - plan to watch it with my brother tomorrow), but he's played the front 6/7 the way I've been calling for, and the results have been much, much better.

To me it's common sense - if you're more talented at DL than you are LB; and if your greatest weakness on defense is at ILB - why in heavens name would anyone design a defense to ensure that those weaknesses are on the field full-time, while the more talented players languish on the sideline?? To me, it was obvious that they needed to go to the 3-3 a long time ago.

I think your original argument was that having linebackers lining up on the line and counting them as defensive lineman was wrong because they were too light and small to do the job, and thus that alignment was not really a 3-3 or 3-4.

You've clearly backtracked from that line, so that now, when the Packer defense, piloted by Capers, gives up only 21 to the Patriots (contrary to your predictions), you claim that Capers is doing what you said he should, and that's why they played well.

You are a piece of work, dude.

[wist43]

I think your original argument was that having linebackers lining up on the line and counting them as defensive lineman was wrong because they were too light and small to do the job, and thus that alignment was not really a 3-3 or 3-4.

You've clearly backtracked from that line, so that now, when the Packer defense, piloted by Capers, gives up only 21 to the Patriots (contrary to your predictions), you claim that Capers is doing what you said he should, and that's why they played well.

You are a piece of work, dude.

Oy vey, lol...

I think you guys read every 3rd word I write, and fill the inbetweens with your own prerecordings...

I've never deviated in my contention of how these personnel should be used. Yes, the way Dom ran his 2-4, both the jumbo and the pass rush version was severely flawed, and I've pointed out why on both counts.

I've also laid out the case for why the 3-3 is vastly superior, given our personnel, and that does involve having more size and pass rush on the field simultaneously. For the longest time I've wanted to have Perry inserted as a down linemen b/c 1) he is bigger than Brad Jones, 2) I wanted him as a down linemen, not a LB b/c he wasn't natural at LB, and he's stated all along he wanted to play DL, 3) played inside the T's he gives us better gap control, and thus we are better equipped to handle the run, should the opponent decide to run it, and 4) he provided much more pass rush potential than anything that could be generated out of dunderdummy's Jumbo.

The next thing I wanted done was to have Neal at either OLB or ILB. Since I think Neal is a very good outside rusher, my preference was to have him on the outside, and use Matthews as a rover. Before we signed Peppers we would have necessarily had to play either Brad Jones, Hawk, or Lattimore somewhere, but now with Peppers - and given our personnel, it is entirely doable to craft nickel alignments that don't have either Brad Jones or Hawk on the field at all - and of course we are much the better for it.

What you are referrencing with the LB's rushing from the 2-4 is that I don't accept the argument that that alignment is in effect a 4-2 simply b/c the 2 OLB's always rush. I don't like that alignment b/c 1) it is very static and predictable, thus easy to block, 2) it ensures that Brad Jones and Hawk remain on the field, 3) it ensures that more talented players like Perry, Neal, and D. Jones are left standing on the sidelines, 4) there are fewer downlinemen firing off and taking on offensive linemen with leverage, and 5) it limits pass rush/blitz options.

The 3-3 is the cure all for all those things - and now that dunderdummy is actually running much more 3-3 and 3-4, our defense is starting to look like a legitimate NFL defense. It only took dunderdummy how many years to come around to this realization??

[ThunderDan]

I think your original argument was that having linebackers lining up on the line and counting them as defensive lineman was wrong because they were too light and small to do the job, and thus that alignment was not really a 3-3 or 3-4.

You've clearly backtracked from that line, so that now, when the Packer defense, piloted by Capers, gives up only 21 to the Patriots (contrary to your predictions), you claim that Capers is doing what you said he should, and that's why they played well.

You are a piece of work, dude.

He wouldn't even give me Peppers as OLB in the 2-4 playing on the line as a DE. Now he must have counted him as a down lineman I think for this week's game.

[wist43]

I think your original argument was that having linebackers lining up on the line and counting them as defensive lineman was wrong because they were too light and small to do the job, and thus that alignment was not really a 3-3 or 3-4.

You've clearly backtracked from that line, so that now, when the Packer defense, piloted by Capers, gives up only 21 to the Patriots (contrary to your predictions), you claim that Capers is doing what you said he should, and that's why they played well.

You are a piece of work, dude.

I would add to my above post - that my prediction of the game was predicated upon my believe that dunderdummy would be dunderdummy, i.e. that he would revert back to his 2-4, and run his keystone cops anti-coverage scheme.

He obviously ran a lot of what I've been calling for for a long time, and we held them in check and won the game. It sounds like we didn't double Gronk a lot, so if that is the case, I am quite surprised that we held him in check without doubling him. I'm going to watch the game tonight, so I'll pay close attention to how they dealt with Gronk.

The fact is - the fact that you guys can't bring yourselves to admit - is that dunderdummy is finally running the scheme I've been calling for all this time, and it's working. As much as you may hate it - the success of running the 3-3 and more 3-4 is vindicating my arguments in spades.

By the same token, the fact that you guys have argued with me every step of the way, i.e. defending dunderdummy and the 2-4 - proves that you've been wrong all along, and that your attempts to sling shit at my arguments were exactly that - shit!!

[wist43]

He wouldn't even give me Peppers as OLB in the 2-4 playing on the line as a DE. Now he must have counted him as a down lineman I think for this week's game.

Tell ya what... I'm gonna watch the game tonight - I'll note every defensive down, and give you a run down of personnel, alignment, down and distance, and result.

How's that??

[mraynrand]

Tell ya what... I'm gonna watch the game tonight - I'll note every defensive down, and give you a run down of personnel, alignment, down and distance, and result.

How's that??

[wist43]

You guys just hate that I'm right, lol...

I would expect that out of the rabble - but I expect a little more intellectual honesty out of you ayn

[mraynrand]

You guys just hate that I'm right, lol...

I would expect that out of the rabble - but I expect a little more intellectual honesty out of you ayn

You cannot be serious!

[mraynrand]

Wist, Capers adjusts. He really does. People have viewpoints that differ from you, and that's fine, but in some ways you are not arguing honestly. When presented with facts that don't fit your view, you've been changing conditions, etc., just as you did when I presented you with the exact numbers, down and distance for the 2-4 versus the 3-3. Dave, this conversation can serve no purpose anymore. Goodbye.

[3irty1]

For years I've been saying this defense would be better if they'd just stay healthy. Dom finally took my advice and look at the result. You're welcome guys.

[Cheesehead Craig]

For years I've been saying this defense would be better if they'd just stay healthy. Dom finally took my advice and look at the result. You're welcome guys.

[RashanGary]

If we win our second Super Bowl in the last 4 years with Capers lead defenses, wist will disappear for a few months, like last time, then come back calling him dunderdummy when he can't hold teams to 3 pints per game every game, every year, no matter how many injuries or circumstNces.

[Zool]

If we win our second Super Bowl in the last 4 years with Capers lead defenses, wist will disappear for a few months, like last time, then come back calling him dunderdummy when he can't hold teams to 3 pints per game every game, every year, no matter how many injuries or circumstNces.

3 pints per game would really hurt the Packers bottom line. I'd say each fan goes at least 4.5 pints per game.

[Maxie the Taxi]

3 pints per game would really hurt the Packers bottom line. I'd say each fan goes at least 4.5 pints per game.

Do you have stats to back that up? Link please!

[pbmax]

For years I've been saying this defense would be better if they'd just stay healthy. Dom finally took my advice and look at the result. You're welcome guys.

I think KFC thursday was the entire problem.

[wist43]

If we win our second Super Bowl in the last 4 years with Capers lead defenses, wist will disappear for a few months, like last time, then come back calling him dunderdummy when he can't hold teams to 3 pints per game every game, every year, no matter how many injuries or circumstNces.

Are you even 30 years old yet??

Get back to me after you have a couple of heart attacks