Packers Still Too Soft

[rbaloha1]

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/packers-still-too-soft-to-be-favorites-td9klcm-203946331.html

[pbmax]

Not buying it. In his lead paragraph he admits the shakiness of his info and say he has sources claim the head coach and GM acknowledge the perception that the team has gone soft and small.

So he is saying the team will do something about the perception? Hire a PR consultant maybe?

Finesse offense might be closer to the truth but if Holmgren called runs with a frequency like McCarthy the numbers would be similar. Its a passing team. Passing games work in cold weather unlike what every writer in this state believes (despite 20 years of contrary evidence) you can win playoff games in the cold by passing.

Adding a running game doesn't make you win because you are suddenly tough and large. It would make the offense more multi-dimensional. So better by adding ability, not by toughness or size. If size and toughness and a running game won, the Titans would have 2 Super Bowls by now. Same with the Chargers.

Funny that Bob doesn't matter the positions where the Packers have gotten bigger (RT, ILB, center, OLB) in this fun little exercise of scaring the weather vanes in his audience. To Bob the only positions that matter are TE, LT and DE/DT (Worthy and Daniels).

[rbaloha1]

Not buying it. In his lead paragraph he admits the shakiness of his info and say he has sources claim the head coach and GM acknowledge the perception that the team has gone soft and small.

So he is saying the team will do something about the perception? Hire a PR consultant maybe?

Finesse offense might be closer to the truth but if Holmgren called runs with a frequency like McCarthy the numbers would be similar. Its a passing team. Passing games work in cold weather unlike what every writer in this state believes (despite 20 years of contrary evidence) you can win playoff games in the cold by passing.

Adding a running game doesn't make you win because you are suddenly tough and large. It would make the offense more multi-dimensional. So better by adding ability, not by toughness or size. If size and toughness and a running game won, the Titans would have 2 Super Bowls by now. Same with the Chargers.

Funny that Bob doesn't matter the positions where the Packers have gotten bigger (RT, ILB, center, OLB) in this fun little exercise of scaring the weather vanes in his audience. To Bob the only positions that matter are TE, LT and DE/DT (Worthy and Daniels).

579

[woodbuck27]

Not buying it. In his lead paragraph he admits the shakiness of his info and say he has sources claim the head coach and GM acknowledge the perception that the team has gone soft and small.

So he is saying the team will do something about the perception? Hire a PR consultant maybe?

Finesse offense might be closer to the truth but if Holmgren called runs with a frequency like McCarthy the numbers would be similar. Its a passing team. Passing games work in cold weather unlike what every writer in this state believes (despite 20 years of contrary evidence) you can win playoff games in the cold by passing.

Adding a running game doesn't make you win because you are suddenly tough and large. It would make the offense more multi-dimensional. So better by adding ability, not by toughness or size. If size and toughness and a running game won, the Titans would have 2 Super Bowls by now. Same with the Chargers.

Funny that Bob doesn't matter the positions where the Packers have gotten bigger (RT, ILB, center, OLB) in this fun little exercise of scaring the weather vanes in his audience. To Bob the only positions that matter are TE, LT and DE/DT (Worthy and Daniels).

Is any of this a lie or fostering a misapplication of the TRUTH?

This:

The Packers ..."a team that ranked 27th in average weight a year ago"

Or what parts of this are not factual in terms of a direction for TT to focus on?:

" In the draft, Thompson should and probably will be looking for bigger, tougher players.

Just in the last two years, the Packers have made too many draft choices that were shorter and lighter than desired. There was a 6-2 tight end (D.J. Williams) and a 5-10½ inside linebacker (D.J. Smith) in 2011, and a 6-2½ defensive end (Worthy) and a 6-0½ defensive end-inside pass rusher (Daniels) in 2012.

One exception, perhaps two, might be acceptable, but compromising height-weight standards that often has led to the Packers' size disadvantage against the power teams.

Fortunately for Thompson, the team's primary needs - the offensive line and the defensive line - correspond to two of the strongest areas of the draft. "

GO PACK GO !

[rbaloha1]

There is a stat expert on the board that challenges McGinn's methodology -- please consult with him.

[pbmax]

His measurement and ranking by weight were highly misleading and rb is correct, that was torn apart in another thread. So Bob is misleading you there.

Also the last two drafts don't make much of an impact on McGinn's argument. Williams barely saw the field and neither did Smith. Daniels and Worthy were backups.

Plus this argument has been making the rounds since 2007 and the Giants playoff loss. Perhaps you could construct an argument about this team being small and soft, but the evidence they cite starts before 2012. Bob needs an explanation for the 2011, 2007 playoff losses as well.

[rbaloha1]

Mcginn is correct to challenge toughness. The front seven is undersized.

[rbaloha1]

His measurement and ranking by weight were highly misleading and rb is correct, that was torn apart in another thread. So Bob is misleading you there.

Also the last two drafts don't make much of an impact on McGinn's argument. Williams barely saw the field and neither did Smith. Daniels and Worthy were backups.

Plus this argument has been making the rounds since 2007 and the Giants playoff loss. Perhaps you could construct an argument about this team being small and soft, but the evidence they cite starts before 2012. Bob needs an explanation for the 2011, 2007 playoff losses as well.

Excuse me but the other poster challenging Mcginn was incorrect and lacks Mcginn's resources to make his claim.

[pbmax]

Mcginn is correct to challenge toughness. The front seven is undersized.

Undersized has nothing to do with toughness.

And the starting front seven is not undersized. The backups he cites might be. Unless you are concerned about height and length of DEs. But even with 2 inch longer arms. Raji wasn't going to stop Kapernick on that run.

[pbmax]

Excuse me but the other poster challenging Mcginn was incorrect and lacks Mcginn's resources to make his claim.

I think he made a convincing case.

[rbaloha1]

I think he made a convincing case.

Disagree.

[pbmax]

denverYoop:

Can you post the data you created when coming up with this post?


http://packerrats.com/showthread.php?25152-Dynasty&p=713259&viewfull=1#post713259

[smuggler]

I know some of the backups played soft last year. Not surprising for backups.

[wist43]

It's body type, a lack of quality depth, and the conscious decisions by Capers to put small fronts on the field.

On the OL, most of our players are in the ballpark in terms of weight... but they were selected and valued by the Packers b/c they are more mobile than they are stout. McCarthy has 3 running plays, and everyone knows what they are - student body left, right, and middle. And in pass pro, you don't need to be a killer to kick-slide and mirror.

Consider draft prospect Brennan Williams, OT, North Carolina, 6'6" 320 lbs.

He certainly has the size - but here is his write-up in ProFootballWeekly:

Downside

- Underdeveloped body - needs to get stronger
- Not explosive off the ball
- Exposed by inside counters
- Quirky, artsy personality atypical of the trenches
- Has some weight room limitations (back)

Fits the bill size wise - but in terms of how he is built, and how he plays - he is soft.

[rbaloha1]

The point is to get big and tough guys like the niners -- guys looking to pound you on every play.

Only Bishop fits that mold on defense. Jolly also possessed that temperament.

[pbmax]

I thought the idea was to get good football players. Big and tough are great accessories. How big and tough is that Giants defense? Kinda more fast and relentless than big or nasty.

That's the problem with adjective football analysis. Its an amorphous blob.

[ND72]

They are too soft, you cannot question that. The Giants and 49ers make us look like puppies.

[3irty1]

The point is to get big and tough guys like the niners -- guys looking to pound you on every play.

Only Bishop fits that mold on defense. Jolly also possessed that temperament.

I'll agree with you here. But attitude is all there is too it. McGinn's article is dogshit and so are the arguments that support it.

Over the last season the team has lacked a noticeable tone-setter on defense. A team looks like the defense and the defense looks like the middle linebacker. With Bishop off the field, most of the team's attitude goes with him. Losing Woodson to old age didn't help any either. Burnett became noticeably more active and physical last year and plays a position where he can set a tone but he'll have to take a similar step again to be considered a real body-sacraficing physical player by me. McMillian and Dezmen Moses have been that type of player so far but will need to gain experience and start producing to earn more snaps before their attitude can really affect the D.

On offense the team already has a pretty decent mean streak across their line. All they lack is consistent running back play IMO. DuJuan Harris has been nice but I wouldn't put the whole running game this season on his shoulders.

[rbaloha1]

They are too soft, you cannot question that. The Giants and 49ers make us look like puppies.

Explain that to the posters that think the current packers are nitschke like.

[smuggler]

No one in the current NFL is Nischke-like. Not even Navorro Bowman.

[pbmax]

These team Defensive Unit weights are for the year 2012 and include anyone who started 4 games for the team in that season. I took that approach because it would not limit it to full time starters (nickel personnel sometimes make starts and not just due to injury), would include key backups, would exclude those who do not see regular PT and would give the reader a solid idea of the heft that was on the field during actual game time. Once Pro Football Reference (source for all these numbers) adds snaps played to their info, an even better measure would be possible.



01. NYJ 251.18
02. SEA 250.18
03. BAL 250.07
04. ARI 249.85
05. DAL 249.53
06. BUF 248.71
07. WAS 246.45
08. KAN 246.27
09. MIA 241.69
10. STL 240.92
11. PIT 240.25
12. NYG 239.86
13. HOU 239.62
14. IND 238.62
15. GNB 238.28
16. SFO 237.92




17. SDG 237.70
18. CAR 237.31
19. OAK 237.09
20. PHI 236.40
21. DEN 236.08
22. JAX 236.00
23. MIN 234.38
24. CIN 232.17
25. NWE 229.92
26. CHI 228.50
27. TEN 228.10
28. NOR 227.36
29. DET 227.31
30. ATL 226.00
31. TAM 225.00
32. CLE 218.45

So the Packers D isn't the 27th lightest in the League. And the League Championship games featured 2 of the lightest 16 defenses in the League.

I have no stat for softness, but as far as I can tell, this adjective substituting as analysis is about as consistent and objective as "Coach didn't have the team ready to play at the beginning of the game".

Thanks to denverYooper for compiling the numbers from a query I started at Pro Football Reference.

Here is that query for the Packers: http://pfref.com/tiny/W8AXK

[rbaloha1]

These team Defensive Unit weights are for the year 2012 and include anyone who started 4 games for the team in that season. I took that approach because it would not limit it to full time starters (nickel personnel sometimes make starts and not just due to injury), would include key backups, would exclude those who do not see regular PT and would give the reader a solid idea of the heft that was on the field during actual game time. Once Pro Football Reference (source for all these numbers) adds snaps played to their info, an even better measure would be possible.



01. NYJ 251.18
02. SEA 250.18
03. BAL 250.07
04. ARI 249.85
05. DAL 249.53
06. BUF 248.71
07. WAS 246.45
08. KAN 246.27
09. MIA 241.69
10. STL 240.92
11. PIT 240.25
12. NYG 239.86
13. HOU 239.62
14. IND 238.62
15. GNB 238.28
16. SFO 237.92
17. SDG 237.70
18. CAR 237.31
19. OAK 237.09
20. PHI 236.40
21. DEN 236.08
22. JAX 236.00
23. MIN 234.38
24. CIN 232.17
25. NWE 229.92
26. CHI 228.50
27. TEN 228.10
28. NOR 227.36
29. DET 227.31
30. ATL 226.00
31. TAM 225.00
32. CLE 218.45

So the Packers D isn't the 27th lightest in the League. And the League Championship games featured 2 of the lightest 16 defenses in the League.

I have no stat for softness, but as far as I can tell, this adjective substituting as analysis is about as consistent and objective as "Coach didn't have the team ready to play at the beginning of the game".

Thanks to denverYooper for compiling the numbers from a query I started at Pro Football Reference.

Here is that query for the Packers: http://pfref.com/tiny/W8AXK

e-mail mcginn and challenge his results. just because you say so does mean it is.

imo the packers are too soft and get manhandled by teams with physical offensive lines no matter how much they weigh. jolly, bishop and perry help with standing up to the physicality of teams. tt understands what type of defensive players are needed to hold up in the trenches which is a weakness.

[Patler]

jolly, bishop and perry help with standing up to the physicality of teams.

Since two played not a single down last year, and Perry was a rookie and then gone himself after a short time, maybe all the hand-wringing over the state of the defense is not needed?

Add to that the further fact that they have a known hitter at safety who as a rookie played tentatively in 2012. IF, he matures as well, maybe the seeds are already in place for a defensive rebound. House for Williams as the starter opposite Shields might also help.

[3irty1]

These team Defensive Unit weights are for the year 2012 and include anyone who started 4 games for the team in that season. I took that approach because it would not limit it to full time starters (nickel personnel sometimes make starts and not just due to injury), would include key backups, would exclude those who do not see regular PT and would give the reader a solid idea of the heft that was on the field during actual game time. Once Pro Football Reference (source for all these numbers) adds snaps played to their info, an even better measure would be possible.



01. NYJ 251.18
02. SEA 250.18
03. BAL 250.07
04. ARI 249.85
05. DAL 249.53
06. BUF 248.71
07. WAS 246.45
08. KAN 246.27
09. MIA 241.69
10. STL 240.92
11. PIT 240.25
12. NYG 239.86
13. HOU 239.62
14. IND 238.62
15. GNB 238.28
16. SFO 237.92




17. SDG 237.70
18. CAR 237.31
19. OAK 237.09
20. PHI 236.40
21. DEN 236.08
22. JAX 236.00
23. MIN 234.38
24. CIN 232.17
25. NWE 229.92
26. CHI 228.50
27. TEN 228.10
28. NOR 227.36
29. DET 227.31
30. ATL 226.00
31. TAM 225.00
32. CLE 218.45

So the Packers D isn't the 27th lightest in the League. And the League Championship games featured 2 of the lightest 16 defenses in the League.

I have no stat for softness, but as far as I can tell, this adjective substituting as analysis is about as consistent and objective as "Coach didn't have the team ready to play at the beginning of the game".

Thanks to denverYooper for compiling the numbers from a query I started at Pro Football Reference.

Here is that query for the Packers: http://pfref.com/tiny/W8AXK

Phenomenal post

[rbaloha1]

Since two played not a single down last year, and Perry was a rookie and then gone himself after a short time, maybe all the hand-wringing over the state of the defense is not needed?

Add to that the further fact that they have a known hitter at safety who as a rookie played tentatively in 2012. IF, he matures as well, maybe the seeds are already in place for a defensive rebound. House for Williams as the starter opposite Shields might also help.

remains speculation since we have not seen them as a unit. mm loves competition and tt needs to deliver more defensive players that match desmond bishop type mentality with production and experience against newer offenses. these players exist.

[rbaloha1]

Phenomenal post

Put your name to it and e-mail Mcginn. Then post Mcginn's response.

[pbmax]

I did email him originally and heard nothing back. But I don't need to hear from him to know measuring weight of the defense is problematic and will vary a LOT depending on how you choose players.

I also know that heavy players can be weak and lighter players can be strong. There are limits to what a 240 lb LB can do versus a 260 lb LB, but its not as simple as the 240 guy is weak and soft and the 260 guy is a monster. The Jets defense was terrible last year and they were quite heavy.

That is why citing the 27th weight ranking is terrible analysis. Not only doesn't he reveal his method, he puts it in no context. Its also terrible analysis to look at two drafts (one for pass rushers) and say the Packers have gone undersized. Its sub-intelligent, but it is what makes McGinn a successful reporter. He has a story (Packers are soft) and he is flogging it for all its worth. Everyone saw the Vikings and 49er games and is willing to believe it. And ANY info that affirms that belief is immediately accepted and any contrary info is waved away like a mosquito.

And no one wonders about the inconsistency. The 49ers are tough and presumably huge. Except they are not heavy at all and the Seahawks tore them apart at the end of the season. So are the Seahawks the best team in the NFC if they can be huge, out-physical the 49ers and win? I am sure the only reason we don't know that for certain is that they didn't make it into the NFC Championship Game and show us. Who beat them by the way? The light in the pants Falcons defense. You know who else stopped the physical and intimidating Seahawks? The soft as a baby's bottom Packers D.

Soft and small as a starting point to determine if there is a physical reason for the Packers terrible performance against the 49ers and the first two Vikings games? Makes perfect sense. Solution to problem to draft bigger, taller and heavier guys than are already on roster? Not even close. The guy who got beaten around the most in the 49ers game was Raji and he is the second biggest guy out there.

[pbmax]

Two notes:

1. Pickett is listed at 310 lbs. Which is a lie wrapped up in a strip of bacon. And would be the pefect explanation for the Jets ranking so high.

2. We should weight that list by number of games started when we calculate it next. Worthy started four games but his heft counts as much as Raji's in the current chart.

[rbaloha1]

I did email him originally and heard nothing back. But I don't need to hear from him to know measuring weight of the defense is problematic and will vary a LOT depending on how you choose players.

I also know that heavy players can be weak and lighter players can be strong. There are limits to what a 240 lb LB can do versus a 260 lb LB, but its not as simple as the 240 guy is weak and soft and the 260 guy is a monster. The Jets defense was terrible last year and they were quite heavy.

That is why citing the 27th weight ranking is terrible analysis. Not only doesn't he reveal his method, he puts it in no context. Its also terrible analysis to look at two drafts (one for pass rushers) and say the Packers have gone undersized. Its sub-intelligent, but it is what makes McGinn a successful reporter. He has a story (Packers are soft) and he is flogging it for all its worth. Everyone saw the Vikings and 49er games and is willing to believe it. And ANY info that affirms that belief is immediately accepted and any contrary info is waved away like a mosquito.

And no one wonders about the inconsistency. The 49ers are tough and presumably huge. Except they are not heavy at all and the Seahawks tore them apart at the end of the season. So are the Seahawks the best team in the NFC if they can be huge, out-physical the 49ers and win? I am sure the only reason we don't know that for certain is that they didn't make it into the NFC Championship Game and show us. Who beat them by the way? The light in the pants Falcons defense. You know who else stopped the physical and intimidating Seahawks? The soft as a baby's bottom Packers D.

Soft and small as a starting point to determine if there is a physical reason for the Packers terrible performance against the 49ers and the first two Vikings games? Makes perfect sense. Solution to problem to draft bigger, taller and heavier guys than are already on roster? Not even close. The guy who got beaten around the most in the 49ers game was Raji and he is the second biggest guy out there.

prove it. send it again. i shall follow-up and make sure he responds.

[rbaloha1]

you keep taking stuff so literally. its about match ups against certain units.

honestly i do not know what you are watching -- thank goodness mm is not buying your mindset.

[pbmax]

you keep taking stuff so literally. its about match ups against certain units.

honestly i do not know what you are watching -- thank goodness mm is not buying your mindset.

Now this I can agree with. It is about matchups. And schemes I would add.

But MM doesn't think his team was soft either

[rbaloha1]

Now this I can agree with. It is about matchups. And schemes I would add.

But MM doesn't think his team was soft either

what coach admits to that? why is the question being asked? does anyone pose the same questions to the niners or ravens?

what does mm say behind close doors? why did mm force the defensive staff to tamu?

the draft will answer numerous questions along with the preseason and the niner opener.

[Patler]

remains speculation since we have not seen them as a unit. mm loves competition and tt needs to deliver more defensive players that match desmond bishop type mentality with production and experience against newer offenses. these players exist.

It is less speculative to discuss the impact of players we have seen in the NFL and who are under contract to the Packers than it is to worry about players who have never played a down in the NFL and who may not be available to the Packers anyway.

I wasn't suggesting that the Packers shouldn't draft for defense, ideally every draft will have a mix of O & D. But for next year, I won't put a lot of my hopes on the rookies anyway, no matter who they are.

[rbaloha1]

It is less speculative to discuss the impact of players we have seen in the NFL and who are under contract to the Packers than it is to worry about players who have never played a down in the NFL and who may not be available to the Packers anyway.

I wasn't suggesting that the Packers shouldn't draft for defense, ideally every draft will have a mix of O & D. But for next year, I won't put a lot of my hopes on the rookies anyway, no matter who they are.

tracey hayward.

did tt screw-up last year by drafting 6 defensive players in a row last year? did tt actually pick the best player available?

[rbaloha1]

It is less speculative to discuss the impact of players we have seen in the NFL and who are under contract to the Packers than it is to worry about players who have never played a down in the NFL and who may not be available to the Packers anyway.

I wasn't suggesting that the Packers shouldn't draft for defense, ideally every draft will have a mix of O & D. But for next year, I won't put a lot of my hopes on the rookies anyway, no matter who they are.

did tt screw up by not securing canty or the 2 niner d-linemen available in free agency?

[Cheesehead Craig]

did tt screw up by not securing canty or the 2 niner d-linemen available in free agency?

Back to Kim Kardashian, did she get pregnant by screwing Canty or the 2 niner DL available in free agency?

[rbaloha1]

Back to Kim Kardashian, did she get pregnant by screwing Canty or the 2 niner DL available in free agency?

nah a rapper who temporarily ran off.

[rbaloha1]

Back to Kim Kardashian, did she get pregnant by screwing Canty or the 2 niner DL available in free agency?

nice redirecting. check out tmz for updates.

[Patler]

did tt screw up by not securing canty or the 2 niner d-linemen available in free agency?

Several different reporters reported that Canty was not cleared by the Packers medical staff. I expect TT to rely on them for those things, so as to Canty my opinion is unequivocally "No", not a mistake by TT if the med staff failed Canty.

As to any others, I don't know what they signed for or what it would have taken to get them to GB. Take McLendon as an example. Obviously the Steelers would have matched anything up to what they signed him for, maybe even a little more. Not sure he is proven enough to risk more than what the Steelers are, so I don't think that was a mistake.

I don't really have much of an opinion about FA "mistakes", or what they should have done, until I see what they do with the cap space when all is done.

[rbaloha1]

Several different reporters reported that Canty was not cleared by the Packers medical staff. I expect TT to rely on them for those things, so as to Canty my opinion is unequivocally "No", not a mistake by TT if the med staff failed Canty.

As to any others, I don't know what they signed for or what it would have taken to get them to GB. Take McLendon as an example. Obviously the Steelers would have matched anything up to what they signed him for, maybe even a little more. Not sure he is proven enough to risk more than what the Steelers are, so I don't think that was a mistake.

I don't really have much of an opinion about FA "mistakes", or what they should have done, until I see what they do with the cap space when all is done.

demonstrates what the packers desire. the te signing adds to the physicalness of the o-line.

[Patler]

tracey hayward.

did tt screw-up last year by drafting 6 defensive players in a row last year? did tt actually pick the best player available?

Do you mean Casey Hayward? Sure, fantastic for a rookie. You could also mention Matthews as a rookie. That doesn't change my expectations for rookies generally. Nick Collins started as a rookie, but wasn't an answer to defense shortcomings for a couple years. I have more hope for guys like Perry, House, McMillan, Manning and Moses to step up and make a difference than I have for the 2013 rookies to. It's an added bonus when a rookie does.

[Patler]

demonstrates what the packers desire. the te signing adds to the physicalness of the o-line.

If he makes the team, which I expect he will.
But that isn't what you asked. You asked if TT made mistakes by not signing specific players, and that is what I answered.

[rbaloha1]

If he makes the team, which I expect he will.
But that isn't what you asked. You asked if TT made mistakes by not signing specific players, and that is what I answered.

you failed to answer questions about last years draft and why mm demanded his coaches go to tamu.

[pbmax]

1. Interest in D lineman can not only be driven by the soft (headed?) and small (minded?) critique. As you yourself pointed out (I think it was you), the Packers have 5 DL who will be FAs next year. A restocking of some sort will need to happen over the next year + a couple of months regardless of soft and small. It also gives you another reason why McGinn's report about Thompson and McCarthy being "aware" of a perception and prepared to address a particular position group does not mean they agree with soft&small.

2. If McCarthy would never admit to soft, how do you (rb) know he doesn't agree with me?

3. Casey Hayward. And we are not criticizing Thompson's draft because virtually the entire board wanted defense, defense, defense. But that focus and in particular the demand for more pass rush, is precisely the basis for McGinn's small critique.

4. Addendum to my point about match ups and scheme. The execution of a scheme, is what I should have written. I don't think any particular alignment is the issue here. Its the execution of an assignment by a player who in most other circumstances, is being asked to be aggressive.

[rbaloha1]

1. Interest in D lineman can not only be driven by the soft (headed?) and small (minded?) critique. As you yourself pointed out, the Packers have 5 DL who will be FAs next year. A restocking of some sort will need to happen over the next year + a couple of months regardless of soft and small. It also gives you another reason why McGinn's report about Thompson and McCarthy being "aware" of a perception and prepared to address a particular position group does not mean they agree with soft&small.

2. If McCarthy would never admit to soft, how do you (rb) know he doesn't agree with me?

3. Casey Hayward.

4. Addendum to my point about match ups and scheme. The execution of scheme, is what I should have written. I don't think any particular alignment is the issue here. Its the execution of an assignment by a player who in most other circumstances, is being asked to be aggressive.

1. jumbling of words -- unable to decipher. Bottom Line -- the packers d-line is not equipped to stop newer offenses.

2. irrelevant due to typical circular logic

3. okay casey -- big deal

4. do not know what you are watching? WHY WERE COACHES AT TAMU?


P.S. When are you e-mailing Mcginn with your findings attempting to debunk his findings with your partners in crime?

[pbmax]

1. jumbling of words -- unable to decipher. Bottom Line -- the packers d-line is not equipped to stop newer offenses.

2. irrelevant due to typical circular logic

3. okay casey -- big deal

4. do not know what you are watching? WHY WERE COACHES AT TAMU?


P.S. When are you e-mailing Mcginn with your findings attempting to debunk his findings with your partners in crime?

Was kind of a word salad, wasn't it? Let's try again.

Forget soft-n-small for a moment and look at the roster: 7 DL lineman under normal not future contract. One is unlikely to see significant playing time next year (Worthy). One is a pass rush specialist in Daniels. The other five are each FAs in some form or fashion after this year.

Even if I think the line performed at a Pro Bowl level last year, they need a D lineman or two this year and next. So I would expect DL to appear under needs for the Packers for this draft from the contract length facts alone, regardless of performance.

This revelation squares McGinn's circle of logic in his column. He said T2 and M3 were aware of the perception of sosmall. He also said the duo were prepared to address it. But nowhere does McGinn say directly that they want D line because they BELIEVE they are softall. They might simply know they need more of them. And soon.

[pbmax]

2. irrelevant due to typical circular logic



That was your logic my man, not mine. You claim you are glad mm doesn't agree with me. I have his public statement. You have squadoosh.

[Patler]

tracey hayward.

did tt screw-up last year by drafting 6 defensive players in a row last year? did tt actually pick the best player available?


you failed to answer questions about last years draft and why mm demanded his coaches go to tamu.

Meant to do it separately but got a phone call. As an aside, what does that have to do with your non sequitur re:the TE?

As to last years draft, why would it be a mistake to draft 6 D? Just because I said "ideally" it will have a mix?

Drafting 6 D in a row does not violate BPA for several reasons:

1. - Most often there will be several similarly ranked players available when its your turn. Picking the one that best matches your need does not violate BPA. Following BPA doesn't negate the opportunity to pick for need.

2. - Several times it seems that TT saw a BPA on the board who stood out in his rankings and who was a defensive player. But it wasn't TT's turn yet, so he traded up to get him. Trading up supports the BPA philosophy, because it presupposes that you see a BPA that stands out from the rest, and you are willing to give up something to get him. It assumes he is such a BPA that he won't last until your turn, and there are not other equally talented players available that will satisfy you.

I'm not sure what sending the coaches on sabbatical has to do with a discussion about whether or not the team is soft and/or the draft vs. players on the roster to effect change; so I won't guess about what you expect me to comment on. Besides, that question wasn't asked in response to any of my comments anyway, was it?

Or, maybe your point is that the coaches went to learn how to make the players less soft and/or bigger?

[rbaloha1]

Was kind of a word salad, wasn't it? Let's try again.

Forget soft-n-small for a moment and look at the roster: 7 DL lineman under normal not future contract. One is unlikely to see significant playing time next year (Worthy). One is a pass rush specialist in Daniels. The other five are each FAs in some form or fashion after this year.

Even if I think the line performed at a Pro Bowl level last year, they need a D lineman or two this year and next. So I would expect DL to appear under needs for the Packers for this draft from the contract length facts alone, regardless of performance.

This revelation squares McGinn's circle of logic in his column. He said T2 and M3 were aware of the perception of sosmall. He also said the duo were prepared to address it. But nowhere does McGinn say directly that they want D line because they BELIEVE they are softall. They might simply know they need more of them. And soon.

I AM STILL WAITING FOR YOUR E-MAIL TO MCGINN AND A SANTIZED EXPLANATIOION OF WHY MM FORCED CAPERS AND STAFF FO TO TAMU ESPECIALLY SINCE YOUR ANALYSIS SAYS THE SCHEME IS FINE?

[pbmax]

I AM STILL WAITING FOR YOUR E-MAIL TO MCGINN AND A SANTIZED EXPLANATIOION OF WHY MM FORCED CAPERS AND STAFF FO TO TAMU ESPECIALLY SINCE YOUR ANALYSIS SAYS THE SCHEME IS FINE?

I was wondering about that. How will you "ensure" McGinn responds this time as you claimed you would earlier?

Going to TAMU to learn about an offensive scheme doesn't mean that Capers will alter his. It could alter his practice time and focus. There are a limited number of hours of practice and only 4 teams are seriously running pistol and read option. There still must be time to learn the base defense.

It could alter keys for players to read. It could alter the counters the players are warned to expect. It could alter the keys Hawk and Burnett read to re-align the defense at the LOS.

Or it could fundamentally alter the scheme the Packers employ versus the 49ers.

But that was not my point. Every scheme has strengths and weaknesses, even ones focused on balance. The far more important factor is how the players execute the scheme no matter what schematic choice the DC makes. My point wasn't that Capes scheme was perfect. It was that the execution of that scheme was worse than any alignment or personnel choices they made. It made the difference against Peterson, it will make a difference against CK.

[Patler]

In 2010, Raji+Pickett+Green was considered huge, even too big for what was desirable for a 3-4 line. Now, Raji+Pickett+Wilson or anyone else is considered too small.

It's not the size of the dog in the fight, its the size of the fight in the dog. Writers want to focus on height, weight, arm length, hand size and think that a half-inch here or there makes a huge difference. I think they focus on the wrong things.

[rbaloha1]

I was wondering about that. How will you "ensure" McGinn responds this time as you claimed you would earlier?

Going to TAMU to learn about an offensive scheme doesn't mean that Capers will alter his. It could alter his practice time and focus. There are a limited number of hours of practice and only 4 teams are seriously running pistol and read option. There still must be time to learn the base defense.

It could alter keys for players to read. It could alter the counters the players are warned to expect. It could alter the keys Hawk and Burnett read to re-align the defense at the LOS.

Or it could fundamentally alter the scheme the Packers employ versus the 49ers.

But that was not my point. Every scheme has strengths and weaknesses, even ones focused on balance. The far more important factor is how the players execute the scheme no matter what schematic choice the DC makes. My point wasn't that Capes scheme was perfect. It was that the execution of that scheme was worse than any alignment or personnel choices they made. It made the difference against Peterson, it will make a difference against CK.

I will get on Mcginn for a response since you are challenging his findings. Trust me -- he will find it amusing that a message board poster is capable of such claims.

Bottom Line: Capers is not equipped to handle modern offenses which is part of the problem along with personnel. This along with free agent interest demonstrate a big problem and not fixed with magic fairy dust as you like to claim.

Stay tuned for the draft.

Again, why did TT take 6 d guys with the first 6 picks last season?

[rbaloha1]

In 2010, Raji+Pickett+Green was considered huge, even too big for what was desirable for a 3-4 line. Now, Raji+Pickett+Wilson or anyone else is considered too small.

It's not the size of the dog in the fight, its the size of the fight in the dog. Writers want to focus on height, weight, arm length, hand size and think that a half-inch here or there makes a huge difference. I think they focus on the wrong things.

Keep spinning and denying.

[Patler]

Keep spinning and denying.

That certainly supports your argument that they are too small. Now I am convinced.

The only one spinning here is you, and when you have no response you reply insults.

[pbmax]

Again, why did TT take 6 d guys with the first 6 picks last season?

Because the secondary and pass rush were terrible in 2011. Neither of those two facts are true anymore, certainly not to the same degree. In fact, I think the D backfield is in great shape at corner and simply is in need of a safety to step up.

[Fritz]

1. Interest in D lineman can not only be driven by the soft (headed?) and small (minded?) critique. As you yourself pointed out (I think it was you), the Packers have 5 DL who will be FAs next year. A restocking of some sort will need to happen over the next year + a couple of months regardless of soft and small. It also gives you another reason why McGinn's report about Thompson and McCarthy being "aware" of a perception and prepared to address a particular position group does not mean they agree with soft&small.

2. If McCarthy would never admit to soft, how do you (rb) know he doesn't agree with me?

3. Casey Hayward. And we are not criticizing Thompson's draft because virtually the entire board wanted defense, defense, defense. But that focus and in particular the demand for more pass rush, is precisely the basis for McGinn's small critique.

4. Addendum to my point about match ups and scheme. The execution of a scheme, is what I should have written. I don't think any particular alignment is the issue here. Its the execution of an assignment by a player who in most other circumstances, is being asked to be aggressive.


It's the last point I find intriguing. I wonder if a scheme like Capers asks too much of many athletes. I'm amazed that we are so critical of players (I am one of those critics) when they get a stupid penalty because they're overaggressive, yet we expect them to be exactly disciplined in Capers's scheme. It must be hard to balance the need to be aggressive and violent (sack the QB! Hit the player so he remembers next time he comes into your area!) with the need to stay in your lane, not just chase the guy with the ball automatically, don't go into a gap that would lead you to the QB because it's not your gap - all of that.

I also would love to know what sources shared with McGinn the idea that MM and TT have admitted the team was too soft. Not that they wouldn't recognize this - they're not idiots - but that someone would leak that to McGinn.

[rbaloha1]

That certainly supports your argument that they are too small. Now I am convinced.

The only one spinning here is you, and when you have no response you reply insults.

No insults only the truth moron.

[rbaloha1]

It's the last point I find intriguing. I wonder if a scheme like Capers asks too much of many athletes. I'm amazed that we are so critical of players (I am one of those critics) when they get a stupid penalty because they're overaggressive, yet we expect them to be exactly disciplined in Capers's scheme. It must be hard to balance the need to be aggressive and violent (sack the QB! Hit the player so he remembers next time he comes into your area!) with the need to stay in your lane, not just chase the guy with the ball automatically, don't go into a gap that would lead you to the QB because it's not your gap - all of that.

I also would love to know what sources shared with McGinn the idea that MM and TT have admitted the team was too soft. Not that they wouldn't recognize this - they're not idiots - but that someone would leak that to McGinn.

Ask Desmond Bishop and C-Wood about the softness.

[wist43]

I think some of you guys are missing the point about what makes the Packers a soft team.

It's philosophy that leads them to acquire certain types of players on offense; and God knows what the hell they're trying to accomplish on defense, but it sure aint standing toe-to-toe with the bullies on the block.

The Packers readily admit this - they want offensive linemen that are mobile and versatile. None of our offensive linemen are good drive blockers - not one. McCarthy loves zone blocking and spreading the field; how much of our running game comes out of passing formations where all the offensive linemen are doing is inviting the DL upfieild and sealing him? McCarthy rarely calls power plays.

On defense we're soft to begin with b/c we only have one 2-gap DL and that is Pickett. Raji is not a good 2-gap player. Everybody knew that when he came out - he is actually more athletic in his lower body than he is stout, and he should be used accordingly - Capers completely misuses Raji, not to mention overuses him.

Beyond that, Capers makes us small by going to his ballyhooed 2-whatever gimmicks. It isn't that he's going to that alignment on 3rd and 13, he's going to it on 2nd and 6 - pisses me off to no end!! I offer up that example from the Seattle game - no excuse for that kind of stupidity.

We desperately need another 2-gap DL - I'm hoping for Hankins or Brandon Williams; and we need another DE. Not holding my breath on either.

[Patler]

No insults only the truth moron.

Uh huh.

[Fritz]

I think some of you guys are missing the point about what makes the Packers a soft team.

It's philosophy that leads them to acquire certain types of players on offense; and God knows what the hell they're trying to accomplish on defense, but it sure aint standing toe-to-toe with the bullies on the block.

The Packers readily admit this - they want offensive linemen that are mobile and versatile. None of our offensive linemen are good drive blockers - not one. McCarthy loves zone blocking and spreading the field; how much of our running game comes out of passing formations where all the offensive linemen are doing is inviting the DL upfieild and sealing him? McCarthy rarely calls power plays.

On defense we're soft to begin with b/c we only have one 2-gap DL and that is Pickett. Raji is not a good 2-gap player. Everybody knew that when he came out - he is actually more athletic in his lower body than he is stout, and he should be used accordingly - Capers completely misuses Raji, not to mention overuses him.

Beyond that, Capers makes us small by going to his ballyhooed 2-whatever gimmicks. It isn't that he's going to that alignment on 3rd and 13, he's going to it on 2nd and 6 - pisses me off to no end!! I offer up that example from the Seattle game - no excuse for that kind of stupidity.

We desperately need another 2-gap DL - I'm hoping for Hankins or Brandon Williams; and we need another DE. Not holding my breath on either.

Funny. I get irritated with your constant negativity, yet I agree with some of your ideas, particularly when it comes the the players you'd like to see TT take. In this case, Hankins of OSU - if that guy is the big-as-a-house and can hold his gap and get some push, then I'd be highly interested in seeing him taken.

[3irty1]

I think some of you guys are missing the point about what makes the Packers a soft team.

It's philosophy that leads them to acquire certain types of players on offense; and God knows what the hell they're trying to accomplish on defense, but it sure aint standing toe-to-toe with the bullies on the block.

The Packers readily admit this - they want offensive linemen that are mobile and versatile. None of our offensive linemen are good drive blockers - not one. McCarthy loves zone blocking and spreading the field; how much of our running game comes out of passing formations where all the offensive linemen are doing is inviting the DL upfieild and sealing him? McCarthy rarely calls power plays.

On defense we're soft to begin with b/c we only have one 2-gap DL and that is Pickett. Raji is not a good 2-gap player. Everybody knew that when he came out - he is actually more athletic in his lower body than he is stout, and he should be used accordingly - Capers completely misuses Raji, not to mention overuses him.

Beyond that, Capers makes us small by going to his ballyhooed 2-whatever gimmicks. It isn't that he's going to that alignment on 3rd and 13, he's going to it on 2nd and 6 - pisses me off to no end!! I offer up that example from the Seattle game - no excuse for that kind of stupidity.

We desperately need another 2-gap DL - I'm hoping for Hankins or Brandon Williams; and we need another DE. Not holding my breath on either.

Excelling as a 1-gap player and a 2-gap player is not mutually exclusive. While I agree that his 1-gap burst off the line is Raji's most valuable quality as a player and it goes to waste somewhat in a 2-gap scheme, you're wrong about him being a 1-gap only player. Raji can put a guy and roller sakes and drive him backwards, he plays with size, strength, and leverage to win that way as well and does so like a solid NT.

You are sensationalizing the need for 2-gap lineman. Picket is our best one but he's not our only one. Wilson has been very successful as well as exclusively a 2-gap player. I don't blame you for counting out Jolly at this point but he's another 2-gap star. That leaves just Neal and Daniels who are 3rd down players but Neal could easily be more and will have his role expanded soon.

Do you not see the fallacy in your narrative? "The scheme is lousy, the players are lousy, the lousy players are miscast for the lousy scheme." Its more sensationalizing. That's too many variables, too many moving parts to be believable. I think what's really going on here is that you don't understand the scheme and that is the foundation for your claims about the personnel. That's my honest theory anyways.

Typically high value picks are guys who exude the first step necessary to be successful in a 1-gap scheme since this is the more rare and more valuable NFL trait. If you are content to get a player limited to the role of 2-gap specialist then I'd prefer to do it in the mid or later rounds. I remember you said something once about Jesse Williams legs looking like toothpicks sticking in a potato :lol: Do you not see the same exact thing for Brandon Williams? I sure do.

[pbmax]

One gap versus two gap does not make a team soft. I understand what you are getting at, the ability to withstand a double team and an assault on the ground, but the Giants make their living one gapping and while you can run on them, no one thinks of that defense as soft. Probably because in NFL writer lexicon the Giants defense == sacks and pressure.

The problem with saying scheme and assignments make for acquiring softer players is two fold.

First, Raji is the exception. He is a player probably talented enough to do both but he is on the team because they had a rare top ten pick. That was too much talent to pass up and the pick wasn't scheme related.

Second, perhaps with the exception of Jarius Wynn the other lineman drafted before last year were specifically for a 3-4 that at least occasionally 2 gaps. Neal, Wilson and Guy. Neal's pro career makes him look like a pass rush specialist, but he was an interior lineman with Purdue and has handled double teams before (no idea if he 2 gapped in college). He might not pan out to be a 3 down player, but he wasn't drafted to be a pass rush specialist with his size and experience. Even Wynn was not just a pass rusher by body type, he was 6-3 and 275 during the draft season. A 280 DE in a 3-4 is very typical, but the Packers tend to play heavier players there.

Things got cock-eyed in 2012 with a draft specifically meant to defend against the pass defense. Worthy was taken over the guy from Penn State because of his explosiveness. But he is too large and strong to be considered only a one gap guy. Daniels, who give great effort, is probably the definition of a smaller guy making do in a poor scheme fit, though he is essentially playing a 3 tech DT in their pass rush sub package.

I agree Raji is often the odd fit here. I think he plays like he prefers to one gap and penetrate. As for 2 gap, he is too talented and big not to be able to do it, but I think he gets loose with technique and assignment. See either of the first two Vikings' games or the 49ers second game. And while I am coming closer to the idea that he is not a fit for this defense, he keeps showing us glimpses of buckling down and staying stout when needed. See for instance, the Giants playoff game in 2011 and the Vikings playoff game in 2012. My concern with Worthy is essentially the same, that he will vacillate between staying within the scheme and free lancing.

Raji held the nose down during a Super Bowl run. He can do it. Whether he chooses to, or the coaches can make him, is the $9,000,000 per year question.

Put aside fit for a minute and think about the contracts. 5 FAs here, likely that three return. They could use a NT because its likely one of Raji and Pickett leave after this year. Neither Pickett nor Raji are great fits for DE in this defense, so a DE would be good too. But if Neal stays healthy, that position might already be filled. And who knows with Jolly.

[rbaloha1]

Throwing around terminology does not solve the issue of the defensive line lining up against physical lines that run modern offenses.

2-gap, 1-gap is meaningless if you are indecisive and get crushed at the line of scrimmage. Raji's reputation of taking plays off still exists. Also fails to hold up against double teams on a consistent basis.

The packers undersized d-linemen present a problem in traditional passing situations since teams can run spread plays and crush these guys to get first downs.

Blitzing can only mask deficiencies for so long.

An overhaul is required not an avalanche of words. At least MM is taking action and not listening to Caper's b.s.

Capers is being exposed and needs to fix the problems from the first niners game.

[pbmax]

The packers undersized d-linemen present a problem in traditional passing situations since teams can run spread plays and crush these guys to get first downs.
Can you point to a team without "undersized" pass rushers on the field for pass situations? Like 260 pound Aldon Smith of the 49ers? Or 255 lb Ahmad Brooks? 270 lb Justin Smith?

The Packers roll out 260 lb Matthews, 270 lb Nick Perry, 330 lb Raji and 295 lb Mike Neal?

[rbaloha1]

Can you point to a team without "undersized" pass rushers on the field for pass situations? Like 260 pound Aldon Smith of the 49ers? Or 255 lb Ahmad Brooks? 270 lb Justin Smith?

The Packers roll out 260 lb Matthews, 270 lb Nick Perry, 330 lb Raji and 295 lb Mike Neal?

Those guys can play the run -- neal and daniels can not.

matthews also get rolled on power running plays.

hiding behind your 1-gap 2-gap stuff is meaningless when guys are getting pounded.

[rbaloha1]

btw when are you going to send mcginn your self proclaimed brilliant "analysis" challenging his softness thesis for feedback?

[pbmax]

Those guys can play the run -- neal and daniels can not.

matthews also get rolled on power running plays.

hiding behind your 1-gap 2-gap stuff is meaningless when guys are getting pounded.

rb, instead of simply throwing things up at the wall why not be more specific? wist is concerned about 1 gappers versus 2 gappers. Not 3irty1 or I.

So does being soft actually mean can't play the run? Because then we might be getting somewhere useful. But the problem isn't with Matthews, Perry or Neal in my opinion. Daniels played a lot only after there were injuries. Hard to fault the team for softsmall based on the pass rushing 6th lineman.

[pbmax]

btw when are you going to send mcginn your self proclaimed brilliant "analysis" challenging his softness thesis for feedback?

As soon as you give me a reason to believe his small claim is defensible.

[rbaloha1]

As soon as you give me a reason to believe his small claim is defensible.

you called him out on not being ranked #27.

quit being a coward.

[rbaloha1]

rb, instead of simply throwing things up at the wall why not be more specific? wist is concerned about 1 gappers versus 2 gappers. Not 3irty1 or I.

So does being soft actually mean can't play the run? Because then we might be getting somewhere useful. But the problem isn't with Matthews, Perry or Neal in my opinion. Daniels played a lot only after there were injuries. Hard to fault the team for softsmall based on the pass rushing 6th lineman.

watch tape and do not reply on wikipedia

[pbmax]

you called him out on not being ranked #27.

quit being a coward.

Rich coming from someone who wants a writer to come save his argument. Why don't you post your own work?

If you watch so much tape, post some clips. Gather some data. Do something other than complain about everyone else.

[wist43]

Excelling as a 1-gap player and a 2-gap player is not mutually exclusive. While I agree that his 1-gap burst off the line is Raji's most valuable quality as a player and it goes to waste somewhat in a 2-gap scheme, you're wrong about him being a 1-gap only player. Raji can put a guy and roller sakes and drive him backwards, he plays with size, strength, and leverage to win that way as well and does so like a solid NT.

You are sensationalizing the need for 2-gap lineman. Picket is our best one but he's not our only one. Wilson has been very successful as well as exclusively a 2-gap player. I don't blame you for counting out Jolly at this point but he's another 2-gap star. That leaves just Neal and Daniels who are 3rd down players but Neal could easily be more and will have his role expanded soon.

We need another guy who can 2-gap for the very reason that asking Raji to do that wears him down, he doesn't do it particularly well, and the constant pounding wears him down and negates his greatest strength - his explosiveness and ability to penetrate.

If I were deliberately looking for a way to neutralize Raji, I would play him exactly as Capers does.

As for Jolly, I was the his biggest cheerleader on here when he was playing. I think he's a hell of a player - but I'm not counting on him. We'll see. I hope he makes it back... he's a good kid and a good player.


Do you not see the fallacy in your narrative? "The scheme is lousy, the players are lousy, the lousy players are miscast for the lousy scheme." Its more sensationalizing. That's too many variables, too many moving parts to be believable. I think what's really going on here is that you don't understand the scheme and that is the foundation for your claims about the personnel. That's my honest theory anyways.

I haven't said the players are lousy - they're simply miscast for a traditional 3-4 b/c of what they do well, and what they don't do well; which is why I've argued that Capers should use more 4 man lines. Instead of adjusting the personnel to get more size up front, Capers goes the other way and adjusts us to be smaller - that don't cut it on 2nd and 6.

As you pointed out, Neal is looking like a different player than what we thought we were drafting - so he's not really a fit to slug it out on run downs; Worthy is a serious medical case, but he dropped a bunch of weight and went from being a potential anchor on the line, to looking like he didn't have enough sand in the bucket; Daniels was drafted as a role player; and, CJ Wilson is a below average 3-4 DE.

The 49er's have Justin Smith, we have CJ Wilson.

Add all that up - is it a surprise we have major problems in our front seven?? and that those problems are manifested on the field??


Typically high value picks are guys who exude the first step necessary to be successful in a 1-gap scheme since this is the more rare and more valuable NFL trait. If you are content to get a player limited to the role of 2-gap specialist then I'd prefer to do it in the mid or later rounds. I remember you said something once about Jesse Williams legs looking like toothpicks sticking in a potato :lol: Do you not see the same exact thing for Brandon Williams? I sure do.

I think you need glasses 3irty1... Jesse Williams is a potato with tooth picks for legs. Brandon Williams is much thicker in his legs and ankles. Jesse Williams is a good player, but for a guy carrying that much weight in his upper body, he has terribly thin legs - I'm not the only one who sees it.

[wist43]

Rich coming from someone who wants a writer to come save his argument. Why don't you post your own work?

If you watch so much tape, post some clips. Gather some data. Do something other than complain about everyone else.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XzPBUGUM7KQ

[pbmax]

video: Taxi Driver Travis Bickell Has an Inquiry

Was talking to rb, but do have question for you:

Do you think Raji wears down and then gets moved around in the run game, especially with double teams?

Because my memory tells me I have seen this early in the season and early in games. But then there are times where he doesn't get moved at all. I think its less getting worn down, which does happen of course same as all players, and more technique, attitude/preference for charging up the field.

Now its possible it has to do with the talent he is facing. He is clearly not as immovable as Pickett. But I suspect there is more going on here than just stamina.

[3irty1]

CJ Wilson has been as productive for us as the guy everyone wanted in Chris Canty?! He might not be a standout but lineman in a 2-gap scheme rarely are. Valuable guy given his paycheck IMO, another one of him is exactly what I want in this draft. We're in total agreement in John Jolly circa 2009 though. Wish we had 3 guys like that.

I'm not saying Jesse isn't a potato with toothpicks I just thought it was a funny description. Williams certainly has a barrel chest and his arms seem to be disproportionately short compared this his legs. I'm asking because I've heard people describe your Williams as top heavy.

[Fritz]

I think drafting a more traditional 2-gap nose tackle - maybe in the middling rounds? - would be good for this team, as would one more defensive end - maybe in rounds one or two or three?

[3irty1]

If I wanted to improve the defense today as much as possible and only had 1 high pick to do so I'd want an OLB. We've already got 2 high round picks but I don't care. The position is important enough to warrant injury proofing it. It would allow us to move Clay around and make him more of a centerpiece and it would allow us to always have fresh legs rushing the passer. The Giants won two superbowls that way and the Ravens just got one too. Comparatively we've not been able to get production out of anyone but Clay Matthews.

I'm secretly hoping we draft Jarvis Jones tomorrow. I think he'll fall but I wonder if he's even on the Packers draft board with his spine thing given how conservative we are with that sort of thing.

[Fritz]

If I wanted to improve the defense today as much as possible and only had 1 high pick to do so I'd want an OLB. We've already got 2 high round picks but I don't care. The position is important enough to warrant injury proofing it. It would allow us to move Clay around and make him more of a centerpiece and it would allow us to always have fresh legs rushing the passer. The Giants won two superbowls that way and the Ravens just got one too. Comparatively we've not been able to get production out of anyone but Clay Matthews.

I'm secretly hoping we draft Jarvis Jones tomorrow. I think he'll fall but I wonder if he's even on the Packers draft board with his spine thing given how conservative we are with that sort of thing.

He's one of those guys that seem like he'll go in the teens of the first round. Probably the damn Giants will get him.

[3irty1]

He's one of those guys that seem like he'll go in the teens of the first round. Probably the damn Giants will get him.

I think he could be this years Bowers. Wouldn't be shocked if he falls all the way out of the first or something because of his health thing.

[Fritz]

Really? I see this differently - he'll go in the mid to late teens or early twenties and the talking heads will crow that somebody - Giants, Bears, Queens - got a steal.

[rbaloha1]

Rich coming from someone who wants a writer to come save his argument. Why don't you post your own work?

If you watch so much tape, post some clips. Gather some data. Do something other than complain about everyone else.

You are the one calling him out -- mcginn did my research and i trust it.

You are the arrogant one calling his methodology and thesis bogus.

Evading mcginn continually demonstrates your historical nonsense.

BTW football is not moneyball which casues you problems.

[rbaloha1]

I think drafting a more traditional 2-gap nose tackle - maybe in the middling rounds? - would be good for this team, as would one more defensive end - maybe in rounds one or two or three?

Do not like read and react stuff.

Know your gap, trust your teammates and follow your keys.

Capers front seven play too tentative against the option. Stopping the dive and forcing the qb to pitch is the way to play option.

1-gap all the way.

[3irty1]

Really? I see this differently - he'll go in the mid to late teens or early twenties and the talking heads will crow that somebody - Giants, Bears, Queens - got a steal.

That spine thing seems pretty serious, I mean the only reason he ended up in Georgia was because USC didn't even clear him to play. My concerns are all medical like Bowers.

[pbmax]

Stopping the dive and forcing the qb to pitch is the way to play option.

That would be terrible advice even if the 49ers ran a triple option. Which they didn't. Which makes your advice historical.

[Upnorth]

I think he could be this years Bowers. Wouldn't be shocked if he falls all the way out of the first or something because of his health thing.

If so I hope TT trades up on day 2.

[rbaloha1]

That would be terrible advice even if the 49ers ran a triple option. Which they didn't. Which makes your advice historical.

what is your advice? its basic option whether it is triple option.

please send your vodoo analysis to mcginn so milwaukee can get a good laugh.

[pbmax]

what is your advice? its basic option whether it is triple option.

There is no pitch man in the 49ers read option as run against the Patriots. Converge on the give (Gore) means Kapernick is free to roam wide and dance with a safety. And that was one TD and one other long, comeback killing, drive sustaining play.

To play an option in most cases, you must play it honest and stick to responsibilities. No over-comitting or chasing. Inside it means you tackle the dive/give and outside it means you stick with the QB (and the pitch if its a triple option). However, as the Ravens demonstrated, CK might be dangerous enough that it might be preferable to let Gore take the ball.

Previously, we discussed why Capers would start talking to college coaches. One reason he might want to is that teams that have run read option have begin to design a triple option out of that pistol. Which would be a logical next step for the 49ers this year.

[rbaloha1]

Chris Ault the father of the pistol is a consultant next year for the niners.

Unsure where you learned about the option but my coaches always preached about stopping the dive because then you limit the option. The niners sometimes have a slot act as a pitchman or CK can drop back to pass which presents many problems. Gore averaging over 5 plus yards on simple dive plays is not the way to play the option.

The key to the option on defense is dictating where the ball goes then swarming to the ball. The problem with read and react is the offense has the upper hand in dictating where the ball goes. IMO a big no no.

I have played both styles against the option and disciplined one gap with everyone on the same page imo is the best way to play the option. Its not easy against the line like the niners so the packers better find the combination of players and schemes which is currently an issue imo.

[wist43]

Was talking to rb, but do have question for you:

Do you think Raji wears down and then gets moved around in the run game, especially with double teams?

Because my memory tells me I have seen this early in the season and early in games. But then there are times where he doesn't get moved at all. I think its less getting worn down, which does happen of course same as all players, and more technique, attitude/preference for charging up the field.

Now its possible it has to do with the talent he is facing. He is clearly not as immovable as Pickett. But I suspect there is more going on here than just stamina.

Yeah, I know you were talking to rb... I was just messin' with ya ;)

As for Raji, my preference would be to play him exclusively at 5 in a rotation, and then use him as an interior rusher in the nickel and dime. Even fresh he's not a very good 2-gap player, and I wouldn't want to play him in such a way that his greatest strength is negated - which is exactly what Capers does.

As he wears down over the course of the season, he loses his explosiveness to penetrate, and our top 10 draft pick from 4 years ago is completely neutralized. As I've said, if I were going to draw up a gameplan with the intent of neutralizing Raji, I do exactly what Capers is doing.

I don't think Capers could do a worse job of designing gameplans that seek to take advantage of the strengths of the players he's been given. If I were Raji, I wouldn't even negotiate with the Packers, I'd be counting the days until I hit FA.

[Fritz]

Yeah, I know you were talking to rb... I was just messin' with ya ;)

As for Raji, my preference would be to play him exclusively at 5 in a rotation, and then use him as an interior rusher in the nickel and dime. Even fresh he's not a very good 2-gap player, and I wouldn't want to play him in such a way that his greatest strength is negated - which is exactly what Capers does.

As he wears down over the course of the season, he loses his explosiveness to penetrate, and our top 10 draft pick from 4 years ago is completely neutralized. As I've said, if I were going to draw up a gameplan with the intent of neutralizing Raji, I do exactly what Capers is doing.

I don't think Capers could do a worse job of designing gameplans that seek to take advantage of the strengths of the players he's been given. If I were Raji, I wouldn't even negotiate with the Packers, I'd be counting the days until I hit FA.


Here's the scariest three paragraphs I've read in awhile. These come from McGinn's article this morning on what he sees as a dire need on the defensive line:

"Ryan Pickett, 33, and entering his 13th season, is nearing the end. He reported two weeks ago overweight and out of shape.

"B.J. Raji will be entering his contract year, but you sure wouldn't have known it by his conditioning. He has looked as sloppy as Pickett, and at this juncture his employment beyond this season is uncertain.

"The coaches have seen Johnny Jolly, too, and he's every bit as beefy as the others. For Jolly to have any chance to contribute after three silent seasons, he needed to report in tiptop shape so he could focus on football. That didn't happen, not by a long shot."


What the hell???

[3irty1]

Here's the scariest three paragraphs I've read in awhile. These come from McGinn's article this morning on what he sees as a dire need on the defensive line:

"Ryan Pickett, 33, and entering his 13th season, is nearing the end. He reported two weeks ago overweight and out of shape.

"B.J. Raji will be entering his contract year, but you sure wouldn't have known it by his conditioning. He has looked as sloppy as Pickett, and at this juncture his employment beyond this season is uncertain.

"The coaches have seen Johnny Jolly, too, and he's every bit as beefy as the others. For Jolly to have any chance to contribute after three silent seasons, he needed to report in tiptop shape so he could focus on football. That didn't happen, not by a long shot."


What the hell???

I wouldn't freak out just yet. McGinn has made a career of selling opinions, rumors, and the occasional quarter truth as facts. He does so by implying he has inside info but never can get quotes that say quite what he wants. Even if he was a credible journalist, there is a history of the organization feeding him shit right before the draft which appears to be a smokescreen for their real intentions.

[rbaloha1]

I wouldn't freak out just yet. McGinn has made a career of selling opinions, rumors, and the occasional quarter truth as facts. He does so by implying he has inside info but never can get quotes that say quite what he wants. Even if he was a credible journalist, there is a history of the organization feeding him shit right before the draft which appears to be a smokescreen for their real intentions.

Dude, the guy has way more cred than you. Your cronies kissing your behind to satisfy your ego does not count. Who do you think you are?

The d-line needs big time help and your continual bs does not mean there is not a problem.

[pbmax]

Chris Ault the father of the pistol is a consultant next year for the niners.

Unsure where you learned about the option but my coaches always preached about stopping the dive because then you limit the option. The niners sometimes have a slot act as a pitchman or CK can drop back to pass which presents many problems. Gore averaging over 5 plus yards on simple dive plays is not the way to play the option.

The key to the option on defense is dictating where the ball goes then swarming to the ball. The problem with read and react is the offense has the upper hand in dictating where the ball goes. IMO a big no no.

I have played both styles against the option and disciplined one gap with everyone on the same page imo is the best way to play the option. Its not easy against the line like the niners so the packers better find the combination of players and schemes which is currently an issue imo.

If the threats are not equal, then I agree about dictating or forcing the offense to the choice you prefer. But Kapernick is the far scarier option. Gore averaging 5 per carry nearly lost the 49ers the game versus the Falcons and it won the game for the Ravens. Each team refused to let CK outside with the ball.

[rbaloha1]

If the threats are not equal, then I agree about dictating or forcing the offense to the choice you prefer. But Kapernick is the far scarier option. Gore averaging 5 per carry nearly lost the 49ers the game versus the Falcons and it won the game for the Ravens. Each team refused to let CK outside with the ball.

I am not going to respond to your crap anymore since you do not understand the number one thing to control any option IS CONTROLLING THE DIVE. Your stuff just shows you never put on the jock strap.

Aloha

[Patler]

I wouldn't freak out just yet. McGinn has made a career of selling opinions, rumors, and the occasional quarter truth as facts. He does so by implying he has inside info but never can get quotes that say quite what he wants. Even if he was a credible journalist, there is a history of the organization feeding him shit right before the draft which appears to be a smokescreen for their real intentions.

Yup, and he sucks in readers who bow to everything he writes rather than discerning what is factually based and what is just idle gossip.

[rbaloha1]

Yup, and he sucks in readers who bow to everything he writes rather than discerning what is factually based and what is just idle gossip.

bmcginn@journalsentinel.com

[pbmax]

Dude, the guy has way more cred than you. Your cronies kissing your behind to satisfy your ego does not count. Who do you think you are?

The d-line needs big time help and your continual bs does not mean there is not a problem.

No one denies there is still a problem in the front seven and its now concentrated on run D. But McGinn's smallsoft suffers from terrible data (players who started on the D line, base or pass rush are among the bigger lines in the League not the smallest-the smallness is in the backend and backups), the Packers might have too many short DL but they were brought in specifically for pass rush, and last is that McGinn's point is either vanishingly small (Pack D soft against Vikes and 49ers) or ridiculously broad (Packers played less than inspired against the run for 2 years, problem is players, scheme and D Coord).

To me, the varied results suggest the problem is far more nuanced than "they are weak, small and soft and must all go for larger, tougher, harder players". Because everything is a tradeoff in the League and the number of times you get a player who can do it all (top of first round pick plus mistakes that fall far lower than they should have) is usually once or twice per year.

And that means you need to target a specific remedy that can be accomplished without trading into the Top 10 of a draft.

[rbaloha1]

bmcginn@journalsentinel.com

[3irty1]

Yup, and he sucks in readers who bow to everything he writes rather than discerning what is factually based and what is just idle gossip.

I think you're just trying to earn an Aloha like pbmax. Lucky bastard.

[rbaloha1]

I think you're just trying to earn an Aloha like pbmax. Lucky bastard.

bmcginn@journalsentinel.com

[pbmax]

I am not going to respond to your crap anymore since you do not understand the number one thing to control any option IS CONTROLLING THE DIVE. Your stuff just shows you never put on the jock strap.

Aloha

You have me there. I did not wear just a jock strap, I wore the entire cup. I played DE in a 4-4 in high school. I had the QB in most cases and if I tried to stop the dive the coach would have grabbed my face mask, thrown a basketball at me and called me homophobic slurs :)

I think you do not understand the point of the option the Packers face. The offense does not block one player and they present the QB as a viable running threat. That changes the usual calculus of 11 defenders versus 10 offensive players back to the Offense's advantage. If the unblocked player chooses poorly, then there is an empty gap to run through as the QB chooses to hand or keep the ball to the player in a position to hit that hole. And that is how Gore gains 5 yards a pop on a simple, used to be ineffective dive play against the Falcons and Ravens.

Stopping the dive play is the first thing you do only because its the first option presented. Or you are an interior defender.

[rbaloha1]

bmcginn@journalsentinel.com

[pbmax]

Whoa, whoa, whoa. Inside this article: http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/packers-badly-in-need-of-linemen-md9mp7g-204614021.html

is this quote from Bob McGinn:


They've been decimated by injury in two of the last three years, and it was only because of the collective skill and toughness of players and coaches that the Packers were able to win the Super Bowl after the 2010 season.

So they are soft. Except for those who are tough and won a Super Bowl despite injuries.

[Cheesehead Craig]

Maybe McGinn's going soft?

[Zool]

Someone is hard for McGinn's softness? Now I'm really confused.

[denverYooper]

I think you're just trying to earn an Aloha like pbmax. Lucky bastard.

lol

[rbaloha1]

lol

its easy to earn and a couple more are getting to that status.

[Cheesehead Craig]

Someone is hard for McGinn's softness? Now I'm really confused.

It's a soft sell, but not hard to do.

[pbmax]

Chris Ault the father of the pistol is a consultant next year for the niners.

This is actually very interesting news. Ault wasn't a huge read option guy, but he wanted a shotgun QB approach that preserved RB running downhill at defense unlike normal split backs in shotgun. Very similar to Mike Sherman's ShortGun with Favre, Green and Hendu. I think his first pistol QB, or the guy after CK, was not as big a runner.

I would imagine they wish to expand the pistol to its full capacity and understand how teams will counteract them.

[denverYooper]

It's a soft sell, but not hard to do.

It's not really all tainted love.

[Fritz]

Aloha has been reduced to a shrivel in all of this. The harder he tries, the softer he gets.

[pbmax]

Aloha has been reduced to a shrivel in all of this. The harder he tries, the softer he gets.

A squeezed lemon?

[rbaloha1]

Aloha has been reduced to a shrivel in all of this. The harder he tries, the softer he gets.

dude the guy is going to be 300 plus. talks about toughness and played for a tough coach.

please do not discuss your penis problems on this thread.

[rbaloha1]

A squeezed lemon?

again you and fritz can take your ed problems to webmd.

[rbaloha1]

Aloha has been reduced to a shrivel in all of this. The harder he tries, the softer he gets.

what is your point moron?

[rbaloha1]

A squeezed lemon?

my squeezed lemon is worth more than your mushed brain.

[rbaloha1]

The Packers needed to get bigger, stronger, more athletic up front on the defensive line. So Thursday night, they made Jones their 26th overall pick.
"We created a UCLA way and the way we had was we were going to be tough guys," Jones said. "We’re going to be smarter, stronger faster and we were never going to quit and we’re going to practice like how we played. We practiced like that every day."

Suck on this moron.

[3irty1]

Here's the scariest three paragraphs I've read in awhile. These come from McGinn's article this morning on what he sees as a dire need on the defensive line:

"Ryan Pickett, 33, and entering his 13th season, is nearing the end. He reported two weeks ago overweight and out of shape.

"B.J. Raji will be entering his contract year, but you sure wouldn't have known it by his conditioning. He has looked as sloppy as Pickett, and at this juncture his employment beyond this season is uncertain.

"The coaches have seen Johnny Jolly, too, and he's every bit as beefy as the others. For Jolly to have any chance to contribute after three silent seasons, he needed to report in tiptop shape so he could focus on football. That didn't happen, not by a long shot."


What the hell???

You know I wish Nutz were here but the fact that those guys are coming in fat in April is an expected thing. Pro DT like that have no doubt been on a weight lifting regimen all offseason. I believe strength comes before conditioning. They have more than double the amount of time they'd need to get in football shape still.

[pbmax]

I wonder what Bob thinks about the Packers getting taller, but less heavy Jones --> Worthy

How does that affect soft small?

[rbaloha1]

You know I wish Nutz were here but the fact that those guys are coming in fat in April is an expected thing. Pro DT like that have no doubt been on a weight lifting regimen all offseason. I believe strength comes before conditioning. They have more than double the amount of time they'd need to get in football shape still.

fat and tough is not good.

[rbaloha1]

I wonder what Bob thinks about the Packers getting taller, but less heavy Jones --> Worthy

How does that affect soft small?

tall generally means the ability to carry more weight.

worthy knew he needed more weight but regressed due to the injury.

jones needs to add more weight in order to be a 3 down player or else he is another neal.

The toughness part is more important. First the dude is from Compton which automatically brings toughness. Second, played for a tough minded (granted a prick) head coach at UCLA.

Third, the packers appear to be emphasizing this mindset with defensive picks as evidenced by quotes coming from his mouth early into the interview. IMO this is not fake tough stuff. Collectively with Matthews, Bishop, Pickett and perry the defensive mindset is changing. The niner game questioned the packer toughness and it is being addressed. Is it a facade? Game one answers many questions.

[3irty1]

I'm not sure what nfl nose tackles do for offseason training but boxers first focus on maxing out muscle mass, which always comes with fat because of the high calorie diet. Aerobic workouts during this time are considered counterproductive. Then a couple months before their fight they switch gears to more aerobic workouts and the fat they gained disappears as does some of their muscle mass but this unbalanced approach is much more effective for achieving balanced strength and conditioning.

Pickett and Raji's "fight" isn't for 3 more months. So if they are on a similar pattern (which Nutz could provide some speculation on) having some flab at this point would not just be expected but a good thing. They would still have enough time to train for a marathon or go through army basic so I think this is just more McGinn being McGinn.

[rbaloha1]

Big guys usually bulk up in the off season.

At least TT is addressing a big problem. Hopefully more d-line picks that are tough, productive and possess the correct size -- not a tweener and not overweight.

[Joemailman]

McGinn is making a big deal about Pickett Raji and Jolly showing up supposedly out of shape. Pickett regularly shows up above his targeted weight, and I don't think anybody was expecting Jolly to show up looking like Julius Peppers. Not sure about Raji but 3irty1 is right. The important thing is where they are at physically when they show up for training camp. Jolly is playing for a contract, and Raji and Pickett are in a contract year, so they shouldn't lack for motivation.

[rbaloha1]

It is April. From my experiences fat guys usually use training camp to get in shape which is not a good thing.

Do you think the Packers org is happy with the current fatties?

Fatties do not help against modern nfl offenses. Maybe in traditional offenses.

it is comical for posters consoling each other after mcginn makes you guys look foolish.

[Joemailman]

It is April. From my experiences fat guys usually use training camp to get in shape which is not a good thing.

Do you think the Packers org is happy with the current fatties?

Fatties do not help against modern nfl offenses. Maybe in traditional offenses.

it is comical for posters consoling each other after mcginn makes you guys look foolish.

You are right. It is April. But training camp is in July. If Raji and Pickett show up in July at 350, that will be an issue. But I don't think that will happen.

[rbaloha1]

You are right. It is April. But training camp is in July. If Raji and Pickett show up in July at 350, that will be an issue. But I don't think that will happen.

the older you get the more of a problem it becomes.

[pbmax]

You are right. It is April. But training camp is in July. If Raji and Pickett show up in July at 350, that will be an issue. But I don't think that will happen.

That is the beauty of McGinn's paraphrase. We don't know what condition they actually showed up in. Pickett was over apparently, how much, we don't know. Raji looked like Pickett. What does that mean, was Bob talking to a carnival sideshow weight guesser?

Without something specific like a quote, we need to see them.

[rbaloha1]

Typical over scrutinizing.

Going out to eat chop suey.

[3irty1]

Typical McGinn fear mongering to advance his manufactured narrative. You'd almost think it was his job to sell papers or something the way he peddles to reactionaries and sensationalists.

[Zool]

Typical McGinn fear mongering to advance his manufactured narrative. You'd almost think it was his job to sell papers or something the way he peddles to reactionaries and sensationalists.

Bingo

[rbaloha1]

Typical McGinn fear mongering to advance his manufactured narrative. You'd almost think it was his job to sell papers or something the way he peddles to reactionaries and sensationalists.

rather than nit pick why don't do some neddle point.:?:

[rbaloha1]

Typical McGinn fear mongering to advance his manufactured narrative. You'd almost think it was his job to sell papers or something the way he peddles to reactionaries and sensationalists.

where is fear mongering? if you were packer management given the niner debacle and part of the cultprits were currently pigs how would you react?

tt is doing something about it. looked at 2 d-linemen in free agency and drafted another one. lets hope for more plus another ilb and a banging safety.

[Patler]

The entire organization is on a rampage against injuries, and rightly so.
....
Don't expect the Packers to fool around with any players in this draft who are even borderline medical risks. Health was every bit as vital as size and toughness when the Packers assembled their draft board.
...
A red flag for Jones is the broken foot that required surgery and sidelined him for the entire 2010 season.

So they picked a guy who has a foot being held together with screws.

[pbmax]

So they picked a guy who has a foot being held together with screws.

Don't you love that in one hand he handed in the softsmallnotinjured article and in the other hand he was picking Jones is his mock?

[rbaloha1]

Don't you love that in one hand he handed in the softsmallnotinjured article and in the other hand he was picking Jones is his mock?

does this automatically make him injury prone?

[Patler]

Don't you love that in one hand he handed in the softsmallnotinjured article and in the other hand he was picking Jones is his mock?

Covers all his bases, doesn't he?

[rbaloha1]

Covers all his bases, doesn't he?

You guys should give up -- the packers made an effort to draft to 2 tough guys with the first 2 picks. MM needs to change the team identity and hope the trend continues with day 3. get me some jesse williams.

[Bretsky]

It's McGinn's job to sell papers; he is an incredibly interesting writer but he used his evidence selectively to patch points together so they are interesting. I read nearly all of his stuff....like him as a writer as he can be thought provoking.....but rarely consider what he says to be remotedly the Bible because I understand it's his job to be interest and sell papers and that can come at the cost of complete reliability

[wist43]

Don't you love that in one hand he handed in the softsmallnotinjured article and in the other hand he was picking Jones is his mock?

Well, I picked Jones on the board here as well - even though I didn't want him. I didn't pick him b/c I liked him, I picked him b/c I thought TT would like him. I'm sure that's what McGinn was doing.

Still, I've warmed up to Jones - I can, with good conscience, neatly place him in the catagory of good players who will underperform b/c of how Dom Capers uses him - I am already not holding Jones accountable for anything negative about his play.

The good news is - Capers average time to firing is about 5 years isn't it?? Doesn't he usually get canned by every one of his employers at about the 5 year mark??

[pbmax]

Yes but wist we know from previous posts you really didn't like the choice but felt it was an obvious one for Thompson.

McGinn reported of a new, Thompson and McCarthy agreed upon organizational push for bigger, tougher and less injured and then predicted Jones as the choice of that organization. You can't square that circle of facts. Its obvious McGinn's original report was much too forceful and there still existed circumstances where an injury history or the presence of bigger players would not prevent the drafting of talent.

The Lacy pick is even more proof the injury thing in the article was non-sense.

[Bretsky]

Green Bay, IMO, passed on the ability to pick out 2 DL's that stood above the rest of what is out there today when they traded down with Miami. Perhaps TT doesn't think the DL is a big area of need anymore.....just saying.........I thought TT was trading down to Miami's first 4th rounder....was a bit suprirsed that he basically jumped down a half of a round. IF he's looking more OL or S it makes sense.........but as for the two DL rated quite high be everybody with round 2-3 grades BYE BYE

[rbaloha1]

Yes but wist we know from previous posts you really didn't like the choice but felt it was an obvious one for Thompson.

McGinn reported of a new, Thompson and McCarthy agreed upon organizational push for bigger, tougher and less injured and then predicted Jones as the choice of that organization. You can't square that circle of facts. Its obvious McGinn's original report was much too forceful and there still existed circumstances where an injury history or the presence of bigger players would not prevent the drafting of talent.

The Lacy pick is even more proof the injury thing in the article was non-sense.

Every draft pick has an injury history.

Lacy stuff is minor.

What about if the packers drafted ball -- would you bring up this article?

Your nit picking and failure to e-mail mcginn with further shows childish tantrums that are insignificant.

[rbaloha1]

Green Bay, IMO, passed on the ability to pick out 2 DL's that stood above the rest of what is out there today when they traded down with Miami. Perhaps TT doesn't think the DL is a big area of need anymore.....just saying.........I thought TT was trading down to Miami's first 4th rounder....was a bit suprirsed that he basically jumped down a half of a round. IF he's looking more OL or S it makes sense.........but as for the two DL rated quite high be everybody with round 2-3 grades BYE BYE

those guys were overrated as well as others like Barkley, Lacy, Teo, etc.

my guess is TT wanted hunt bit when taken traded down.

as per the ravens gm this is an unusual year for quality safeties and a starter can be found at every round.

my pics are Jesse Williams and Philip Thomas -- use whatever pics required to get these 2 tough guys.

[rbaloha1]

It's McGinn's job to sell papers; he is an incredibly interesting writer but he used his evidence selectively to patch points together so they are interesting. I read nearly all of his stuff....like him as a writer as he can be thought provoking.....but rarely consider what he says to be remotedly the Bible because I understand it's his job to be interest and sell papers and that can come at the cost of complete reliability

Please stop reading his stuff as it causes you constipation.

[Fritz]

Yes but wist we know from previous posts you really didn't like the choice but felt it was an obvious one for Thompson.

McGinn reported of a new, Thompson and McCarthy agreed upon organizational push for bigger, tougher and less injured and then predicted Jones as the choice of that organization. You can't square that circle of facts. Its obvious McGinn's original report was much too forceful and there still existed circumstances where an injury history or the presence of bigger players would not prevent the drafting of talent.

The Lacy pick is even more proof the injury thing in the article was non-sense.


I know Bretsky is correct that it's McGinn's job to create interest to sell papers, but this gets at the problem the NFL faces: becoming entertainment instead of sports first, and in doing so getting away from things like, oh, truth.

I'm about sick of McGinn's leading us down the wrong path while claiming he's got inside information. He was absolutely adamant that the Packers were almost histrionic in their new desire to avoid any player with any semblance of injury, and he gave as evidence the release of Saine and DJ SMith, while ignoring that the team did not cut Sherrod or Sean Richardson or Andrew Quarless. And then when the Packers drafted a guy in the second round with a history of nagging injuries, the JSO gave us this headline:

"Packers almost reluctantly select Alabama's Eddie Lacy as their back for the future"

Really? They didn't want Eddie Lacy, but they were forced to take him? By whom? After people bitching about Thompson's predilection for taking surprising players (Rodgers, Collins, Jennings) instead of expected players (like Chad Jackson instead of Jennings), now somehow Thompson is reluctantly bowing to some kind of pressure to take a running back he didn't really want?

Isn't it possible Thompson wanted to stock up on picks in rounds 4-7? Isn't it more plausible that he agreed with the majority of draft-watchers that this draft lacked star power but was stacked, depth-wise? Perhaps he felt Lacy was the best talent available at that spot and filled an area of need?

McGinn went out on a limb to try to create two new narratives for this team: that they're openly admitting they were too softnsmall, and that they were going to be hypervigilant about choosing players who were injury-free. The latter is obviously not true given their first two picks, and this gives me pause about the former.

[falco]

I know Bretsky is correct that it's McGinn's job to create interest to sell papers, but this gets at the problem the NFL faces: becoming entertainment instead of sports first, and in doing so getting away from things like, oh, truth.

I'm about sick of McGinn's leading us down the wrong path while claiming he's got inside information. He was absolutely adamant that the Packers were almost histrionic in their new desire to avoid any player with any semblance of injury, and he gave as evidence the release of Saine and DJ SMith, while ignoring that the team did not cut Sherrod or Sean Richardson or Andrew Quarless. And then when the Packers drafted a guy in the second round with a history of nagging injuries, the JSO gave us this headline:

"Packers almost reluctantly select Alabama's Eddie Lacy as their back for the future"

Really? They didn't want Eddie Lacy, but they were forced to take him? By whom? After people bitching about Thompson's predilection for taking surprising players (Rodgers, Collins, Jennings) instead of expected players (like Chad Jackson instead of Jennings), now somehow Thompson is reluctantly bowing to some kind of pressure to take a running back he didn't really want?

Isn't it possible Thompson wanted to stock up on picks in rounds 4-7? Isn't it more plausible that he agreed with the majority of draft-watchers that this draft lacked star power but was stacked, depth-wise? Perhaps he felt Lacy was the best talent available at that spot and filled an area of need?

McGinn went out on a limb to try to create two new narratives for this team: that they're openly admitting they were too softnsmall, and that they were going to be hypervigilant about choosing players who were injury-free. The latter is obviously not true given their first two picks, and this gives me pause about the former.

I thought the same thing. Might very well be true, but I think he goes outside the bounds of journalism to create a narrative here.

[rbaloha1]

You guys take stuff too literally. Who buys a print newspaper anymore? Check out the number of cities with internet only newSpapers

Discrediting a writer that provides in-depth draft previews is silly and displays jealously.

The Packers drafted 2 tough guys and are using the 49er game as the barometer to fix a problem. The Rams and Seahawks stand toe to toe with niners and fight back. The Packers are too meek against the niners but are slowly changing with a new mindset Mcginn is mentioning.

Keep denying and throwing nonsense tantrums while we laugh at your tirades.

[rbaloha1]

I thought the same thing. Might very well be true, but I think he goes outside the bounds of journalism to create a narrative here.

The draft is fluid which surprises everyone every year.

IS ANYONES MOCK DRAFT 100 PER CENT CORRECT?

[Pugger]

You guys take stuff too literally. Who buys a print newspaper anymore? Check out the number of cities with internet only newpapers

Discrediting a writer that provides in-depth draft previews is silly and displays jealously.

The Packers drafted 2 tough guys and are using the 49er game as the barometer to fix a problem.

The Rams and Seahawks stand toe to toe with niners and fight back.

The Packers are too meek against the niners but is slowly changing with a new mindset Mcginn is mentioning.

Keep denying and throwing nonsense tantrums while we all laugh at your tirades.

And taking what a team beat writer says as gospel has its issues too.

[rbaloha1]

And taking what a team beat writer says as gospel has its issues too.

Do i agree on every single player and team opinion -- heck no but i admire the thoroughness.

[pbmax]

The problem is the narrative and the message. When you source your overstated article to people inside the organization you make people think a new plan is in place similar in its fixed goal to the plan to refurbish the South End Zone of the Stadium. The truth is far more nuanced, but McGinn either doesn't have the details or they aren't interesting enough in and of themselves to garner attention.

The problem then becomes today where you need to explain the Lacy pick. Because that violates one of the two tenets Bob claimed now ruled on Lombardi Ave. And you get an article that tries to paint the Lacy pick as the Packers being backed into a corner where they HAD to take him when they clearly felt he violated a drafting commandment.

Is that possible? Sure. Is it the only explanation? No. Would I like to know why they did what they did? Yes. Has McGinn aided me in my quest? Not at all except to point out that there were numerous backs available if that is what the Pack were looking at. Which I could surmise from watching the draft.

McGinn writes some tremendous stuff and if I could only read Pete Dougherty and Cliff Christl talk about game changers and momentum I would go insane. His TV tape review is great as is his year in review stuff.

Even some of his muckraking is fantastic as he got the organization to turn on itself to expose Sherman's isolation in making personnel decisions.

But the hit rate on the muckraking is low, like a late round draft pick and someone has to point out when he gets it wrong.

That, and not Skinbasket's fantastic sense for giving offense, is why I keep coming back here. To bang Packer news against the ground to see what survives. Wheat from chaff.

And the dick jokes.

[rbaloha1]

The problem is the narrative and the message. When you source your overstated article to people inside the organization you make people think a new plan is in place similar in its fixed goal to the plan to refurbish the South End Zone of the Stadium.

The truth is far more nuanced, but McGinn either doesn't have the details or they aren't interesting enough in and of themselves to garner attention.

The problem then becomes today where you need to explain the Lacy pick. Because that violates one of the two tenets you claimed now ruled on Lombardi Ave. And you get an article that tries to paint the Lacy pick as the Packers being backed into a corner where they HAD to take him when they clearly felt he violated a drafting commandment.

Is that possible? Sure. Is it the only explanation? No Would I like to know why they did what they did? Yes. Has McGinn aided me in my quest? Not at all except to point out that there were numerous backs available if that is what the Pack were looking at. If they were looking only at RBs.

It is pretty simple -- does not like the Lacy pick and is being a prick about it.

Stop reading his stuff.

[Bretsky]

I know Bretsky is correct that it's McGinn's job to create interest to sell papers, but this gets at the problem the NFL faces: becoming entertainment instead of sports first, and in doing so getting away from things like, oh, truth.

I'm about sick of McGinn's leading us down the wrong path while claiming he's got inside information. He was absolutely adamant that the Packers were almost histrionic in their new desire to avoid any player with any semblance of injury, and he gave as evidence the release of Saine and DJ SMith, while ignoring that the team did not cut Sherrod or Sean Richardson or Andrew Quarless. And then when the Packers drafted a guy in the second round with a history of nagging injuries, the JSO gave us this headline:

"Packers almost reluctantly select Alabama's Eddie Lacy as their back for the future"

Really? They didn't want Eddie Lacy, but they were forced to take him? By whom? After people bitching about Thompson's predilection for taking surprising players (Rodgers, Collins, Jennings) instead of expected players (like Chad Jackson instead of Jennings), now somehow Thompson is reluctantly bowing to some kind of pressure to take a running back he didn't really want?

Isn't it possible Thompson wanted to stock up on picks in rounds 4-7? Isn't it more plausible that he agreed with the majority of draft-watchers that this draft lacked star power but was stacked, depth-wise? Perhaps he felt Lacy was the best talent available at that spot and filled an area of need?

McGinn went out on a limb to try to create two new narratives for this team: that they're openly admitting they were too softnsmall, and that they were going to be hypervigilant about choosing players who were injury-free. The latter is obviously not true given their first two picks, and this gives me pause about the former.


Great Post

[rbaloha1]

Great Post

The cronies stick together.

[MadtownPacker]

The cronies stick together.
I like the edge you bring to discussion but you gotta act a lil bitch like that? People are gonna agree with others and disagree with you. That's the point of it this all right? Quit trying to crush different opinions or I have a feeling it will backfire on you.

[RashanGary]

McGinn has a strong, dramatic writing style. Everything he says is like he's punching you in the face with it.

That said, I thought he was spot on with the Eddie Lacy article. He was the unanimous selection by his scouts as the best RB in this draft. He was also talked about by the scouts as being a real injury concern. Thompson said himself in the presser that he may have dropped because of the medical situation.

McGinn ended his article by saying Lacy could be the guy to balance out the Packers offense, in epic proportions. I got the feeling McGinn thinks Lacy could be the next big thing.



The big story is that a very talented player with a long injury history dropped to the Packers. He got that across in his know it all, dramatic fashion.

[RashanGary]

I feel similarly about this pick as I would feel about the Floyd pick as a Vikings fan. Lacy just got a dose of humility. He's one of the best players from the best conference and he dropped due to medical/conditioning concerns. The guy just got punched in the face with a learning opportunity, and he got that punch right before he came to our team. This situation, like the one with Aaron Rodgers, could have awoken a beast. Let's hope he remembers this for a long time and goes to work with that creepy desire to prove everyone wrong #12 wakes up with every day.

[RashanGary]

LMFAO. . . .

Just listened to Trgo at the podium. He said Pickett is the lightest he's ever been and Raji is right where he left off :) :) :)


Gotta love McGinn saying Pickett and Raji came in as fat piles of blob and then Trgo say the opposite.

[rbaloha1]

LMFAO. . . .

Just listened to Trgo at the podium. He said Pickett is the lightest he's ever been and Raji is right where he left off :) :) :)


Gotta love McGinn saying Pickett and Raji came in as fat piles of blob and then Trgo say the opposite.

Saw that. Did not say it with conviction.

Its possible weight is fine but body fat is up.

[RashanGary]

Saw that. Did not say it with conviction.

Its possible weight is fine but body fat is up.

I thought he said it like he knew what was written and he knew he was making McGinn look bad. He had a little smile about it.

[rbaloha1]

I thought he said it like he knew what was written and he knew he was making McGinn look bad. He had a little smile about it.

Appeared that way.

[pbmax]

I will say this in Bob's defense. Coaches lie to the press. We'll see when we see Pickett and JollyRaji

[RashanGary]

I will say this in Bob's defense. Coaches lie to the press. We'll see when we see Pickett and JollyRaji

Yeah. I thought it was ironic considering all of the BM trashing. Made me laugh. The media members laughed a little too.

[RashanGary]

Speaking of being a nasty football team. There is a certain way to play football. There are certain lines that should not be crossed. I remember, don't know exactly who it was, but a defender tackled a guy with a bad ankle and put a nasty twist on it. After, he said he put some hot-sauce on his ankle. You're getting in the realm of moral conflict here. I would play the game that way. If I knew a guy had a bad rib, a bad knee or a bad ankle, I'd attack that weakness and make him either play scared to protect himself or get hurt.

These guys have a choice to step on the field less than 100% It would be absolutely stupid to let that player run around with that injury and beat you. If you watch UFC, once a guy gets some badly bruised ribs, you keep going back to that spot. Once he starts covering up, you blast him so hard in the head that he can't fucking stand. Same goes in football. If Adrian Peterson likes to run high, you go at his knees over and over and over until he has no choice but to run behind his pads. If he chooses not to run behind his pads, then he gets injured. If he chooses to run behind his pads, then he looses effectiveness.

The place I draw the line is when I guy cannot protect himself. I don't think you should purposely shatter a guys leg if it's caught in a pile or anything like that. But you should make damn sure he's looking out for his legs every snap of the game. If you let him play safe, you're letting him beat you.

Greg Williams pretty much had it figured out the year they won the SB. "affect the head, see if his knee is OK, let's find out if he wants to play." Make the other team put their energy into being safe. The more focus they put into protecting their bodies, the less focus they have on beating you.

Football is about winning and until winning is taken out of the equation, the team that wants to win more (talent being equal) will win. Nastiness is a mental edge.

We do have to get bigger and stronger. I also think we have to get meaner.

[wootah]

Mental image after that last post:

http://www.alt-market.com/images/stories/cobrakai1.jpg

[SnakeLH2006]

Mental image after that last post:

http://www.alt-market.com/images/stories/cobrakai1.jpg

No shit...if your gonna be soft..be firm at the same point:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tFYdNndERcM

[3irty1]

Not only do coaches lie to the press, they seem to get off on feeding shit to McGinn to make him look bad. I don't dislike McGinn, his job is a total bitch. He has to write for one of the very most knowledgeable fanbases in sports about the dealings of one of the most secretive GM's in the league. If I have to choose between reading puff piece human interest stories about Andrew Datko's collection of vintage sewing machines or wild speculation I'd take wild speculation. The whole build-your-own narrative routine is still obvious and shameful for a journalist, even one that only covers sports. If you think the Packers need to get tougher then by all means, provide that analysis. What you shouldn't do is paint it that the Packers management agrees with you without getting quotes that say so. McGinn is credible as an analyst, but sketchy at best as a journalist.

[rbaloha1]

Not only do coaches lie to the press, they seem to get off on feeding shit to McGinn to make him look bad. I don't dislike McGinn, his job is a total bitch. He has to write for one of the very most knowledgeable fanbases in sports about the dealings of one of the most secretive GM's in the league. If I have to choose between reading puff piece human interest stories about Andrew Datko's collection of vintage sewing machines or wild speculation I'd take wild speculation. The whole build-your-own narrative routine is still obvious and shameful for a journalist, even one that only covers sports. If you think the Packers need to get tougher then by all means, provide that analysis. What you shouldn't do is paint it that the Packers management agrees with you without getting quotes that say so. McGinn is credible as an analyst, but sketchy at best as a journalist.

The toughness mindset seems to be theme with this current draft.

[Pugger]

A lot of folks worry about lining up against SF in the first week. But was our weakness strength/toughness or speed on D? Drafting Jones and dumping Walden will a long way towards fixing that.

[rbaloha1]

A lot of folks worry about lining up against SF in the first week. But was our weakness strength/toughness or speed on D? Drafting Jones and dumping Walden will a long way towards fixing that.

Why should the packers not be worried.

IMO Perry is an upgrade over Walden; Bishop is an upgrade over Jones; DJ is an upgrade over Wilson; Iowa safety is an ugrade over center fielder; Boyd is an upgrade over any back-up rotational dt.

Is this enough?

[Fritz]

Speaking of being a nasty football team. There is a certain way to play football. There are certain lines that should not be crossed. I remember, don't know exactly who it was, but a defender tackled a guy with a bad ankle and put a nasty twist on it. After, he said he put some hot-sauce on his ankle. You're getting in the realm of moral conflict here. I would play the game that way. If I knew a guy had a bad rib, a bad knee or a bad ankle, I'd attack that weakness and make him either play scared to protect himself or get hurt.

These guys have a choice to step on the field less than 100% It would be absolutely stupid to let that player run around with that injury and beat you. If you watch UFC, once a guy gets some badly bruised ribs, you keep going back to that spot. Once he starts covering up, you blast him so hard in the head that he can't fucking stand. Same goes in football. If Adrian Peterson likes to run high, you go at his knees over and over and over until he has no choice but to run behind his pads. If he chooses not to run behind his pads, then he gets injured. If he chooses to run behind his pads, then he looses effectiveness.

The place I draw the line is when I guy cannot protect himself. I don't think you should purposely shatter a guys leg if it's caught in a pile or anything like that. But you should make damn sure he's looking out for his legs every snap of the game. If you let him play safe, you're letting him beat you.

Greg Williams pretty much had it figured out the year they won the SB. "affect the head, see if his knee is OK, let's find out if he wants to play." Make the other team put their energy into being safe. The more focus they put into protecting their bodies, the less focus they have on beating you.

Football is about winning and until winning is taken out of the equation, the team that wants to win more (talent being equal) will win. Nastiness is a mental edge.

We do have to get bigger and stronger. I also think we have to get meaner.

I've been meaning to respond to Tom Silverstein's article after the draft, which carried the smallnsoft theory into an analysis of the latest draft class. The argument is that when you look at the players the Packers drafted, it's evidence they are obviously trying to get bigger, and by implication, tougher. I'm not sure how the two are connected exactly, so I won't speak tot he toughness issue. However, I would like to present some comparisons between the size of the players drafted this year and those playing the same or similar positions that the Packers have picked up in the last year or two prior to the recent draft.

Here's the link to Silverstein's article:
http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/205047001.html

Okay:

Offensive linemen:

2012 Andrew Datko 6-6, 315
2013 D. Bahktaeri 6-4, 301
J. Tretter 6-3, 307

Defensive linemen:

2012 J. Worthy 6-2, 308
M. Daniels 6-0, 291
2013 D. Jones, 6-4, 280
J. Boyd 6-2, 307

Linebackers:

2012: Nick Perry 6-3, 270
T. Manning 6-2, 237
2013: N. Palmer 6-2, 248
S. Barrington, 6-1, 240

Running backs:

2011-2012: A. Green 6-0, 225
D. Harris, 5-7, 197
2013: E. Lacy 5-11, 229
J. Franklin 5-10, 200

Wide Receivers:

2011 - 12: R. Cobb 5-10, 191
J. Ross 5-11, 213
J. Boykin 6-2, 218
2013: C. Johnson 6-2, 215
K. Dorsey 6-1, 207

Corner/Safety

2012: C Heyward 5-11, 185
J. McMillian 5-11, 203
2013: M Hyde 5-11, 194


I'm not going to get into deep analysis; others are more adept. I am not, on the surface, seeing this year's draft class as especially "bigger."

[Freak Out]

Speaking of being a nasty football team. There is a certain way to play football. There are certain lines that should not be crossed. I remember, don't know exactly who it was, but a defender tackled a guy with a bad ankle and put a nasty twist on it. After, he said he put some hot-sauce on his ankle. You're getting in the realm of moral conflict here. I would play the game that way. If I knew a guy had a bad rib, a bad knee or a bad ankle, I'd attack that weakness and make him either play scared to protect himself or get hurt.

These guys have a choice to step on the field less than 100% It would be absolutely stupid to let that player run around with that injury and beat you. If you watch UFC, once a guy gets some badly bruised ribs, you keep going back to that spot. Once he starts covering up, you blast him so hard in the head that he can't fucking stand. Same goes in football. If Adrian Peterson likes to run high, you go at his knees over and over and over until he has no choice but to run behind his pads. If he chooses not to run behind his pads, then he gets injured. If he chooses to run behind his pads, then he looses effectiveness.

The place I draw the line is when I guy cannot protect himself. I don't think you should purposely shatter a guys leg if it's caught in a pile or anything like that. But you should make damn sure he's looking out for his legs every snap of the game. If you let him play safe, you're letting him beat you.

Greg Williams pretty much had it figured out the year they won the SB. "affect the head, see if his knee is OK, let's find out if he wants to play." Make the other team put their energy into being safe. The more focus they put into protecting their bodies, the less focus they have on beating you.

Football is about winning and until winning is taken out of the equation, the team that wants to win more (talent being equal) will win. Nastiness is a mental edge.

We do have to get bigger and stronger. I also think we have to get meaner.

This is the NFL not the UFC for fucks sake. Being nasty is one thing but purposely trying to break someones ankle is another. Make the tackle/sack...hammer people...but don't turn this into some cage match.

[run pMc]

This is the NFL not the UFC for fucks sake. Being nasty is one thing but purposely trying to break someones ankle is another. Make the tackle/sack...hammer people...but don't turn this into some cage match.

Agree. It's a violent enough sport, I can do without the intentional maiming. Hiding/downplaying injuries is commonplace so players aren't targeted, but it happens. Maybe it's a grandpa phrase, but it is 'unsportsmanlike conduct' IMO. As a Packer fan I'm not especially proud of Charles Martin effectively ending Jim McMahon's career as a starting QB, and I hated McMahon. Karma is a b****; I certainly wouldn't want Julius Peppers returning the favor to Aaron Rodgers.

McGinn's claims about injury history are understandable but spotty, since the roster is still dotted with players who are or have been hurt (including the aforementioned Rodgers ). I think the organization wants to limit where possible the number of players who are hurt or have an extensive history -- there were times last year where McCarthy had to shorten practice because he didn't have enough healthy bodies, which must have an impact on their ability to teach,coach, and prepare. I think [B]that's what he's trying to avoid this year. Hurt is one thing, available and able to play is another.

As for the soft/small thing...I think they do have some shorter/squattier bodies on the OL and DL, and Datone Jones gives them a different look. Getting Bishop back and getting rid of D.J.Smith makes them a bigger & tougher team. Losing Saturday and getting Quarless back should help as well. Lacy will help. They have brought guys in who are going to bring a little attitude which will help them. I'm still worried about the safeties -- M.D. Jennings tackles like a corner, and at CB Tramon tackled like a matador.

I honestly am less concerned with SF than I am with the other NFCN teams -- GB plays them a lot more, and you gotta win your division games to make the playoffs.

[rbaloha1]

I've been meaning to respond to Tom Silverstein's article after the draft, which carried the smallnsoft theory into an analysis of the latest draft class. The argument is that when you look at the players the Packers drafted, it's evidence they are obviously trying to get bigger, and by implication, tougher. I'm not sure how the two are connected exactly, so I won't speak tot he toughness issue. However, I would like to present some comparisons between the size of the players drafted this year and those playing the same or similar positions that the Packers have picked up in the last year or two prior to the recent draft.

Here's the link to Silverstein's article:
http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/205047001.html

Okay:

Offensive linemen:

2012 Andrew Datko 6-6, 315
2013 D. Bahktaeri 6-4, 301
J. Tretter 6-3, 307

Defensive linemen:

2012 J. Worthy 6-2, 308
M. Daniels 6-0, 291
2013 D. Jones, 6-4, 280
J. Boyd 6-2, 307

Linebackers:

2012: Nick Perry 6-3, 270
T. Manning 6-2, 237
2013: N. Palmer 6-2, 248
S. Barrington, 6-1, 240

Running backs:

2011-2012: A. Green 6-0, 225
D. Harris, 5-7, 197
2013: E. Lacy 5-11, 229
J. Franklin 5-10, 200

Wide Receivers:

2011 - 12: R. Cobb 5-10, 191
J. Ross 5-11, 213
J. Boykin 6-2, 218
2013: C. Johnson 6-2, 215
K. Dorsey 6-1, 207

Corner/Safety

2012: C Heyward 5-11, 185
J. McMillian 5-11, 203
2013: M Hyde 5-11, 194


I'm not going to get into deep analysis; others are more adept. I am not, on the surface, seeing this year's draft class as especially "bigger."

It the final product that counts. This years draft has a few players with larger frames that must get larger.

Expect others to get larger as well.

Strictly eyeball test -- overall the packers look like shrimps compared to the niners.

[Cheesehead Craig]

I just couldn't leave well enough alone.

I emailed good ol' Bob McGinn (it was surprisingly easy to find his email address) and asked him where he got the 27th heaviest stat from, if it was his own work or from where as I simply couldn't find it.

He replied back and stated that he got the number from a NFL release at the beginning of the season.

Cool, now I had a starting block to look for it. Couldn't find it on NFL.com and while looking for it on Google I found this article from Bob back in Feb of this year right before the SB. He mentions in it that based on the same report where the Packers are too light at the 27th heaviest overall team in the NFL, that the 49ers are the 26th heaviest team in the NFL.

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/ravens-49ers-show-nfl-is-still-a-big-mans-game-m08je66-189534361.html

He does throw in the caveat that the 49ers have "big wide receivers, the jumbo O-line, large quarterbacks and a big fullback." So he's saying that their offense is really huge. The only 2 positions he doesn't mention are RB and TE as being large. So that must mean that the defense is undersized.

He continues with: "Their D-line isn't unduly heavy but there is the desired height.

Outside linebackers Aldon Smith (6-4, 262) and Ahmad Brooks (6-3, 264) are imposing, inside linebackers NaVorro Bowman (6-0½, 242) and Patrick Willis (6-1, 240) are so good their size doesn't matter, two of the top three cornerbacks stand 6-0½ and the safeties are ordinary size."

So I guess my questions are , how is it that it's such a problem for the Packers to be so light but not the 49ers? And why does he go into such depth to defend the 49ers size and states it's not relevant for the defense?

[Upnorth]

Because it plays better into the narrative that way. Do you want to be informed or entertained?

[woodbuck27]

No shit...if your gonna be soft..be firm at the same point:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tFYdNndERcM

Those bad.... bad.... very bad girls.

[SnakeLH2006]

Those bad.... bad.... very bad girls.

No shit. That's Snake's life...why the fuck you think I don't post much anymore...lol. We are both into that shit. It's kind of like when your a kid and like Reece's Pieces..and get access to a 2 lb. bag of them..you still like them, but then it's not as fun...but still is....I dunno. Snake has for the life of me dated hot ass chicks/they are enamored and willing to do whatever..it's fun...but I get bored a bit...thus posting more lately when I have time. My girl is finishing up her school/internships/getting a great job soon for major money so she can buy me a new house....but check out the most hardcore sex shit you can find with the hottest chicks...I've been doing that forever..no bragging...just I do it and always have and will...I get fucking bored with the same chick tho...but been with her longer than most...cuz she can cook...holy shit ya. :glug:

As far as the UFC shit...I got bored with that too. I get soooo bored. Snake gets soooooo bored with EVERYTHING. I love the Pack tho...but hey getting back to sports talk...hey for the last 6 years the Packers have been beaten by more physical teams. Physical teams like the Giants/Niners/Ravens have been beating peeps up and winning. Why not invest in some bruisers like Lacy...some lineman..get Jolly back....etc.? I'm happy bout Lacy if he can not get hurt...just need a few big nasty OL and we are set. It's not always about being the fastest or biggest...but just laying some wood and striking fear in mofos. Works with women who run the world....why not the NFL? LMAO.

Man I remember being a kid loving this guy:

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_8T7z-Ulhwow/RsNLuCgK9BI/AAAAAAAAAJY/uWJP7eM8TTs/s400/3826_1.JPG

[woodbuck27]

No shit. That's Snake's life...why the fuck you think I don't post much anymore...lol. We are both into that shit. It's kind of like when your a kid and like Reece's Pieces..and get access to a 2 lb. bag of them..you still like them, but then it's not as fun...but still is....I dunno. Snake has for the life of me dated hot ass chicks/they are enamored and willing to do whatever..it's fun...but I get bored a bit...thus posting more lately when I have time. My girl is finishing up her school/internships/getting a great job soon for major money so she can buy me a new house....but check out the most hardcore sex shit you can find with the hottest chicks...I've been doing that forever..no bragging...just I do it and always have and will...I get fucking bored with the same chick tho...but been with her longer than most...cuz she can cook...holy shit ya. :glug:

As far as the UFC shit...I got bored with that too. I get soooo bored. Snake gets soooooo bored with EVERYTHING. I love the Pack tho...but hey getting back to sports talk...hey for the last 6 years the Packers have been beaten by more physical teams. Physical teams like the Giants/Niners/Ravens have been beating peeps up and winning. Why not invest in some bruisers like Lacy...some lineman..get Jolly back....etc.? I'm happy bout Lacy if he can not get hurt...just need a few big nasty OL and we are set. It's not always about being the fastest or biggest...but just laying some wood and striking fear in mofos. Works with women who run the world....why not the NFL? LMAO.

Man I remember being a kid loving this guy:

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_8T7z-Ulhwow/RsNLuCgK9BI/AAAAAAAAAJY/uWJP7eM8TTs/s400/3826_1.JPG

Right on Packer fan>>>I'm right there with you.

We just had the draft last week. It takes time to assess the whole nine yards.

Today I'm so happy to say that I believe that Ted Thomson did better than OK. Watered down product or not.

Check the grading for the NFC and this LINK Snake. Now it's being done by some English /British Chapies... but all the same. Jeff and Neil do a decent job of it. This LINK is for their NFC Draft Reviews.

http://www.nfluk.com/opinions/articles/neil-and-jeff%E2%80%99s-nfc-draft-grades

Ted Thompson >>> He's like Sinatra and did it his way.

Today I'm mustering up more faith that it's going to be better. I gernerally take some time to think and inspect anything before I jump all over it. I've never been the Rahh Rahh 'Type Of Fan'. I've never been much of a joiner. I think for myself.

Ohh that part about you and women. I've been there too. Those were wild and crazy days. I've taken a few side paths. Sometimes I walked too far down some. Life's 'only' interesting if you experience it. I'm always experiencing 'my life'.

I love it the way life is now Snake and that's never boreing.

It's all >>> Calm...Cool ... Chilled Out ... Together... Collected...HAPPY. Nothing ever too serious. :-)

[Fritz]

I just couldn't leave well enough alone.

I emailed good ol' Bob McGinn (it was surprisingly easy to find his email address) and asked him where he got the 27th heaviest stat from, if it was his own work or from where as I simply couldn't find it.

He replied back and stated that he got the number from a NFL release at the beginning of the season.

Cool, now I had a starting block to look for it. Couldn't find it on NFL.com and while looking for it on Google I found this article from Bob back in Feb of this year right before the SB. He mentions in it that based on the same report where the Packers are too light at the 27th heaviest overall team in the NFL, that the 49ers are the 26th heaviest team in the NFL.

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/ravens-49ers-show-nfl-is-still-a-big-mans-game-m08je66-189534361.html

He does throw in the caveat that the 49ers have "big wide receivers, the jumbo O-line, large quarterbacks and a big fullback." So he's saying that their offense is really huge. The only 2 positions he doesn't mention are RB and TE as being large. So that must mean that the defense is undersized.

He continues with: "Their D-line isn't unduly heavy but there is the desired height.

Outside linebackers Aldon Smith (6-4, 262) and Ahmad Brooks (6-3, 264) are imposing, inside linebackers NaVorro Bowman (6-0½, 242) and Patrick Willis (6-1, 240) are so good their size doesn't matter, two of the top three cornerbacks stand 6-0½ and the safeties are ordinary size."

So I guess my questions are , how is it that it's such a problem for the Packers to be so light but not the 49ers? And why does he go into such depth to defend the 49ers size and states it's not relevant for the defense?

Looks like Bob got caught with his pants down.

And we all do contradict ourselves and construct narratives to allow ourselves to live in the world and think we're okay - but when you're a journalist and at least paying lip service to the idea of presenting news as having some basis in actual fact, then it's a little less forgivable.

[pbmax]

I just couldn't leave well enough alone.

I emailed good ol' Bob McGinn (it was surprisingly easy to find his email address) and asked him where he got the 27th heaviest stat from, if it was his own work or from where as I simply couldn't find it.

He replied back and stated that he got the number from a NFL release at the beginning of the season.

Cool, now I had a starting block to look for it. Couldn't find it on NFL.com and while looking for it on Google I found this article from Bob back in Feb of this year right before the SB. He mentions in it that based on the same report where the Packers are too light at the 27th heaviest overall team in the NFL, that the 49ers are the 26th heaviest team in the NFL.

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/ravens-49ers-show-nfl-is-still-a-big-mans-game-m08je66-189534361.html

He does throw in the caveat that the 49ers have "big wide receivers, the jumbo O-line, large quarterbacks and a big fullback." So he's saying that their offense is really huge. The only 2 positions he doesn't mention are RB and TE as being large. So that must mean that the defense is undersized.

He continues with: "Their D-line isn't unduly heavy but there is the desired height.

Outside linebackers Aldon Smith (6-4, 262) and Ahmad Brooks (6-3, 264) are imposing, inside linebackers NaVorro Bowman (6-0½, 242) and Patrick Willis (6-1, 240) are so good their size doesn't matter, two of the top three cornerbacks stand 6-0½ and the safeties are ordinary size."

So I guess my questions are , how is it that it's such a problem for the Packers to be so light but not the 49ers? And why does he go into such depth to defend the 49ers size and states it's not relevant for the defense?

I am stunned that the truth turned out to be slightly muddier than the 27th lightest team in the League. Did he mention whether the NFL number was for the entire team or starters only?

[Cheesehead Craig]

I am stunned that the truth turned out to be slightly muddier than the 27th lightest team in the League. Did he mention whether the NFL number was for the entire team or starters only?

Entire team.

[pbmax]

Entire team.

Figures.