Results 1 to 20 of 20

Thread: 620tmj talking Packers until 8pm

  1. #1

    620tmj talking Packers until 8pm


  2. #2
    ? HOFer
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Ehh let's not get into that just yet
    Posts
    18,240
    Thanks! I am listening!

  3. #3

    Re: 620tmj talking Packers until 8pm

    Quote Originally Posted by pack4to84
    http://www.620wtmj.com/sports/billmichaels
    good read about 3-4

    listen live online.

    http://www.620wtmj.com/
    thanks, appreciate it.

  4. #4
    Ex-Hood Rat HOFer mission's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    ATL
    Posts
    4,990
    good look, im locked

  5. #5
    how bout some updates if any good info comes up?

    i'm watching house now, can't be bothered

  6. #6
    Except that Mr. Michaels is describing the classic two-gap 3-4 that McCarthy hinted would not be the version they would run. In this version, Jenkins and Kampman in particular might be in trouble.
    Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.

  7. #7
    ? HOFer
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Ehh let's not get into that just yet
    Posts
    18,240
    Lance Allen is dumb. Best system is the 3-4 for Vilma? Funny, how he was a pro bowler and dominant ILB in the 4-3 they ran, and once the 3-4 arrived, he kind of fell apart.

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by Partial
    Lance Allen is dumb. Best system is the 3-4 for Vilma? Funny, how he was a pro bowler and dominant ILB in the 4-3 they ran, and once the 3-4 arrived, he kind of fell apart.
    Yes, he apparently confused his story. The arrival of the 3-4 marked the beginning of the end of Vilma's impressive run.
    Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.

  9. #9
    Geriatric Rat All-Pro
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    That great pressroom in the sky
    Posts
    1,104
    That's the official story about Vilma; he did go from 118 to 187 tackles in the 4-3 and then back to 116 in the 3-4 under Mangini and then was injured the next year. So he had a little over a year in the 3-4 and I'm thinking some of the drop off was due to the guy in front of him. But I didn't watch much of the Jets in 2006.

  10. #10
    Senior Rat All-Pro Waldo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    The ATL
    Posts
    1,297
    Since when does tackles = quality.

    Was Vilma an efffective ILB or not? How many tackles he had is immaterial. If Barnett's tackles decrease but he does a darn good job when the ball comes near him, did the scheme hurt his play, or just his stats? Dropping from star quality stats to pedestrian stats is not an indication of ineffectiveness if the player is doing a great job with what they are asked to do.

  11. #11
    Geriatric Rat All-Pro
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    That great pressroom in the sky
    Posts
    1,104
    Quote Originally Posted by Waldo
    Since when does tackles = quality.

    Was Vilma an efffective ILB or not? How many tackles he had is immaterial. If Barnett's tackles decrease but he does a darn good job when the ball comes near him, did the scheme hurt his play, or just his stats? Dropping from star quality stats to pedestrian stats is not an indication of ineffectiveness if the player is doing a great job with what they are asked to do.
    I didn't really complete my thought - my sixteen different prescription meds fog my brain after 10 PM - but I agree with you. Unless you see a guy play, especially in football, the stats don't mean all that much. But they can give you a general idea - and it seems to me that the official story isn't really well supported based on stats.

  12. #12
    Wolf Pack Rat HOFer Deputy Nutz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    In Skin's basket
    Posts
    11,175
    Why is Jenkins in trouble? the guy was a run stuffing defensive end to begin with, He was already a hybrid end/tackle. I might be wrong by I think Jenkins goes around 290 anyways, what more do you want from an end in a 3-4?

    Listening to the panic with some of these people is hilarious.

  13. #13
    Stout Rat HOFer Guiness's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Canada, eh?
    Posts
    13,538
    Quote Originally Posted by Cleft Crusty
    Quote Originally Posted by Waldo
    Since when does tackles = quality.

    Was Vilma an efffective ILB or not? How many tackles he had is immaterial. If Barnett's tackles decrease but he does a darn good job when the ball comes near him, did the scheme hurt his play, or just his stats? Dropping from star quality stats to pedestrian stats is not an indication of ineffectiveness if the player is doing a great job with what they are asked to do.
    I didn't really complete my thought - my sixteen different prescription meds fog my brain after 10 PM - but I agree with you. Unless you see a guy play, especially in football, the stats don't mean all that much. But they can give you a general idea - and it seems to me that the official story isn't really well supported based on stats.
    He likes you Waldo! He'll kill you last...
    --
    Imagine for a moment a world without hypothetical situations...

  14. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by Deputy Nutz
    Why is Jenkins in trouble? the guy was a run stuffing defensive end to begin with, He was already a hybrid end/tackle. I might be wrong by I think Jenkins goes around 290 anyways, what more do you want from an end in a 3-4?

    Listening to the panic with some of these people is hilarious.
    The point of the post was that Michael's site has it wrong. McCarthy all but said at the PC they will NOT play the alignment showing at TMJ's website. (See link above)

    But if you are going to two gap like the illustration says he will on the TMJ site, then you either better be a monster or too big to move at DE in that old AFC 3-4 (Think Luv Ya Blue Oilers, not Cowher Steelers). Jenkins strong suit, even at tackle has been his quickness. His effectiveness at run stuffing at end in Sanders system is due in part to two factors: he wasn't charging up the field on every play like KGB and two, he was split much wider than he is in that 3-4 illustration.

    That aside, I think McCarthy made it clear he expects Jenkins and Kampman to be able to compete in the alignment he and Capers envision. I suspect that is correct, but time will tell.
    Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.

  15. #15
    Postal Rat HOFer Joemailman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    In a van down by the river
    Posts
    31,777
    Quote Originally Posted by Deputy Nutz
    Why is Jenkins in trouble? the guy was a run stuffing defensive end to begin with, He was already a hybrid end/tackle. I might be wrong by I think Jenkins goes around 290 anyways, what more do you want from an end in a 3-4?

    Listening to the panic with some of these people is hilarious.
    I agree. Jenkins seems to be a natural fit for a 3-4 DE. He's actually listed at 6-2, 305. I'm confused as to why he would seem to be in trouble here.
    Ring the bells that still can ring
    Forget your perfect offering
    There is a crack, a crack in everything
    That's how the light gets in - Leonard Cohen

  16. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by Waldo
    Since when does tackles = quality.

    Was Vilma an efffective ILB or not? How many tackles he had is immaterial. If Barnett's tackles decrease but he does a darn good job when the ball comes near him, did the scheme hurt his play, or just his stats? Dropping from star quality stats to pedestrian stats is not an indication of ineffectiveness if the player is doing a great job with what they are asked to do.
    As I recall, after a time the team didn't see him as effective, as they tried to shop him after it was clear that he was unhappy. Now as to the source of the unhappiness, whether it was the DT in front of him or the scheme, I haven't any idea.
    Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.

  17. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by Joemailman
    Quote Originally Posted by Deputy Nutz
    Why is Jenkins in trouble? the guy was a run stuffing defensive end to begin with, He was already a hybrid end/tackle. I might be wrong by I think Jenkins goes around 290 anyways, what more do you want from an end in a 3-4?

    Listening to the panic with some of these people is hilarious.
    I agree. Jenkins seems to be a natural fit for a 3-4 DE. He's actually listed at 6-2, 305. I'm confused as to why he would seem to be in trouble here.
    First of all, listed weights are dicey if its the team's publication. Second, Jenkins game at DT is all quickness and getting the corner on a guard. Depending on the alignment, he may be asked to play differently at DE in this scheme. We won't know until camp and preseason.
    Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.

  18. #18
    Geriatric Rat All-Pro
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    That great pressroom in the sky
    Posts
    1,104
    Quote Originally Posted by Guiness
    Quote Originally Posted by Cleft Crusty
    Quote Originally Posted by Waldo
    Since when does tackles = quality.

    Was Vilma an efffective ILB or not? How many tackles he had is immaterial. If Barnett's tackles decrease but he does a darn good job when the ball comes near him, did the scheme hurt his play, or just his stats? Dropping from star quality stats to pedestrian stats is not an indication of ineffectiveness if the player is doing a great job with what they are asked to do.
    I didn't really complete my thought - my sixteen different prescription meds fog my brain after 10 PM - but I agree with you. Unless you see a guy play, especially in football, the stats don't mean all that much. But they can give you a general idea - and it seems to me that the official story isn't really well supported based on stats.
    He likes you Waldo! He'll kill you last...
    I lied.

  19. #19
    Geriatric Rat All-Pro
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    That great pressroom in the sky
    Posts
    1,104
    Quote Originally Posted by Joemailman
    Quote Originally Posted by Deputy Nutz
    Why is Jenkins in trouble? the guy was a run stuffing defensive end to begin with, He was already a hybrid end/tackle. I might be wrong by I think Jenkins goes around 290 anyways, what more do you want from an end in a 3-4?

    Listening to the panic with some of these people is hilarious.
    I agree. Jenkins seems to be a natural fit for a 3-4 DE. He's actually listed at 6-2, 305. I'm confused as to why he would seem to be in trouble here.
    Perhaps he got someone pregnant.

  20. #20
    I think Jenkins is better suited to play tackle. The only reason he was moved to end is that the Packers were desperate.

    I'm not going to say that he can't play end in a 3-4.

    I wonder if Thompson might develop into a starter.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •