Defensive Coordinator

[Joemailman]

I'd say anyone who runs a 3-4...I really think we're set to become a 3-4 team. Kampy, Pickett, Jenkins on the DL. Hawk, Bishop, Barnett, Poop @ LB. When you don't have a strong DL, you have to make an adjustment, and we haven't.

eitehr way, Bobby has got to go.

I dislike getting into an X and O dispute with ND, but I don't think we have the personnel for a 3-4. Jenkins at end (a DT-DE tweener) is a good fit. Pickett can be shoved around, he is not a nose tackle like Grady Jackson. I don't think Kampman has the size, even from earlier in his career to be a DE in the 3-4. You don't see many sub 300 DEs in a 3-4.

As for LBs, Pop might be the best fit, he can play the McGinest role. But Barnett is too small to take on guards and I am not sure Hawk can either. He might fit outside, but that gives us two LBs. Not sure where Bishop or Chillar would fit. Bishop might go inside for his best fit.

I understand that our DL isn't helping Bates scheme, but a 3-4 needs a strong line as well, it just doesn't depend on pass rush from it.

As for new coach, I am not excited about Haslett. I have heard he has worn out his welcome with his players in two cities now. Nolan followed Marvin Lewis at Baltimore with Super Bowl personnel and went backward. His time at Washington was also unproductive. Rod Marinelli has never been a D coordinator before.

Moss did not learn defense from Sanders or Bates, so his scheme may very well look different. Of all the people listed, I want Lewis first, then Moss. But I am less than enthused about linebacker play this year from Moss. Might be the DTs, but its not reassuring. I would be pleased as punch if the Jones' canned Phillips and he became the D coordinator as well.

Debating whether the Packers currently have the personnel for the 3-4 misses the point IMHO. If you're going to switch to the 3-4, or any other defense for that matter, it should be because you believe it's the best defensive scheme, not because you believe it matches your current defensive personnel. NFL careers are short, and personnel situations can change very quickly.

[texaspackerbacker]

Do any of you guys have the mental capability to remember longer than the last 2 or 3 rotten weeks?

The lesson of these bad games should be that the fools who bad mouthed Nick Barnett had it all wrong. I wonder how many of them are the same ones whining about Sanders now.

Are you guys totally oblivious to the fact that we're playing without Barnett and Jenkins, and with Hawk, Bigby, Rouse, Collins, etc. diminished in quality by injuries? That on top of missing Harris for a bunch of games, etc.

And 5 of the losses were by four points or less--a lot of bad calls, a missed kick by a usually excellent kicker, a whole lot of close plays and near misses, of various kinds.

It's been a rotten year all the way around, but completely throwing out last season, completely throwing out the games won by this defense with game-changing turnovers, etc., that's just beyond stupid.

Whiners about change better be careful what they wish for lest the Packers end up with something a whole lot worse--like the other kind of CHANGE that a bunch of misguided fools brought to us.

Even if we took last year's defense and used that to illustrate Bob Sanders' ability as DC, it still failed miserably in the game that mattered most. It will not make us a Super Bowl caliber team, even if everybody was healthy. It doesn't work. Time for a change.

You're talking about the overtime game that we lost to the team that SEEMED like they were playing way over their heads at the time, but which went on to knock off the mighty Patriots and win the Super Bowl? The team which is 12-1 this year, and generally considered the best team in the NFL?

Uh, yeah, let's go ahead and crucify Sanders for that one too.

[Gunakor]

Do any of you guys have the mental capability to remember longer than the last 2 or 3 rotten weeks?

The lesson of these bad games should be that the fools who bad mouthed Nick Barnett had it all wrong. I wonder how many of them are the same ones whining about Sanders now.

Are you guys totally oblivious to the fact that we're playing without Barnett and Jenkins, and with Hawk, Bigby, Rouse, Collins, etc. diminished in quality by injuries? That on top of missing Harris for a bunch of games, etc.

And 5 of the losses were by four points or less--a lot of bad calls, a missed kick by a usually excellent kicker, a whole lot of close plays and near misses, of various kinds.

It's been a rotten year all the way around, but completely throwing out last season, completely throwing out the games won by this defense with game-changing turnovers, etc., that's just beyond stupid.

Whiners about change better be careful what they wish for lest the Packers end up with something a whole lot worse--like the other kind of CHANGE that a bunch of misguided fools brought to us.

Even if we took last year's defense and used that to illustrate Bob Sanders' ability as DC, it still failed miserably in the game that mattered most. It will not make us a Super Bowl caliber team, even if everybody was healthy. It doesn't work. Time for a change.

You're talking about the overtime game that we lost to the team that SEEMED like they were playing way over their heads at the time, but which went on to knock off the mighty Patriots and win the Super Bowl? The team which is 12-1 this year, and generally considered the best team in the NFL?

Uh, yeah, let's go ahead and crucify Sanders for that one too.

I don't know if you realize this Tex, but the Giants play in our conference. We'd have to beat them to get where we want to go. Sanders didn't get it done. I don't want another NFC Championship Game loss, I want a Super Bowl victory. Sanders scheme didn't get it done and won't get it done. I want something better. Something that could stop even the Giants, the best team in football. Time for a change.

By the way, the Giants are 11-2 this year. They got beat by Philadelphia last weekend.

[texaspackerbacker]

I'll give you your last line; The rest of the post, not so much.

My point is that after a great season--6th in the NFL in least points scored against, we lost that one game--in overtime, to a team that was a whole lot better than it seemed at the time, with our offense not exactly tearing things up, and with Al Harris unexpectedly playing a lot worse than he had all season. Now, which of those reasons--or any others you can think of--do you blame Sanders for?

Sanders and the D scheme had a helluva lot more to do with getting the Packers that far than with losing that game.

And as for this year, can anybody in their right mind argue that INJURIES are not the primary reason for the porous defense? And with all that, our D has still contributed a huge number of turnovers, many with scores. Somebody whined that Sanders shouldn't get any credit for that. Maybe not, but the D scheme sure as hell DOES make the bunch of interception a lot more likely, and he's the architect of the scheme.

[Partial]

Tex, our pass rush was awful toward the end of last year, and the year before as well. This scheme asks too much of the DL imo. The offensive line is never tricked. They can line up and start blocking right away knowing full well the guy is coming at 'em straight ahead and that their won't be a blitzer hitting the gap either.

It's far too plain jane.

I'm not crazy about Mike Nolan myself. Give me Marv Lewis, but Nolan seems like one of those guys who was in a great system and smart, but not a great coach. The defenses in SF weren't anything to write home about nor were they creative as far as I know. Give me Rob Ryan, I am sure Oak is gonna clean house this off-season!!

[texaspackerbacker]

Tex, our pass rush was awful toward the end of last year, and the year before as well. This scheme asks too much of the DL imo. The offensive line is never tricked. They can line up and start blocking right away knowing full well the guy is coming at 'em straight ahead and that their won't be a blitzer hitting the gap either.

It's far too plain jane.

I'm not crazy about Mike Nolan myself. Give me Marv Lewis, but Nolan seems like one of those guys who was in a great system and smart, but not a great coach. The defenses in SF weren't anything to write home about nor were they creative as far as I know. Give me Rob Ryan, I am sure Oak is gonna clean house this off-season!!

Why are people so hung up on a great pass rush? Sure, you gotta put a little bit of pressure on the QB, maybe even pull a surprise blitz rarely, but for the most part, dropping into coverage and getting picks is a lot more likely to win game. The greater problem with the Packer defense this year is not pass rush, but run stopping--and that didn't get a lot worse until Barnett went down.

I'm not completely hung up on Sanders. It's the scheme that does great things. I'm not even completely committed to the scheme, for that matter. You could do essentially the same stuff with a 3-4. The absolute urgency, however, is not going to a blitz-happy scheme and not getting away from man coverage. Blitzing and zone coverage are recipes for disaster.

[Fritz]

I don't know who I agree with.

[Pugger]

If you can't rush the passer even the most pedestrian QB can pick you apart. Your LBs and DBs can't cover their men forever.

I have a question for you guys: how many winning teams are using a scheme like the one we're using? I'm not being flippant, I'm just curious cuz I don't know.

[pack4to84]

If you can't rush the passer even the most pedestrian QB can pick you apart. Your LBs and DBs can't cover their men forever.

I have a question for you guys: how many winning teams are using a scheme like the one we're using? I'm not being flippant, I'm just curious cuz I don't know.

I believe the Packers are the only one. Denver tried it then let Jim Bates go at the end of last season.

[pack4to84]

My self I would like to switch to 3-4 4-3 hybrid. Steelers, Ravens and Pats use. Use mostly 3-4 but switch to 4-3 base in certain situations. It is easier to find LB in the draft vs DE for a 4-3 defense. 3-4 uses DT for all 3 positions. OLB our normally small fast DE. I think Kampton could drop a few pounds and fit into the OLB spot. Hunter and Thompson are already a perfect fit.
I always loved they way we used Tim Harris and Bryce Paup back in the day. They ran a 4-3 hybrid where 3 dt and 1 DE who lined up where ever he thought he could get the most pressure. Forcing teams to have to audible almost every play. When Lambeau field got loud it would cause mayhem on the OL.

[Rastak]

Home sick as a dog reading through some articles on the NFL and this one seems to agree with Tex.

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/article/20081209/PKR07/81209184/1058/PKR01

Count me among the handful of people not calling for the firing of Green Bay Packers defensive coordinator Bob Sanders. es, the defense has been atrocious this season, particularly in the last month.

Yes, Sanders’ unit is ranked in the bottom third of the NFL in yards and points.

Yes, the Packers were shredded for 549 yards against Houston, the highest total by a Green Bay defense in 25 years.

Yes, the Packers were lit up for a combined 84 points in losses to New Orleans and Carolina, the highest point total allowed in back-to-back games by a Packers team in 50 years.

The knee-jerk demand for a change in defensive leadership is understandable. The Packers’ repeated failures to make key stops has spawned intense frustration, and blame naturally points toward Sanders.

Sacking him will provide disgruntled Packers followers their pound of flesh, but it won’t solve the problem.

Sanders oversaw a top-10 defense a year ago and was in charge when the Packers produced one of the best performances in franchise history by allowing the Minnesota Vikings 104 total yards and three first downs in a December 2006 game.

Did Sanders suddenly become incompetent this season? Or are there circumstances beyond his control that have left the defense in shambles?

Sanders isn’t to blame for injuries that ended the seasons of Cullen Jenkins and Nick Barnett and rendered Atari Bigby all but ineffective. Sanders isn’t to blame for the sudden decline of Kabeer Gbaja-Biamila that led to his midseason release. Sanders isn’t to blame for the trade of Corey Williams.

Granted, no one wants to hear excuses. It’s all about results, and the defense isn’t producing. But with the exception of Pro Bowl defensive end Aaron Kampman, the Packers’ front seven is a collection of below-average players.

The blame falls at the doorstep of General Manager Ted Thompson for not providing adequate manpower and largely ignoring the defense the past two years. Just five of 20 draft picks in 2007 and 2008 were defensive players, and the only starter from that group is Desmond Bishop, an injury fill-in.

First-round draft pick Justin Harrell has been a big disappointment. Is Harrell’s slow development Sanders’ fault, given the defensive tackle’s injury history?

The only defensive free agent signed by Thompson in the past two years still on the roster is linebacker Brandon Chillar.

Considering Thompson’s conservative approach, is it any wonder the Packers’ pass rush and run defense have been invisible? They rank a deplorable 28th in both sacks and yards allowed per rush.

Making Sanders the scapegoat would be short-sighted. He isn’t a miracle worker, and that’s what is needed to turn this collection of players into a respectable defense.

Mike Vandermause is sports editor of the Press-Gazette

[pbmax]

Debating whether the Packers currently have the personnel for the 3-4 misses the point IMHO. If you're going to switch to the 3-4, or any other defense for that matter, it should be because you believe it's the best defensive scheme, not because you believe it matches your current defensive personnel. NFL careers are short, and personnel situations can change very quickly.

There is no magic scheme in the NFL. You can't do the defensive equivalent of hiring a spread offense guru and expect to compete with the big boys by virtue of surprise alone.

That said, the current 3-4 (which looks a lot different that the old AFC 3-4 that used to be popular) is here for a reason. One, is market inefficiencies. 4-3 teams kill themselves looking for big pass rushing DEs and strong but fast linebackers in the draft. That leaves a lot of tweeners available. Guys like Jenkins who are somewhere between DT and DE. Guys who are too big to play OLB in a 4-3 in space but are not big enough to put a hand down on the LOS every down.

If the LBs are smart and tough enough, it also means you can present one front and coverage and then switch and bring pressure from an unexpected angle. This concept is not unique to the 3-4, but without pulling someone out of coverage, you can attack with a choice of LBs and not just stunt lineman. And if you send five or more, you can play more coverages with the extra LB than with a D lineman dropping into a zone.

But the NFL is the extreme case; without the players for the scheme, its not stopping anyone for long.

[Gunakor]

I'll give you your last line; The rest of the post, not so much.

My point is that after a great season--6th in the NFL in least points scored against, we lost that one game--in overtime, to a team that was a whole lot better than it seemed at the time, with our offense not exactly tearing things up, and with Al Harris unexpectedly playing a lot worse than he had all season. Now, which of those reasons--or any others you can think of--do you blame Sanders for?

Sanders and the D scheme had a helluva lot more to do with getting the Packers that far than with losing that game.

And as for this year, can anybody in their right mind argue that INJURIES are not the primary reason for the porous defense? And with all that, our D has still contributed a huge number of turnovers, many with scores. Somebody whined that Sanders shouldn't get any credit for that. Maybe not, but the D scheme sure as hell DOES make the bunch of interception a lot more likely, and he's the architect of the scheme.

The game only went to overtime because of 2 missed FG's that would have put the game away in regulation. Don't let the fact the game went to overtime fool you into believing something that isn't true. The Packers were thoroughly dominated on defense that day. And your point about Harris getting abused, fine, I'll give you that as it wasn't something that happened very often. But a good DC would have made an adjustment to his defense to give Harris help, and that didn't happen. Sanders just kept letting Plax dominate Harris all game without giving him any safety help. That is not good strategy. That no help was given to Harris was Sanders mistake.

Have you ever thought for a second, Tex, that maybe some of the success the defense had last year was due to great players overcoming poor coaching by executing a shitty scheme to perfection? That maybe, just maybe, if we had a better DC coaching these great players that we'd have beat the Giants and gone on to potentially beat the Patriots a couple weeks later? We have phenomenal players on defense. A few are injured, granted, but others have stepped up their game from last year - namely Tramon Williams and Nick Collins, specifically. Yet this defense is FAR worse than it was last year. At some point you have to blame the system. It's become that time IMO.

A healthy medium between the always blitzing Slowik and the passive, vanilla, no pressure getting, bend but don't break (sometimes) Sanders would be a wonderful thing. Remember, the top priority of a defense is NOT to get turnovers. It is to stop the opponent from moving down the field and scoring points - a 3 and out accomplishes that just as well as an INT. I want to see more 3 and outs, even if it comes at the cost of a few INT's. Whatever it takes to keep the opponent from putting 21 points or more on the board against us every single week.

[Guiness]

I'm with PBMax in thinking that I'd like to see Jones decide Phillips can't get it done, and can him. He'd be one hot commodity, and I think he might get another HC gig. But if not, do what it takes to get him here!

Another interesting name from the 'currently employed, but probably not much longer' is Rob Ryan. I wonder if we could get Buddy over here to punch MM in the face every time his QB threw a pick six?

From the list...I think Marv Lewis. But he's another guy that would probably have HC aspirations if he got tossed this year.

[Freak Out]

Lets go out and spend some money and steal a 3-4 coordinator if possible and make the switch...what the hell....if the offense works out and really plays to it's potential it can carry the team until the D kinks get worked out and we become DOMINANT. ha ha....Why not?