PREDICT WHO MM WILL HIRE AS DEFENSIVE COORDINATOR

[Bretsky]

THOUGHTS ???????????

[Bretsky]

Gotta be honest

In our last poll predicting who should be the DC 18 out of 47 picks selected Greg Williams or Mike Nolan

The favorite among the PR folks was the unproven guy from Phily who is thought to be a rising star based on some stuff we read

He garnered more votes than Mike Nolan and Greg Williams combined
Winston Moss received more votes than Mike Nolan


All those factors made me kind of think we are nuts

[red]

don't really care. as long as it isn't bob sanders we should be a much improved team

[Bretsky]

Some of this goes back to our feeling toward MM; is he a strong enough personality to bring in a guy like Greg Williams, or will he hire somebody he is may have a greater comfort level with

[pbmax]

I think M3 is deliberate, but not overly so. After giving Sanders time to establish himself, he made a pretty bold move after the weakness was exposed. He was also on board for making a change at QB when most would be shaking in their boots.

Going by what scouts have said, Williams is a clear step ahead of Nolan in making something from less than something. If the interview went well, I say he takes Williams. Its a fit from a scheme and personnel, but it upgrades exactly what McCarthy wants to upgrade: pressure from non-D line sources.

The only thing holding this back would be Williams ambitions, he could still clearly want to be a HC. But the same can be said of Nolan. I don't think its wise under the current structure to go for a position coach.

[texaspackerbacker]

We will be damn lucky not to take a giant step downward. Whoever deviates the least from the scheme we have had will be the least bad choice.

It damn well better not be Williams or McDermott or some similar blitz-happy fool. I don't like that McCarthy is even considering or interviewing Williams. I have a bad feeling it will be him.

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

don't really care. as long as it isn't bob sanders we should be a much improved team

Wrong. We were not that bad of a defense last year with the d-line healthy and loaded with talent. The d-line sucked this year and so did we on defense. Am not saying he's a good d-coordinator because the guy was indeed to "vanilla" as some like to call him. But he's not the worst I have ever seen. If you just hire any guy with no experience as a coordinator, the defense could actually worsen next year.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Going by what scouts have said, Williams is a clear step ahead of Nolan in making something from less than something. If the interview went well, I say he takes Williams. Its a fit from a scheme and personnel, but it upgrades exactly what McCarthy wants to upgrade: pressure from non-D line sources.

I'm not sure. Scouts seemed to be pretty darn high on Nolan also.

“He’s good now. He’s smart,” an unnamed scout told the Press-Gazette. “He can run 3-4, 4-3, he knows it all. It depends on what personnel you have. He’ll do whatever, morph to whatever. He’ll use your players to their strengths. He’s smart that way.”

[RashanGary]

I'm not sure. Scouts seemed to be pretty darn high on Nolan also.

Oh, would ya get off Nolan's nuts already :P

Jump on the Williams train before it's too late.

[pbmax]

Yep, I saw that quote, but then ran into this one on Packer Update.

"He [Nolan] has the family name, the good looks and the stylish suits, but other than a couple of very good seasons with the Ravens, what's he really accomplished? And let's face it, coordinating a top 10 defense in Baltimore hasn't been all that difficult since Ray Lewis and Ed Reed arrived. Williams, on the other hand, has built top 10 defenses with numerous teams - none of which possessed two future Hall of Famers. In my opinion, the Packers would be a legitimate Super Bowl contender in 2009 with Williams on the coaching staff. I couldn't make that same statement about Nolan."

Now the swipe at the family name and looks is meaningless. But the point about personnel seems legit. He wasn't dealing with a bare cupboard in Buffalo (Wade Phillips had a good defense before him) and Snyder certainly spent money, but he didn't have Lewis or Ed Reed on either team. And Nolan didn't have as good a result of with Snyder's money either. Of course, Nolan had Spurrier, Williams had Gibbs.

[pbmax]

I had completely forgotten that Williams coached D with Jeff Fisher in Tennessee and Houston. That tears it, I want Williams. Nolan will be OK, but I'd like to see Williams.

[RashanGary]

I had completely forgotten that Williams coached D with Jeff Fisher in Tennessee and Houston. That tears it, I want Williams. Nolan will be OK, but I'd like to see Williams.

Yep, he's got some connection to the Buddy Ryan brand of defense.

When MM became coach he seemed really excited to give his coordinators and position coaches the leeway he didn't always have. There were times, when he took over, I got the impression he always wanted full control of an offense and felt he could do better if he had it. Just listening to him, he really wanted to be the head coach to give his guys the leeway to really coach. With Sanders I think he started to feel like he couldn't. With this guy, he can just give him the reigns and let him run. I think these two are going to be a very good match. MM does not seem like a micromanager and Williams seems like a guy who has earned freedom from oversight.

MM runs offense. Williams runs defense. There's not a whole lot of grey area.

[bobblehead]

Yep, I saw that quote, but then ran into this one on Packer Update.

"He [Nolan] has the family name, the good looks and the stylish suits, but other than a couple of very good seasons with the Ravens, what's he really accomplished? And let's face it, coordinating a top 10 defense in Baltimore hasn't been all that difficult since Ray Lewis and Ed Reed arrived. Williams, on the other hand, has built top 10 defenses with numerous teams - none of which possessed two future Hall of Famers. In my opinion, the Packers would be a legitimate Super Bowl contender in 2009 with Williams on the coaching staff. I couldn't make that same statement about Nolan."

Now the swipe at the family name and looks is meaningless. But the point about personnel seems legit. He wasn't dealing with a bare cupboard in Buffalo (Wade Phillips had a good defense before him) and Snyder certainly spent money, but he didn't have Lewis or Ed Reed on either team. And Nolan didn't have as good a result of with Snyder's money either. Of course, Nolan had Spurrier, Williams had Gibbs.

This is just more of what I have been saying all along...I don't really want Nolan. Some guys seem to do it no matter the personel. I don't know a lot about Williams, but I know Nolan and I have seen him not do it enough to want someone else.

I have no idea if winston moss is the answer or not, I was guessing he would get it, not necessarily hoping he would. In the back of my mind I always wanted Bates back (won't happen I know) or Tim Lewis.

A lot of things could work to our favor and turn this defense around...lowest on the list is changing D schemes in my opinion.

I'll take Williams or Moss at this point, but I still really don't want Nolan. I know the point about the name is "meaningless" but I think if you dig a little deeper the real point was that the guy has built a reputation on a few good D's in Baltimore and otherwise has been style over substance...I'll take substance every time.

[packrulz]

I guess I don't like the idea of hiring an ex-boss, will Nolan be able to take orders from M3? I don't like hiring "buddies" either, I want M3 to chew the D-coordinators ass if things aren't right. I vote Williams.

[Gunakor]

We will be damn lucky not to take a giant step downward. Whoever deviates the least from the scheme we have had will be the least bad choice.

It damn well better not be Williams or McDermott or some similar blitz-happy fool. I don't like that McCarthy is even considering or interviewing Williams. I have a bad feeling it will be him.

The only thing that worked last season with our scheme was the defensive backfield. The Eagles run the same press man coverage that we do, so McDermott wouldn't be changing anything there. It wouldn't be some zone coverage scheme. What he'd change is the way he gets after the QB. You keep ragging on blitz happy defenses like the Eagles, yet the Eagles defense is consistently better than ours is. Every single year. It is a far superior defensive scheme to what we've ran with Bob Sanders. Wouldn't you like a defense that is better than what we've had every single year?