Any relevance from Packers Blog

[texaspackerbacker]

I only got so far, and started noticing how everyone had Barnett not on the roster. I think it's hilarious. Our best athlete at LB, and everyone is ready to cut him before we even see what Capers does with him. good god people, shut up and wait to see what we do or how capers does it before you drop the man.

Yeah. This stupid crap of disrespecting Nick Barnett is rearing its ugly head again. Cutting him, shifting him outside, come on; I thought we had gotten past that idiocy.

In contrast, this quote in Waldo's post is eminently sensible and logical. I was not aware of the way Capers's variety of 3-4 uses the NT, but the way it's described, it does seem very suitable to Packer personnel--and Capers said he likes to adapt scheme to personnel.

As for Suggs, I don't really give a shit whether he's franchised or not. The Packers don't need him, and I'm pretty sure Thompson will see it that way also.

[Lurker64]

The Packers have enough time and a baseline of talent to make this switch very easily. The 3-4 that Capers runs is not a two-gap 3-4 and uses quickness and movement of the defensive line to make plays. Ryan Pickett would be the perfect nose tackle in this scheme and they have plenty of 3-4 ends to make this work. The nose is never in a two-gap mode, he can swing from A gap to A gap in the same fashion he did when Pickett played in the 4-3. Quickness is the key for this to work and the Packers, once they get healthy, will be able to fit the pieces into the scheme. They will need more outside backers because they will keep Hawk and Barnett inside. But time is on their side and they can find the pieces to make this work. The can also use the Steelers to study and learn from since the Steelers, under Mike Tomlin, incorporated his style of tight man to man into their defense. The Packers will be more versatile in coverage now with Capers but cannot lose their identity in coverage. They are best when they can play man to man, and it will be Capers’ job to blend the best of the Packers into the best of his scheme. That is the essence of coaching.

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/...diner-news-89/

Good to hear it. As I understand it the two basic shapes of the 3-4 are either 2-gap responsibility for the DL, with bigger ILBs and speedier OLBs or 1-gap responsibility for the DL with speedier ILBs and bigger OLBs. Since neither Barnett nor Hawk would really be at all appropriate for the classic "rush end", keeping them both (and they're definitely two of the best players on the defense), would require us to use the latter.

So I'm guessing this means that your prototypical "classic 3-4 ILBs" like Maualuga would probably move down the Packers draft board, since I don't think he fits the scheme (and is unlikely to be the best value at #9 anyway), since I've never seen a 3-4 defense with one massive thumping ILB and one speedy instinctive ILB (but maybe it could work?), but if a guy like Curry is available at #9, they'd probably snap him up and line him up on as Sam. Though, I don't believe Capers and McCarthy have actually met with Thompson to indicate to him how he should adjust his boards and scouting yet, so this all is yet to be determined.

Also, before anybody questions Barnett and Hawk's size to play inside, keep in mind that Pittsburgh's ILBs are listed at: 6'2" 243 (Farrior), 6'1" 239 (Foote), 6'3" 234 (Fox), and 6'1" 234 (Timmons) while Barnett and Hawk are listed at 6'1" 248 and 6'2" 238. If Pittsburgh's guys are any indication, Barnett may actually be too big to play inside .

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

If Barnett can play inside than I would all for keeping him. And after Lurker's last post I guess Barnett would indeed fit the scheme. Probably the only thing now would be to hope that Barnett is ready for training camp so that he can learn the new defense. Also, since the scheme we will be running requires faster Ilb's I sincerely hope that Barnett does not lose a lot of speed after coming off the ACL injury.

Barnett scares me this season and that part of the reason why I kind of wanted to replace him. That and the fact that I want amazing linebackers in the 3-4 (I know Hawk hasn’t been amazing, but he has a lot of ability and I want to see it used properly).

I'd be willing to give him a shot, but Bishop has a great opportunity in front of him to make an impression and get some playing time.

[vince]

All the talk about weakness, inadequacy of personnel, etc. is just wrong. We have plenty of depth all around, partly due to injuries last season. I think Kampman will stay at DE, although I think he could handle OLB also. Another often disrespected--unjustifiably IMO--is Montgomery, who I see as backing up Kampman at DE. Jenkins should thrive in the 3-4. I see Jolly as backing him up with Harrell more likely to back up Pickett in the middle. Cole is another guy who played better than many give him credit for. I think he could be a decent backup at NT or even DE in run situations.

That's the first time I've been accused of being a doom-and-gloom guy here, so I kind of feel good about that... In any event, no matter how positive you are on the team overall, there are inevitably going to be some players that are not well suited for the 3-4 Tex.

Unlike some on this board, I think most of the current front seven personnel can/will make the transition effectively. I think there will be a few that won't though. In my opinon, Cole and Montgomery are two of those guys. Perhaps they'll surprise me, but absent potentially lethal doses of testosterone, I don't see Montgomery holding up as a 3-4 end, nor Cole at NT. Neither is strong enough at the point of attack at their positions in a 4-3 to be impactful, and the 3-4 will be more demanding on them. Upgrading these two spots on the roster could have a very positive impact on the team's success.

Of course it doesn't make my opinion right about these guys, but here is some support for the idea of improving these spots on the roster.

http://www.packerupdate.com/pu/2009/...to-return.html

LINEMEN ARE LESS LIKELY TO RETURN
Colin Cole and Michael Montgomery probably weren’t thrilled to hear that Dom Capers and his beloved 3-4 are coming to town. Both defensive linemen are scheduled to become unrestricted free agents late next month and neither seems to be an ideal fit for the new scheme. "Cole could probably function as a nose tackle and Montgomery as an end, but both players are better-suited for the 4-3," said a former scout. "I don’t think that either guy is stout enough at the point of attack to be anything more than a deep reserve for a team that runs a pure 3-4."

The Packers were very interested in re-signing both players as late as a few weeks ago, but that may no longer be the case. "[GM] Ted Thompson likes Cole and Montgomery a lot more than most people around the league, so you never know what will happen in the next 32 days," said the scout. "But I can’t imagine that Capers will be all that enthused about their return once he views the film from last season."