The Evolution of the Defense

[MJZiggy]

That was because of his 7,000 free agent updates.

Wrong poster. Harlan for godssakes would you change that avatar already.

[mraynrand]

Wist, you can't be serious!

Oh, yes he can!

[Scott Campbell]

The defense sucked b/c we switched schemes 4 seasons ago, and in 4 drafts after the switch TT brought in 3 players that fit the new scheme. 3 players out of a needed 14-15. That's why the defense sucked.

So we've won a Superbowl in 25% of the years since the switch?

[Iron Mike]

[3irty1]

The defense sucked b/c we switched schemes 4 seasons ago, and in 4 drafts after the switch TT brought in 3 players that fit the new scheme. 3 players out of a needed 14-15. That's why the defense sucked.

TT tried to play the '08 season with Kampman and Thompson at OLB; he drafted Raji and Matthews in '09 - okay, a good start; and he drafted Neal in '10. That's it... a scheme change, and in 4 offseasons TT only brings in 3 players?? Why are any of you surprised that the front seven sucked whorish tits??

As for Harrell, everybody knew he was a bust; Neal is looking like Harrell part deux; and TT was never going to pay Jenkins, and everyone knew it. That's not bad luck, that's poor player personnel evaluation. Even if TT had some delusion that Harrell would all of sudden produce, he still knew he was going to let Jenkins walk, and Jolly was already covered in red flags. TT simply did not lift a finger to cover the DL, and the front seven in general.

We're just discussing DL here... that's before you ever start picking about that pathetic LB'ing corp.

Bottom line is, TT did next to nothing to complete the scheme change he started in '08... it bit him in the ass last year; and that led to this year's knee-jerk reaction draft in which TT had to - absolutely had to - target every pick for scheme specific players. Had TT and the Packers paid even the least bit of attention to the front seven in '10 and '11, maybe we win the SB last year too, and we're not faced with the worst defense in the NFL and a panic draft.

Who are the 3? Who doesn't fit and why?

[pbmax]

3irty1, great post. Only one gripe. If Capers D gives up 6 yards to the run on 1st down, he won't be with us for very long. And because of that, he wouldn't stay in a 2-4. Love everything else.

wist, you have to make a chart of your complaints to keep them straight. Capers was not with the Packers in 08. Kampman was a DE, Jenkins was the other DE in a 4-3 Over run by Bob Sanders and Thompson stood on the sideline wondering how long those fantastic measurables were going to last at DE.

Also, 3 drafted front seven players makes more sense if you think Jolly and Harrell will still be playing. For at least two of those years, that looked to be the case. Didn't work out, and that falls on Thompson and Rock Gullickson, but he isn't quite as loony as you wish him to be.

Your 3 player figure should also carry the caveat that you do not consider draft picks in rounds 4-7 to be useful. Otherwise, you would need to add Wilson, Jones, Guy, Wynn, Smith and Elmore to the other three higher picks.

[wist43]

Who are the 3? Who doesn't fit and why?

I named the 3, Raji, Matthews, and Neal. Jenkins carried over; Hawk wasn't worth the 5th pick, but he carried over too; Pickett carried over; and Bishop developed. All the rest is documented, i.e. a bunch of 6th/7th rd/FA's filling out the rest of the group. And that's before you account for the minuses of the carry overs and draft investment (Jenkins and Neal).

You can say some of what cost us at the position was bad luck, i.e. Jolly; but allowing Jenkins to walk cheap, and depend on a young, injury plagued player, who had shown nothing to date?? and then to ignore the front seven altogether in the first 3 rds last year must have been an excerise in anger management for Dom.

An attacking 3-4 is all about pressure; you can only do so much with scheme and play calling. Just like any other scheme, talent matters. Eventually a lack of talent will catch up to you after teams get a decent amount of tape of what gimmicks you're running. Wynn, Wilson, Jones, Zombo, Walden, Muir, and Green all need to be moved off the roster. None of the LB's really fit an attacking 3-4, and every player on that list has proven thru playing time that they need to be moved off the roster.

[wist43]

wist, you have to make a chart of your complaints to keep them straight. Capers was not with the Packers in 08. Kampman was a DE, Jenkins was the other DE in a 4-3 Over run by Bob Sanders and Thompson stood on the sideline wondering how long those fantastic measurables were going to last at DE.

Also, 3 drafted front seven players makes more sense if you think Jolly and Harrell will still be playing. For at least two of those years, that looked to be the case. Didn't work out, and that falls on Thompson and Rock Gullickson, but he isn't quite as loony as you wish him to be.

Your 3 player figure should also carry the caveat that you do not consider draft picks in rounds 4-7 to be useful. Otherwise, you would need to add Wilson, Jones, Guy, Wynn, Smith and Elmore to the other three higher picks.

Nobody was more bummed about the loss of Jolly than I was... loved that guy.

Everyone keeps falling back to Harrell and Jolly though, and then Neal; that's a lot of faith to put in guys that all had huge question marks... all the while knowing you were going to let Jenkins walk.

As for your "caveat" about mid-round picks... I'm always yelling for more defense at every level of the draft. 3rd round picks may not be instant starters, but they have more upside than 6th rounders; 4th rounders the same; and so on... ironically, all of the guys you listed (Wilson, Jones Guy, Wynn, Smith, and Elmore) are either 6th, or 7th round picks. Not one of them is a "mid-round" pick.

Of course I appreciate 6th and 7th round picks.... I would like as many as possible to promote competition at the bottom end of the roster - and to mine for gold; but taking a front seven player in the 2nd/3rd/4th round is your organization saying they've done their homework, and think "this guy", can develop into a starting calibur NFL player. That's much more of a committment.

[3irty1]

Well believe it or not I was surprised that the defense sucked last year. I'd say the primary reason for that was because it was top 5 the two years before that. Not bad for only bringing in 3 guys. Well Bishop too but that doesn't really count because he was a mid round pick and nobody should ever expect those guys to work out. Hell, nobody should ever even expect a first round pick to work out if he had torn his biceps in college and played through it. I mean come on, that's a chronic back injury waiting to happen. Or Mike Neal? How was it not obvious to Ted that he would injure his knee in camp and need surgery? I think the rotator cuff surgery the year before should have been more than enough of a sign. Bustzilla.

[Pugger]

Well believe it or not I was surprised that the defense sucked last year. I'd say the primary reason for that was because it was top 5 the two years before that. Not bad for only bringing in 3 guys. Well Bishop too but that doesn't really count because he was a mid round pick and nobody should ever expect those guys to work out. Hell, nobody should ever even expect a first round pick to work out if he had torn his biceps in college and played through it. I mean come on, that's a chronic back injury waiting to happen. Or Mike Neal? How was it not obvious to Ted that he would injure his knee in camp and need surgery? I think the rotator cuff surgery the year before should have been more than enough of a sign. Bustzilla.

Ted isn't that clairvoyant.

[3irty1]

3irty1, great post. Only one gripe. If Capers D gives up 6 yards to the run on 1st down, he won't be with us for very long. And because of that, he wouldn't stay in a 2-4. Love everything else.

It's not that far off from the reality though. In our superbowl season everyone was talking about how the Packers run defense was lousy although this never passed the eye-ball test because the Packers were terrific at stopping the run when they needed to. Its a sound strategy in my opinion. If you watch Dom's defensive calls too he tends to make them based on down and distance more so than on who the offense brings out. If you're an offensive play caller who "takes what the defense gives you," you'll play right into Dom's hand because what he gives you is what his individual players excel at stopping. This was finally exposed last year, why take the bait when you can have great success throwing right into the teeth of the defense? The Packers 3rd down defense was the weakest personnel-wise, featuring a nose tackle that never left the field, a JAG as the other interior pass rusher, a JAG in Walden, and an nonathletic safety in Peprah. It wasn't good but it was made even worse when teams played us like every down was 3rd down.

[pbmax]

It's not that far off from the reality though. In our superbowl season everyone was talking about how the Packers run defense was lousy although this never passed the eye-ball test because the Packers were terrific at stopping the run when they needed to. Its a sound strategy in my opinion. If you watch Dom's defensive calls too he tends to make them based on down and distance more so than on who the offense brings out. If you're an offensive play caller who "takes what the defense gives you," you'll play right into Dom's hand because what he gives you is what his individual players excel at stopping. This was finally exposed last year, why take the bait when you can have great success throwing right into the teeth of the defense? The Packers 3rd down defense was the weakest personnel-wise, featuring a nose tackle that never left the field, a JAG as the other interior pass rusher, a JAG in Walden, and an nonathletic safety in Peprah. It wasn't good but it was made even worse when teams played us like every down was 3rd down.

Well, the numbers on that run defense looked pedestrian (not quite 6 ypc though) and the pass D was outstanding. And I was quite concerned that run defense. As it turned out, they could stop the run (esp with Howard Green) when they had to and the offense eventually started putting up enough points that running the Packers out of the building ceased to be a good option. But that team was 500 at one point and the D did not look like world beaters versus the Dolphins or Redskins.

I suspect that defense was not as dominant as its numbers suggest, just as the 2011 D was not as bad as its yardage number makes it look to be.

[3irty1]

Well, the numbers on that run defense looked pedestrian (not quite 6 ypc though) and the pass D was outstanding. And I was quite concerned that run defense. As it turned out, they could stop the run (esp with Howard Green) when they had to and the offense eventually started putting up enough points that running the Packers out of the building ceased to be a good option. But that team was 500 at one point and the D did not look like world beaters versus the Dolphins or Redskins.

I suspect that defense was not as dominant as its numbers suggest, just as the 2011 D was not as bad as its yardage number makes it look to be.

Well on my typical Dom Capers 3-and-out the ypc was 3.5. But that 2010 defense didn't really hit until they kicked the injury bug. Clay and Pickett were both hurt early in the Skins game which turned that D to crap. Your starting OLB for the Phins were Brady Poppinga and Brad Jones. For pretty much the whole season though the secondary was elite, even with Charlie Peprah. Its a real shame we never got to see two games in a row of Burnett and Collins.

Its amazing how bad our defense gets when you take Clay off the field. Hopefully we'll be saying the same thing about Perry on 3rd down.

[Smidgeon]

Well believe it or not I was surprised that the defense sucked last year. I'd say the primary reason for that was because it was top 5 the two years before that. Not bad for only bringing in 3 guys. Well Bishop too but that doesn't really count because he was a mid round pick and nobody should ever expect those guys to work out. Hell, nobody should ever even expect a first round pick to work out if he had torn his biceps in college and played through it. I mean come on, that's a chronic back injury waiting to happen. Or Mike Neal? How was it not obvious to Ted that he would injure his knee in camp and need surgery? I think the rotator cuff surgery the year before should have been more than enough of a sign. Bustzilla.

Excellent points.

[RashanGary]

3irty1, great post. Only one gripe. If Capers D gives up 6 yards to the run on 1st down, he won't be with us for very long. And because of that, he wouldn't stay in a 2-4. Love everything else.

If teams play 3 WR sets or greater on the majority of first downs, the risk of Matthews, Perry, Bishop or Hawk getting beat by WR's is pretty great. And if they want to bracket the interior receiver, they're leaving the two outside WR's matched up on corners with only one safety deep.

The risk of giving up a big pass against this offensive package is far greater than the risk of giving up a 6 yard run.



Now, if the Packers end up developing a premier coverage linebacker down the road, I could certainly see a 3-4 type arrangement on first and 10.

For now, Woodson is a premier inside player. Shields and Williams belong on the field. A case may soon be made for our 3rd DL being stronger than our 4th LB. In that case, 3-3-4 would make a lot of sense and IMO would be a better 1st and 10, one score game setup. It would be a better run stopping unit. Maybe a little less confusing, but a nice setup against the run and against 3 WR pass sets.

Maybe you do line Perry up as a 3rd lineman, or maybe one of these young guys is a player right away. Time will tell.

A lot of things can happen, but as long as 3 WR's are on the field, the QB wears a red shirt and CB's are at a great disadvantage near the line of scrimmage, the pass is going to be a far bigger threat against more teams. Some teams, the ones with crappy QB's, I could certainly see 3-4 being the base setup, but that is less games than more.



Like 3irty1 said, there's an evolution toward the passing game, and defenses are countering by having additional cover guys on the field to avoid bad matchups.



I'll bet dollars to dimes we play more nickle than traditional base again this year. In that case, the defense we play most, that's our base IMO.