3-Men Rush

[wist43]

You are effing relentless, Wist. First the provocative claim that most on this board prefer finesse football, and then when a Packer player does get a sack it's not because of anything he did.

Watch the play. Wilson got by Grubbs... so what, hooray. It had nothing to do with scheme. It is the scheme and alignments I'm complaining about.

[swede]

3-Men Rush is like so 70's.

[mmmdk]

Why the 3-men rush? No worries, mates!

[mraynrand]

3-Men Rush is like so 70's.

It's disturbing that Brees had so much Grace Under Pressure.

[wist43]

It's disturbing that Brees had so much Grace Under Pressure.

Grace under pressure??

Saw a guy stabbed multiple times at a Rush concert - the guy with the knife freaked out, was obviously wacked out on drugs. Started flailing around, I was next closest to him when he started stabbing the guy. All I could do was try to be ready for him if he came at me. Had blood all over me... the grace part came in when me and my chums gracefully exited the floor and went up into the nose bleed seats to smoke a joint and calm our nerves.

Took the fun out of the concert though.

[mraynrand]

Grace under pressure??

Saw a guy stabbed multiple times at a Rush concert - the guy with the knife freaked out, was obviously wacked out on drugs. Started flailing around, I was next closest to him when he started stabbing the guy. All I could do was try to be ready for him if he came at me. Had blood all over me... the grace part came in when me and my chums gracefully exited the floor and went up into the nose bleed seats to smoke a joint and calm our nerves.

Took the fun out of the concert though.

Were they playing 'Losing it' from Subdivisions at the time?

[LegandofthePack15]

Most of the guys on this board like finesse football... so Capers is a wet dream for them.

You don't hear the term much anymore, but back in the 80's when teams offenses were geared much more toward the run, it was customary when you got a lead late in a game to go into a "prevent defense", i.e. rush 3 and drop 8.

Of course all that usually resulted in is what it results in today, i.e. easy yards and eventually good opportunities for points. Nothing much has changed except that teams are now much more geared for the passing game, and the rules have been changed to aid the offense.

Rushing 3 in the 80's was stupid then - it's stupid now. Rushing 3 is the equivalent of saying our front seven sucks so bad, we know we can't get home, so we'll drop everyone and hope for the best. It's a very frustrating style of football to watch.

TT may as well not have even gone out and resupplied the front seven - Capers isn't going to use them anyway.

Well said.

[mmmdk]

I don't like finesse football, especially on Defense. Packers defense is young though and they really look confused at times but is that due mediocre talent or crappy teachings by their coaches? Or both!? I think our offense is only "finesse" due to our lack of power to the O-line as they get pushed around a lot; AR is tough as nails and receivers are slumping.

[denverYooper]

I don't like finesse football, especially on Defense. Packers defense is young though and they really look confused at times but is that due mediocre talent or crappy teachings by their coaches? Or both!? I think our offense is only "finesse" due to our lack of power to the O-line as they get pushed around a lot; AR is tough as nails and receivers are slumping.

Disagree about OL. They have more problems with speed. They seem to do fine against power.

[Patler]

I love finesse football. In fact, I think all the players should wear belts with little plastic flags tucked into them, to be pulled out for a "tackle". That way, they won't hurt each other, and shouldn't even get their uniforms dirty. Think of all the stunning pirouettes to be performed by ball carriers to avoid the grabby-handed defenders! Classical music would be a perfect background.

[George Cumby]

I love finesse football. In fact, I think all the players should wear belts with little plastic flags tucked into them, to be pulled out for a "tackle". That way, they won't hurt each other, and shouldn't even get their uniforms dirty. Think of all the stunning pirouettes to be performed by ball carriers to avoid the grabby-handed defenders! Classical music would be a perfect background.

A little "Swan Lake" perhaps?

[ThunderDan]

I love finesse football. In fact, I think all the players should wear belts with little plastic flags tucked into them, to be pulled out for a "tackle". That way, they won't hurt each other, and shouldn't even get their uniforms dirty. Think of all the stunning pirouettes to be performed by ball carriers to avoid the grabby-handed defenders! Classical music would be a perfect background.

And all the players have to wear bras and tinfoil hats. And the ball is now a ballon so no one gets hurt. And the players have to hug each other while the person with the ballon compliments the other team. Let's call it sarcastiball.

Stole that from South Park.

[Patler]

A little "Swan Lake" perhaps?

A good tune for a playoff game!

[Fritz]

A good tune for a playoff game!

What is getting lost in all this - and I am enjoying the fun, so it's not a criticism - is the question of the effectiveness of the three man rush.

Somewhere PB Max wrote that the bigger issue may be the problem of eight people not being able to cover four or five receivers. But if I understand the coverages correctly, in the three man rush the team drops two safeties very deep, with the mandate that no one gets behind them. To me, this nearly eliminates them from covering anything short or medium or even long range - conceivably, if a receiver runs a pattern that goes fifteen yards, the safeties still are supposed to be behind him. So in one sense you actually have only six guys who can cover the receivers, so your odds aren't so good any more.

I despise Wist's approach to this topic, but if I try not to let my anger get the best of me and just focus on the topic, I come to the conclusion that the three man rush can be used as a change of pace, but Capers's reliance on it is unsettling to me. I much prefer sending four or five guys so if nothing else the pocket is tighter and harder to throw out of, then playing six or seven back.

I do realize that Capers tried to blitz last year, and it just didn't work. How many times did we see Capers send a bunch of guys in, only to have them all picked up and blocked? It was maddening.

I think what really bothers me at the heart of it is the Packers' defensive concept that defensive linemen just take up blockers so linebackers can make tackles. I just don't like it. If you turned Worthy and Raji loose to get upfield, it seems like you'd be using their skills much better. Then you wouldn't have to blitz five or six so much, you'd think. I like the idea of disruptive, penetrating defensive linemen. And I think the Packers have two or three or maybe even four guys who, by the end of the year, could do this.

[mraynrand]

A little "Swan Lake" perhaps?

I suggest Grieg's "In the hall of the Mountain King" for the hurry-up offense.