PACKERS' ... Secret Superstar: Brad Jones

[wist43]

I saw some of the most atrocious running on a GB team in quite some time last year. Watching Alex Green run for like 60 yards on 40-something carries against the Texans was an interesting display.

On the other hand, Benson's 3 yds and a cloud of dust started to show signs of improvement. His play at Indianapolis in week 5 (before injury, of course) made it seem like he was finally getting the system, and enjoying going against only 6-7 in the box.

I think McCarthy and the rest of the offensive staff have discussed the same issues we have ad nauseum. Their offensive season analysis clearly identified a deficiency. TTs draft is proof. Lots of change to O-line and the addition of some new talented runners will lead to improvement, even if their may be some early hiccups.

For 2013, look for Harris/Green to be a solid tandem to begin of the season. Green's knee will be finally healed and he has flashed in open space. Lacy/Franklin will come on as the season ages. Lacy particularly will cure our 3rd and short woes.

Mark my words, the running game will not be our achilles heal this year.

I like a lot of the players that TT has drafted - I've said that most years.

My main complaints are philosophical - and how those players are used.

I think both our offense and defense can both be better in the trenches - what holds us back are some drawbacks with body type, coaching philosophies, game planning, and play calling.

The offensive line flip was a dramatic move. You just don't see that kind of thing at the NFL level. Our line had become so dysfunctional, that it was killing the entire offense - including our MVP QB.

But it was MM's and TT's obsession with "versatility" that landed us in that boat to begin with. How many years did we play where guys didn't even have a semi-settled position until week 12?? You can't do that year in and year out, and not expect to have major problems.

Add to that MM's pyschotic determination to use only 3 running plays that have the offensive linemen up out of their stance quickly, running tall, reach blocking, zone blocking, and balletically floating left, middle, right - soft, soft, soft. The charge that the Packers are soft up front is entirely valid - and it's mostly self-inflicted.

The OL flip can't help but help, but we need more power running plays incorporated into every game plan. If MM just keeps doing what he's been doing, then we're going to continue to struggle.

It all depends on what MM and Capers do with the players they've been given. If MM sticks to his 3 running plays; and Capers plays 2-4 as his base?? Then we're going to see a repeat of last year, i.e. SF will beat the living hell out of us, and we'll be powerless to do anything about it.

If MM and Capers correct those philosophical shortcomings, then I think we'll see improvement - not holding my breath though.

[packer4life]

If Capers plays 2-4 as his base??

His 2-4 Base with Neal at OLB looks pretty damn solid to me. Sprinkle in Jolly relieving Raji inside and I think a 2-4 might just dominate.

[wist43]

His 2-4 Base with Neal at OLB looks pretty damn solid to me. Sprinkle in Jolly relieving Raji inside and I think a 2-4 might just dominate.

This how you dominate - you have to control the LOS. The Niners do that; the Seahawks do that... the Packers?? not so much.

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/blog/pat-kirwan/22315031/tough-days-for-front-sevens-but-best-reside-in-rugged-nfc-west

The Niners and Seahawks are probably the two best front sevens in football. They do something Capers hates to do... they play with 3 DL on the field much more often than Capers does. Capers wants to play 2-4 as his base as much as he can... more soft, soft, soft.

Many people make the charge that the Packers are a soft team - as I've said, those wounds are self-inflicted.

[3irty1]

The 49ers play about the NFL average of 3-4 base, 2-4 nickel, and 2-3dime. Roughly 45%, 45%, 10% respectively. The Packers run an unusual amount of nickel as we all know. The numbers are about 27%, 63%, 5% respectively.

Pittsburgh, Houston, and KC run the most base of any 3-4 team, an above average amount of dime as well for some reason.

Pittsburg: 58% 3-4, 26% 2-4, and 15% 2-3
Houston: 57% 3-4, 2% 2-4, and 38% 2-3
KC: 55% 3-4, 9% 3-4, 33% 2-3

[woodbuck27]

The 49ers play about the NFL average of 3-4 base, 2-4 nickel, and 2-3dime. Roughly 45%, 45%, 10% respectively. The Packers run an unusual amount of nickel as we all know. The numbers are about 27%, 63%, 5% respectively.

Pittsburgh, Houston, and KC run the most base of any 3-4 team, an above average amount of dime as well for some reason.

Pittsburg: 58% 3-4, 26% 2-4, and 15% 2-3
Houston: 57% 3-4, 2% 2-4, and 38% 2-3
KC: 55% 3-4, 9% 3-4, 33% 2-3

Hi 3irty1:

Do you have a Source please? If so ... Thank You Packer fan.

The numbers are about 27% (Base 'D') , 63% (Nickel), 5% (Dime) respectively for the Green Bay Packers.

So could Wist43 have been correct? It seems to me that he was in terms of all the stunting that Dom Capers does.

How can anyone tell what kind of 'D' we really do run!? How given that... can the Packers defensive players settle into any fluid and consistent comfort zone with 'only' playing a Base 'D' < 30 % of the time. Are our defensive players that intelligent? Can they be really comfortable in their roles?

PACKERS !

[3irty1]

I had a friend parse it out for me from data he keeps. Those numbers are from 2011.

You can tell what kind of D a team runs by how many DL and LB are on the field at a given time. Our players aren't any more intellegent, they are just rotated heavily. In a lot of situations other teams would use a 3-4 we use a beefy 2-4 with Raji and Picket. I think that one package probably accounts for the entire difference between us and what's normal.

Those 3 teams that go right from base to dime are what I find the most interesting.

[wist43]

I had a friend parse it out for me from data he keeps. Those numbers are from 2011.

You can tell what kind of D a team runs by how many DL and LB are on the field at a given time. Our players aren't any more intellegent, they are just rotated heavily. In a lot of situations other teams would use a 3-4 we use a beefy 2-4 with Raji and Picket. I think that one package probably accounts for the entire difference between us and what's normal.

Those 3 teams that go right from base to dime are what I find the most interesting.

Read that article from cbssportline I posted... talks about SF staying base 3-4 regardless of what they're facing. They're not static of course, but they stay in base 3-4 a lot. To me, going to a 2-4 is utterly useless. Even we ran against it when SF inexplicably pulled it out against us.

What was the breakdown in the Baltimore vs. NE game?? Now that would be an interesting look. New England with all their midgets.

You think I hate how the Packers ballarina around with the OL - my God, I hate Bill Belichick, and that midget RB, Woodhead is now with my second favorite team, the Chargers.

It looks like Belichick trying to beef up his running game though, bringing in LeGarrett Blount, and Ridley and Boldin are both 220 lbs.

[wist43]

I looked at a little of the Balt @ NE game... Balt had guys standing up on the ends a lot, sometimes had their hand on the ground; but the players they're doing that with are much bigger than ours. Kruger was listed 285, Upshaw 272, Suggs 260. They also had Safeties crowding the line a lot.

[pbmax]

I saw some of the most atrocious running on a GB team in quite some time last year. Watching Alex Green run for like 60 yards on 40-something carries against the Texans was an interesting display.

On the other hand, Benson's 3 yds and a cloud of dust started to show signs of improvement. His play at Indianapolis in week 5 (before injury, of course) made it seem like he was finally getting the system, and enjoying going against only 6-7 in the box.

I think McCarthy and the rest of the offensive staff have discussed the same issues we have ad nauseum. Their offensive season analysis clearly identified a deficiency. TTs draft is proof. Lots of change to O-line and the addition of some new talented runners will lead to improvement, even if their may be some early hiccups.

For 2013, look for Harris/Green to be a solid tandem to begin of the season. Green's knee will be finally healed and he has flashed in open space. Lacy/Franklin will come on as the season ages. Lacy particularly will cure our 3rd and short woes.

Mark my words, the running game will not be our achilles heal this year.

Don't forget that Harris averaged 4.6 per carry. Much of this was after Lang went back to Guard and Barclay went to RT.

[pbmax]

Okay, let's look at the second 49er game - surely this went much better, yes??

16 rushes for 106 yds... sounds kind of promising. But alas, Cobb and Rodgers account for half of it. Harris had 11-53 yds. Take the 18 yd brain-fart (by the Niners), and you have 10 rushes for 35 yds.

That is right in keeping with the teams overall 3.5 yd/avg.

You cannot eliminate the best play by calling it a fluke and not eliminate any other data at the other end of the spectrum and call it an honest analysis. Harris ran for those 18 yards and scored. The play was real and it counted in the most important way.

Harris was 11 for 53, or an average of 4.8 per carry.

BTW, Culliver played 48 snaps of defense versus the Packers in the playoffs, unless there was an injury I forgot about, that's 48 snaps of nickel.

[3irty1]

I looked at a little of the Balt @ NE game... Balt had guys standing up on the ends a lot, sometimes had their hand on the ground; but the players they're doing that with are much bigger than ours. Kruger was listed 285, Upshaw 272, Suggs 260. They also had Safeties crowding the line a lot.

Both of those teams doing do anything consistent, they seem to be true multiples defenses. Both run a good amount of 4-2 even with OLB playing DE.

[pbmax]

Read that article from cbssportline I posted... talks about SF staying base 3-4 regardless of what they're facing. They're not static of course, but they stay in base 3-4 a lot. To me, going to a 2-4 is utterly useless. Even we ran against it when SF inexplicably pulled it out against us.

The article does not say that. It talks specifically about first down. Other material referenced earlier tells us that San Fran, like every other team, matches personnel groups when possible and they spend 50% of their time in nickel versus 3 wides.

Seattle's Marcus Trufant was their nickel back for 2012 until something happened (injury, replacement?) and he appeared in 12 games total. He was on the field for 352 D snaps. Prorated for 12 games, (using one of the safeties to get total snaps) 97% of D snaps for 976 plays yields 1006 total D snaps over 18 games. Playing in 12 of 18 games gives us .66667 * 1006 total D snaps; tells us Trufant was available for 671 snaps.

352/671 = Seattle played nickel approximately 52.5% of their snaps.

[3irty1]

Read that article from cbssportline I posted... talks about SF staying base 3-4 regardless of what they're facing. They're not static of course, but they stay in base 3-4 a lot. To me, going to a 2-4 is utterly useless. Even we ran against it when SF inexplicably pulled it out against us.

What was the breakdown in the Baltimore vs. NE game?? Now that would be an interesting look. New England with all their midgets.

You think I hate how the Packers ballarina around with the OL - my God, I hate Bill Belichick, and that midget RB, Woodhead is now with my second favorite team, the Chargers.

It looks like Belichick trying to beef up his running game though, bringing in LeGarrett Blount, and Ridley and Boldin are both 220 lbs.

You're not talking about this one are you? http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/blog/pa...ugged-nfc-west

I didn't find where it says anything like the bold part here.

[3irty1]

The article does not say that. It talks specifically about first down. Other material referenced earlier tells us that San Fran, like every other team, matches personnel groups when possible and they spend 50% of their time in nickel versus 3 wides.

Seattle's Marcus Trufant was their nickel back for 2012 until something happened (injury, replacement?) and he appeared in 12 games total. He was on the field for 352 D snaps. Prorated for 12 games, (using one of the safeties to get total snaps) 97% of D snaps for 976 plays yields 1006 total D snaps over 18 games. Playing in 12 of 18 games gives us .66667 * 1006 total D snaps; tells us Trufant was available for 671 snaps.

352/671 = Seattle played nickel approximately 52.5% of their snaps.

Its my understanding that Wist wouldn't have a problem with Seattle playing 100% of their downs in Nickel because they do so with 4 down lineman. That's why I stuck to 3-4 teams that spend the vast majority of their nickel snaps in a 2-4. I can say with confidence though that between nickel and dime, the 49ers spend more snaps with 2 down lineman than they do with 3.

I'm hoping to take the discussion past the point where its obvious that the 2-4 itself isn't idiotic. How the Packers use the 2-4 might be very idiotic and that's what I'd rather talk about.

[Cheesehead Craig]

I like a lot of the players that TT has drafted - I've said that most years.

My main complaints are philosophical - and how those players are used.

I think both our offense and defense can both be better in the trenches - what holds us back are some drawbacks with body type, coaching philosophies, game planning, and play calling.

The offensive line flip was a dramatic move. You just don't see that kind of thing at the NFL level. Our line had become so dysfunctional, that it was killing the entire offense - including our MVP QB.

But it was MM's and TT's obsession with "versatility" that landed us in that boat to begin with. How many years did we play where guys didn't even have a semi-settled position until week 12?? You can't do that year in and year out, and not expect to have major problems.

Add to that MM's pyschotic determination to use only 3 running plays that have the offensive linemen up out of their stance quickly, running tall, reach blocking, zone blocking, and balletically floating left, middle, right - soft, soft, soft. The charge that the Packers are soft up front is entirely valid - and it's mostly self-inflicted.

The OL flip can't help but help, but we need more power running plays incorporated into every game plan. If MM just keeps doing what he's been doing, then we're going to continue to struggle.

It all depends on what MM and Capers do with the players they've been given. If MM sticks to his 3 running plays; and Capers plays 2-4 as his base?? Then we're going to see a repeat of last year, i.e. SF will beat the living hell out of us, and we'll be powerless to do anything about it.

If MM and Capers correct those philosophical shortcomings, then I think we'll see improvement - not holding my breath though.

While I will say I don't like your over the top you do at times about how bad the defense or OL is, I will say that I agree with a large portion of this post.