PACKERS' ... Secret Superstar: Brad Jones

[Zool]

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.

Take out the longest gain by a RB and their average doesn't look as good. ANY RB. Geezus Wist, SF had the 4th ranked run D last year. No shit the Packers didn't run well against them. I can't tell if you're trying to prove a point, or you've been fighting so long you don't know how to stop.

[3irty1]

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.

Nice post. I think where you and I disagree is that I don't think you scheme "softness" From where I stand that comes from the players. The Bears D under Lovie for the last 10 years was as schematically unagressive as a defense can get but it was full of physical and aggressive players. I don't think it matters that we are playing with 2 down lineman if our OLB are fast and physical enough. Diagnosing the Packers scientifically I think we can rule out the 2-4 as the root of the problem. To me the 2-4 is fine, its the linebackers who suck. Capers probably sucks too but for different reasons mostly having to do with how when his defenses break, they shatter and there is never any adjustments or plan B.

As for 3 running plays that's kind of how offenses work. In fact of the 3 teams usually have a single favorite that shows through and acts as the basis for everything they want to do on the whole offense. The zone blocking system is so incredibly proven at this point. I scientifically rule that out too. Other teams dominate with it. We just have shitty players in there. Whether by injury, musical chairs or whatever circumstance they just suck. Maybe not all of them but as a group they have given up like 90 sacks in the last two years and haven't come remotely close to a 1000 yard rusher.

[pbmax]

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.

And that is the problem with focusing on the Packers in a 2-4. With two down lineman it sounds like you would have to be undersized and underpowered. But you have to compare like for like and personnel to personnel. For the vast majority of snaps (close to 50% of total D snaps) everyone is in nickel to match personnel. And if you run a 3-4, you take out a lineman and add a DB. Because no one wants a NT on the field to pass rush unless they are Wilfork or Ngata. And if you need to match 3 wide personnel but expect a run anyway, then you use a big nickel or keep the 3 DL, but that is a minority of downs.

We are conflating a problem with Run D and Capers extra 10-15% use of nickel.

The Seahawks nickel 4 lineman will look like Bob Sanders 4 down lineman in terms of size. Bruce Irvin is a DE like KGB was a DE small and fast. Kampman was undersized for a Power side LDE and I cannot name the power side pass rushing LDE on the Seahawks. The 49ers move good sized DE Justin Smith inside (good news rb, I just read somewhere that Smith is 285 now) to tackle and line up a LB as DE.

But none of these edge guys are bigger and do not play tougher than Clay Matthews and Nick Perry. Whatever difference is found is not sizable enough to blame it on the two LBs as DEs.

The 2-4 also does not explain poor run defense even in the base 3-4. Walden was a problem here as well as the nickel, not because of size or strength but because of discipline and patience. He was a terrible backside defender.

If there is a problem on the D line, its interior, not the exterior. And I think the problem on the interior is adherence to scheme.

The Packers did not play much nickel versus Peterson on run downs and for two games the extra DLineman made virtually no difference.

[woodbuck27]

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.

pbmax:

What's going to happen to DuJuan 'Mighty Mouse' Harris this season?

Will he be primarily used as a backup? I believe he'll certainly compete to make the roster. He's got a lot of moxy.

PACKERS !

[run pMc]

I came across this and thought it was interesting:

In as stunning an upset as there has been in recent playoff history, the Green Bay Packers throttled the San Francisco 49ers on Saturday with a big-play offense and a defense that lined up in nickel or dime formations on all but one of 86 plays.

link to story:

http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/1996-01-07/sports/9601070088_1_49ers-offensive-coordinator-brent-jones-nfc

[pbmax]

pbmax:

What's going to happen to DuJuan 'Mighty Mouse' Harris this season?

Will he be primarily used as a backup? I believe he'll certainly compete to make the roster. He's got a lot of moxy.

PACKERS !

No idea. The Packer have a healthy Alex Green ahead of Harris on the depth chart. Franklin and Lacy have to make the team. That would seem to leave Harris and Starks fighting for the 4th RB slot. With Kuhn, that's 5 back. Unless they keep 6, I think Harris sticks and Starks gets the boot.

[Zool]

No idea. The Packer have a healthy Alex Green ahead of Harris on the depth chart. Franklin and Lacy have to make the team. That would seem to leave Harris and Starks fighting for the 4th RB slot. With Kuhn, that's 5 back. Unless they keep 6, I think Harris sticks and Starks gets the boot.

Can't they just line up a trash can and save Kuhn's salary? Would they really be missing out on much if they did? Granted the FB dive would gain 0 yards instead of .5 but that seems like a good trade off.

[run pMc]

Whether you love or hate the scheme, it's on the players to execute it.
I have to think that with teams throwing the ball so much that there's more value in having a 2-4 than a 3-3...it's easier to disguise which LB you send after the QB. If you have teams like NO, DET, etc. that throw all the time (and from shotgun) on your schedule you either need:
a fearsome pass rushing DL to sack/pressure the QB
-or-
LBs who can cover and tackle.

This is where Brad Jones fits into the scheme.

[3irty1]

And that is the problem with focusing on the Packers in a 2-4. With two down lineman it sounds like you would have to be undersized and underpowered. But you have to compare like for like and personnel to personnel. For the vast majority of snaps (close to 50% of total D snaps) everyone is in nickel to match personnel. And if you run a 3-4, you take out a lineman and add a DB. Because no one wants a NT on the field to pass rush unless they are Wilfork or Ngata. And if you need to match 3 wide personnel but expect a run anyway, then you use a big nickel or keep the 3 DL, but that is a minority of downs.

We are conflating a problem with Run D and Capers extra 10-15% use of nickel.

The Seahawks nickel 4 lineman will look like Bob Sanders 4 down lineman in terms of size. Bruce Irvin is a DE like KGB was a DE small and fast. Kampman was undersized for a Power side LDE and I cannot name the power side pass rushing LDE on the Seahawks. The 49ers move good sized DE Justin Smith inside (good news rb, I just read somewhere that Smith is 285 now) to tackle and line up a LB as DE.

But none of these edge guys are bigger and do not play tougher than Clay Matthews and Nick Perry. Whatever difference is found is not sizable enough to blame it on the two LBs as DEs.

The 2-4 also does not explain poor run defense even in the base 3-4. Walden was a problem here as well as the nickel, not because of size or strength but because of discipline and patience. He was a terrible backside defender.

If there is a problem on the D line, its interior, not the exterior. And I think the problem on the interior is adherence to scheme.

The Packers did not play much nickel versus Peterson on run downs and for two games the extra DLineman made virtually no difference.

Bruce Irvin doesn't play every down, the Seahawks platoon him with Red Bryant when they want beef on the field. Chris Clemons is their other DE.

I agree Walden is a huge addition by subtraction but that LB group as a whole has been a consistent problem for us. OLB was my choice for biggest need this offseason simply because we're an injury away from being right back where we were last year or in 2011. The DL got addressed instead and is now the strongest group in camp. I can see how the front 7 could easily be the best we've ever ever had in the Capers era but we're an injury away from Dezmon Moses starting. Could be worse but still. The Ravens and Giants were all at least 3 deep with pass rushers in recent years and it served them really well in the playoffs.

[pbmax]

Agree on OLB depth.

But Bruce Irvin is exactly my point. Everyone wants to compare the Packers 2-4 lineman to the 3-4 heavy package from 2010 with Howard Green as DE. That's just nuts.

Perry and Matthews are DEs in passing situations just as Irvin or A Smith are. They need to be compared to KGB not Reggie White.

Now if someone can tease out data or film that shows the extra 10-20% of nickel is getting gashed by the run MORE THAN THE BASE D, then I will start to buy the theory. But I haven't seen it yet. The worst play of the 49er game in the second half came against Eagle Oakie and the 3-4 base.

[Pugger]

No idea. The Packer have a healthy Alex Green ahead of Harris on the depth chart. Franklin and Lacy have to make the team. That would seem to leave Harris and Starks fighting for the 4th RB slot. With Kuhn, that's 5 back. Unless they keep 6, I think Harris sticks and Starks gets the boot.

Starks' biggest problem is he cannot stay on the field. If you spend more time on the trainer's table than on the gridiron you won't last long.

[rbaloha1]

Starks' biggest problem is he cannot stay on the field. If you spend more time on the trainer's table than on the gridiron you won't last long.

You can not make the club from the tub.

Depth charts are meaningless at this point.

Backups need to perform when given the opportunity.

[wist43]

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.

The gist of the article is the ability to handle anything from one personnel group. He uses the 49ers as an example. He does jump from talking about how a team needs to be able to account for any formation with any personnel, and then he goes on to focus on first down, and the need to be able to handle other down and distance situations out of your base b/c of how the league has changed from run-centric to anything goes.

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

"Nowadays a team like the Patriots can jog onto the field on first down with two tight ends, two wide receivers and a running back and coordinators are forced to use a base defense that has to be ready for everything from a no-back set to a two- or three-back set.

"Add the no huddle concept on second down, and NFL defenses have to be able to play every situation from their base defense. That means the front seven players have to be dynamic athletes who can be stout against a power run game as well as line up against a no-back spread set and have enough calls to confuse the quarterback.

"The front seven comprises the defensive linemen and the linebackers, whether it is a 3-4 or 4-3 defense. The growing popularity of the 3-4 does provide more flexibility to adjust to the challenges that offenses present, but 4-3 teams have their own ways of adjusting. Otherwise, there wouldn't be any 4-3 defenses left.

"Hall of Fame coach Bill Walsh once told me that the key to great offense was the ability to handle every down and distance from one personnel group. That forced defensive coordinators to make the decision about what personnel group they wanted to put on the field.

"What are the challenges that defenses face?

"Over the past three years NFL offenses haven't changed their thinking when it comes to first down philosophy. The last three seasons are carbon copies of themselves in the run/pass ratio on first downs. The formula has been 52 percent run and 48 percent pass.

"Defenses have to be able to handle that balance equally as well. Take the 2012 Bucs, for example. Tampa Bay had the top-ranked run defense on first down, giving up 3.56 yards per run. But the Bucs also had the worst pass defense on first down, giving up the most passing plays over 4 yards at 146.

"Teams have to play both aspects of an offense or they are going to struggle. When it comes to second down there were 12 teams in the NFL that ran the ball at least 45 percent of the time on all second downs. In the old days, a breakdown of every second down situation would provide a solid scouting report about what to do with the front seven. A second down with 2-5 yards to go could be a heavy run down. A second-and-1 or less could be a 'free' down and a deep ball situation. A second down with more than 5 yards to go could be draws and screens. Today the front seven better be ready for anything.

"When it comes to evaluating a defensive front seven, first down is the first place to look. The San Francisco 49ers were the best, giving up 4.38 yards per first down. They were third-best on first downs against the run at 3.79 a rush and No. 1 against the pass at 5.03 per pass. And the Niners' opponents were right on the NFL average with 52.7 percent run and 47.3 percent pass on first down.

"Teams tried everything, and simply, the 49ers could handle it. Consider the 49ers' front seven and the reasons they were so good. Justin Smith led a front three on the defensive line that was strong and could control the line of scrimmage. Everything was funneled to the linebackers and waiting for any formation and any play call was Patrick Willis, NaVorro Bowman, Aldon Smith and Ahmad Brooks. The linebackers had five interceptions, 24 passes defended and 29 sacks."

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

Can you imagine?? Linebackers involved in turnover plays?? Been watching the Packers so long I wasn't sure that was still legal

[wist43]

You guys - if we got production out of our 2-4 I'd be okay with it - but we don't get production.

Capers tends to be very static for long stretches, he's impossibly slow to make adjustments, and when he does make adjustments he's more likely to make it worse. If his initial gameplan works, our defense will usually be okay; if his initial gameplan is crap (far too often), we're screwed.

Even old, classy pro Charles Woodson couldn't mind his tongue after the Niner debacle - to paraphrase Charles, when it comes to Dom Capers?? "... WTF is he doing!!!"

[3irty1]

You guys - if we got production out of our 2-4 I'd be okay with it - but we don't get production.

Capers tends to be very static for long stretches, he's impossibly slow to make adjustments, and when he does make adjustments he's more likely to make it worse. If his initial gameplan works, our defense will usually be okay; if his initial gameplan is crap (far too often), we're screwed.

Even old, classy pro Charles Woodson couldn't mind his tongue after the Niner debacle - to paraphrase Charles, when it comes to Dom Capers?? "... WTF is he doing!!!"

Yeah but other teams do. You want to talk about how Capers is bad at it then lets do that. I'd rather not have a discussion where we are talking about how the 2-4 is shit, Capers version of it is shit, Capers is shit, the players are shit, and the shitty players don't fit in the shitty scheme. That's too many claims at once to be serious or credible. Unpacking those claims one at a time I think its safe to at least say there is nothing inherently wrong with the 2-4. It works for other teams. Let's at least narrow down our woes to either Capers's specific use of the 2-4, Capers inability to adjust during a game, shitty players, or shitty fits in the scheme.

Personally I can't pin blame on the Capers scheme, it seems fine. I think Capers sucks on game day and the players are shitty but not bad fits. Shitty and injured are effectively the same thing.