Burnett the clean up tackler

[rbaloha1]

On its face, it sounds like the kind of contra-conventional wisdom you would get from someone on NFL Tonight in order to start a debate. But I am willing to listen.

Those plays by Kap were not the only ones to go bad, so everything could help.

It was demonstrated with tape and appeared correct.

[rbaloha1]

On its face, it sounds like the kind of contra-conventional wisdom you would get from someone on NFL Tonight in order to start a debate. But I am willing to listen.

Those plays by Kap were not the only ones to go bad, so everything could help.

Why do you always accuse media of intentionally provoking debate if it is contrary to your views?

The point was singling out of EW when there was numerous team breakdowns.

The bad performance started with Capers poor game prep.

[pbmax]

Why do you always accuse media of intentionally provoking debate if it is contrary to your views?

The point was singling out of EW when there was numerous team breakdowns.

The bad performance started with Capers poor game prep.

Because if I pointed out everytime ESPN or talk radio started a staged debate to increase ratings, I would have no time for anything else. I mention it when its germane to a conversation I am having. Seems kinds reasonable to me. I shouldn't be forced to post both sides of an argument, should I?

In this case, I do recall someone (possibly you) mentioning this coverage at the time. But I do not remember this conclusion:

... espn football analysts showed why Walden was not at fault. Walden was performing assignments correctly but other players were not.

Much depends on who is doing the analysis because some at ESPN do their work and are current. Many simply blather platitudes and conventional wisdom.

But if you have a link, or can find an article covering the material, I would love to see it. Because as I said above, there were too many mistakes and Walden wasn't it on all of them. But he had two of the worst, including the 56 yard touchdown. And if someone at ESPN actually said he was not at fault at all, I would love to know how they came to that conclusion.

[rbaloha1]

Because if I pointed out everytime ESPN or talk radio started a staged debate to increase ratings, I would have no time for anything else. I mention it when its germane to a conversation I am having. Seems kinds reasonable to me. I shouldn't be forced to post both sides of an argument, should I?

In this case, I do recall someone (possibly you) mentioning this coverage at the time. But I do not remember this conclusion:



Much depends on who is doing the analysis because some at ESPN do their work and are current. Many simply blather platitudes and conventional wisdom.

But if you have a link, or can find an article covering the material, I would love to see it. Because as I said above, there were too many mistakes and Walden wasn't it on all of them. But he had two of the worst, including the 56 yard touchdown. And if someone at ESPN actually said he was not at fault at all, I would love to know how they came to that conclusion.

It was from some tv show. Unsure if on-line stuff exists.

No offense -- but I am going to take seriously what ex-nfl players and coaches that watch coach's tape conclude.

[rbaloha1]

Because if I pointed out everytime ESPN or talk radio started a staged debate to increase ratings, I would have no time for anything else. I mention it when its germane to a conversation I am having. Seems kinds reasonable to me. I shouldn't be forced to post both sides of an argument, should I?

In this case, I do recall someone (possibly you) mentioning this coverage at the time. But I do not remember this conclusion:



Much depends on who is doing the analysis because some at ESPN do their work and are current. Many simply blather platitudes and conventional wisdom.

But if you have a link, or can find an article covering the material, I would love to see it. Because as I said above, there were too many mistakes and Walden wasn't it on all of them. But he had two of the worst, including the 56 yard touchdown. And if someone at ESPN actually said he was not at fault at all, I would love to know how they came to that conclusion.

Coach Greene disagrees with you.

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/article/20130115/PKR0101/130115073/Don-t-blame-Walden-Kaepernick-s-TD-dash-says-Greene

[rbaloha1]

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1569001-how-erik-walden-duped-colts-into-overpaying-for-his-services

For rats that equate salary based on performance.

[Cleft Crusty]

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1...r-his-services

It's remarkable how, according to some unnamed ESPN source, Walden was not responsible for any of the problems versus SF, yet he had to 'dupe' the Colts into paying him a "whole 16 million" (the amazing thing is that 8 million is guaranteed; that's a lot for dog meat like Walden, but pretty low for a starting OLB).



Clefty struggles to find anyone who thought Walden played well against the 49ers, and most attribute the major breakdowns to Walden. Walden played well against the Colts, and played well against the Bears at the end of 2010. He flashes here and there, and that seems to tease teams into thinking they will get that 16+ games each year. But, by this time in a player's career, you know what you're getting: for Walden that's a guy who will play like a dud 14 games a year, and maybe have one or two solid, eye catching games. If you're the Colts, you hope those are in the playoffs.

Walden was at his worst in the Packers' playoff loss to the San Francisco 49ers. While he certainly wasn't the only reason why the Packers lost, he was truly awful. His failures were a large reason why 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick ran wild for 181 yards and 2 scores on the ground. PFF once again ranked him dead last in the NFL in pass rushing among 3-4 outside linebackers. They also ranked him dead last on their list of free agent edge defenders. The Green Bay Packers really had no desire to re-sign him, Walden would later say. It isn't hard to see why. Devin Shanley of Acme Packing Company, the Packers SB Nation blog, wrote this of Walden in his free agent preview of the outside linebacker:

Likelihood Of Re-Signing

I hope with all my being that it’s poor. I’ll say this again, Walden is the worst OLB available in free agency right now according to PFF. The Packers could sign literally anyone else and have it be an upgrade. The problem is that Ted Thompson likes to keep his own guys and Walden is bound to be extra cheap (he is the worst OLB free agent available after all); so it’s not unreasonable to expect him back trying out for the team again in 2013. Sigh….I think I died a little typing that sentence.

[denverYooper]

Coach Greene disagrees with you.

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/...sh-says-Greene

In a sport that requires so much esprit de corps, it would be terrible form for a coach to specifically call out a player to the media, especially immediately after an emotional loss.

[pbmax]

Coach Greene disagrees with you.

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/...sh-says-Greene

Yes, and I have pointed to those statements before. Green did defend him. But KYPack caught the NFL Films tape of the game and while mic'd up, Green told Walden after the play that he "can't do that".

So while it does not clear anyone else of fault on the play (the CB was no help and Wood took a bad angle) it seems clear Green was defending his guy.

[RashanGary]

More and more, I'm with Wist on the players not fitting a scheme. Joe Whitt said they played press defense last year, and that's why Tramon had a lesser year. He said Tramon can play press, but he's best in off coverage. Shields, on the other hand, plays best in press coverage. They took Tramon out of his playmaking role because Shields is better at press.

Obviously Raji and Clay's strong points conflict and Clay is going to win that decision.

We never should have been playing press man coverage against SF. We should have been off, facing the ball. But Shields can't, so we were forced into an idiotic scheme that puts our OLBs in awful position. Shields looks good because he's good at one thing. We do the one thing he's good at because the other guys are more complete players and can play the other defenses better. Still, everyone suffers because of Shields inability to play most defenses. As much talent as we have, I think we do ourselves a huge disservice by catering to Sam Shields. He's not good enough to design your whole coverage scheme around him. He's just so bad at the other things, we're forced to.

If Hyde could pick up that slot position quickly, I think we'd be better off with two well rounded players at CB. The way we have to dumb everything down for SS is a bigger problem than any positives he brings to the table.

[rbaloha1]

More and more, I'm with Wist on the players not fitting a scheme. Joe Whitt said they played press defense last year, and that's why Tramon had a lesser year. He said Tramon can play press, but he's best in off coverage. Shields, on the other hand, plays best in press coverage. They took Tramon out of his playmaking role because Shields is better at press.

Obviously Raji and Clay's strong points conflict and Clay is going to win that decision.

We never should have been playing press man coverage against SF. We should have been off, facing the ball. But Shields can't, so we were forced into an idiotic scheme that puts our OLBs in awful position. Shields looks good because he's good at one thing. We do the one thing he's good at because the other guys are more complete players and can play the other defenses better. Still, everyone suffers because of Shields inability to play most defenses. As much talent as we have, I think we do ourselves a huge disservice by catering to Sam Shields. He's not good enough to design your whole coverage scheme around him. He's just so bad at the other things, we're forced to.

If Hyde could pick up that slot position quickly, I think we'd be better off with two well rounded players at CB. The way we have to dumb everything down for SS is a bigger problem than any positives he brings to the table.

SS could maybe form his own island like Revis.

Disagree about SS -- problems were peaking into the backfield and tackling. Both were corrected and SS was best packer secondary player late in the season.

SS is good in all defenses but certainly is best at bump and run.

[Joemailman]

Maybe the real problem is that Tramon's shoulder doesn't allow him to play press very well. It may be time to look at someone else at his starting CB position if the shoulder continues to be a problem.

[Patler]

Greene went well beyond defending Walden in his interview, and his explanation was formed after reviewing the film. His instantaneous reaction during the game from his field level view may not have been as correct as his opinion formed after reviewing the film.

[Joemailman]

If Walden did what he was supposed to do in that defensive formation, they have to throw that formation out. There is no way the CB (Tramon) was going to be able to stop that play. Maybe Woodson wasn't where he was supposed to be?

[3irty1]

More and more, I'm with Wist on the players not fitting a scheme. Joe Whitt said they played press defense last year, and that's why Tramon had a lesser year. He said Tramon can play press, but he's best in off coverage. Shields, on the other hand, plays best in press coverage. They took Tramon out of his playmaking role because Shields is better at press.

Obviously Raji and Clay's strong points conflict and Clay is going to win that decision.

We never should have been playing press man coverage against SF. We should have been off, facing the ball. But Shields can't, so we were forced into an idiotic scheme that puts our OLBs in awful position. Shields looks good because he's good at one thing. We do the one thing he's good at because the other guys are more complete players and can play the other defenses better. Still, everyone suffers because of Shields inability to play most defenses. As much talent as we have, I think we do ourselves a huge disservice by catering to Sam Shields. He's not good enough to design your whole coverage scheme around him. He's just so bad at the other things, we're forced to.

If Hyde could pick up that slot position quickly, I think we'd be better off with two well rounded players at CB. The way we have to dumb everything down for SS is a bigger problem than any positives he brings to the table.

You sure that's not backwards? From my non-whitt eyes I'd say Tramon has been better in press over the years although hasn't played nearly as much of it in 2011 and 2012. I assumed that was shoulder related. While SS is willing to throw his body around he's not really the big strong body to be a real monster in press. Nor would I think he'd be as reliant on it since he he's got elite recovery speed and ability to play the ball.