After 1 preseason game - Pack it in, the season is already over

[wist43]

The reason for alarm is where the players are lining up and how they are being used.

We have a roster full of 4-3 players, what we saw last night was Dunderdummy taking these 4-3 players and misusing them in the 3-4. Which is exactly what I would expect from Dunderdummy.

The next thing that should have sank every Packer fan's heart was seeing them line up in that static 2-4 nickel. For the same reasons we shouldn't be using guys like Daniels and Jones in the base, we should not be using the 2-4 in the nickel, but should be using the 3-3.

Nothing has changed except some of the personnel - but with the same problems we had last year, i.e. players not fitting the scheme, but for other reasons. Daniels and Jones are going to wear down if they are asked to play DE in the base - while at the same time reducing their effectiveness as nickel rushers; Hawk and B. Jones are not going to suddenly become better players; Capers can't fathom trying to defend 3 wides with base personnel; on and on...

Nothing has changed - all we've accomplished is that we've gotten smaller.

The only chance this defense has is if our offense can consistently stake them to a big lead, and we don't need to defend both the run and pass. Unfortunately, the road blocks in front of us, i.e. SF, Seattle, Car., etc, are all very physical, tough teams... not likely that we will jump out to big leads on those teams.

I think we have the talent to contend for a title - but our defense simply won't hold up if Capers plays them the way it looks like he is going to. If properly used, I think our defense can be championship calibur - in spite of the fact that we have terrible ILB's.

Our defensive line should be a strength - instead, it is a huge weakness b/c of how Capers uses them.

[pbmax]

One of your criticisms is that Capers play too little base. How exactly will that small amount of base wear down two young players like Jones and Daniels?

Jones was drafted, at least in part, because he was a prototype for a 3 down DE in a 3-4.

Daniels might be their best lineman. He has to play. He doesn't have to play all the snaps, but easily must play most of them.

Who do you prefer in base?

[wist43]

One of your criticisms is that Capers play too little base. How exactly will that small amount of base wear down two young players like Jones and Daniels?

Jones was drafted, at least in part, because he was a prototype for a 3 down DE in a 3-4.

Daniels might be their best lineman. He has to play. He doesn't have to play all the snaps, but easily must play most of them.

Who do you prefer in base?

Guion, Boyd, Worthy, Thorton - and any other slug who might be capable of eating up blocks.

Save Daniels and Jones for nickel pass rush. Why in heavens name would you want to see them wasted as DE's in the base??

Your obtuse observation about "young players like Jones and Daniels" harkens back to a reporter asking MM about burning Raji out, and his response was, "... he's a young man". Well, Raji did burn out and his effectiveness went in the tank.

I think the entire Packers organization is tone deaf when it comes to playing defense. From player procurement to the coaching... that '10 SB really was a fart in the wind.

[wist43]

One of your criticisms is that Capers play too little base. How exactly will that small amount of base wear down two young players like Jones and Daniels?

Jones was drafted, at least in part, because he was a prototype for a 3 down DE in a 3-4.

Daniels might be their best lineman. He has to play. He doesn't have to play all the snaps, but easily must play most of them.

Who do you prefer in base?

About the base...

Yes, I wanted them to play more base - and I want them to play more base now, but not with our pass rush personnel.

We had Pickett and Jolly last year - perfect for running more base, but Dunderdummy ran very little base. Now that those players are gone, and we really don't have the ideal personnel to run a 3-4 base - now??, we're going to run more base??

If we run it with guys like Guion and Boyd eating up snaps at DE... then yes, I'm all for running more of it; but if Dunderdummy is going to waste our nickel pass rushers at DE?? - that's a death sentence for this defense and for this season.

[Joemailman]

Guion, Boyd, Worthy, Thorton - and any other slug who might be capable of eating up blocks.

Save Daniels and Jones for nickel pass rush. Why in heavens name would you want to see them wasted as DE's in the base??

Your obtuse observation about "young players like Jones and Daniels" harkens back to a reporter asking MM about burning Raji out, and his response was, "... he's a young man". Well, Raji did burn out and his effectiveness went in the tank.

I think the entire Packers organization is tone deaf when it comes to playing defense. From player procurement to the coaching... that '10 SB really was a fart in the wind.

Do you really think guys like Guion, Boyd, Worthy, and Thorton won't get snaps in base? I don't think they're going to ask Daniels and Jones to play every down. You are making conclusions from a couple series in the first preseason game. Teams tend not to reveal their strategy for the regular season in preseason games. It's perfectly understandable that they want to see what Daniels and Jones can do in base. Those guys haven't played base much so far in their careers. The first 2 preseason games are for trying things out, not for revealing what your regular season strategy will be.

[pittstang5]

Guion, Boyd, Worthy, Thorton - and any other slug who might be capable of eating up blocks.

Save Daniels and Jones for nickel pass rush. Why in heavens name would you want to see them wasted as DE's in the base??

Your obtuse observation about "young players like Jones and Daniels" harkens back to a reporter asking MM about burning Raji out, and his response was, "... he's a young man". Well, Raji did burn out and his effectiveness went in the tank.

I think the entire Packers organization is tone deaf when it comes to playing defense. From player procurement to the coaching... that '10 SB really was a fart in the wind.

I agree with your concerns Wist about Daniels and Jones in Base. But, that's all they have. Guion and Worthy haven't practiced. I honestly think Guion is going to be gone soon and Worthy will probably end up on Pup. Boyd has one year under his belt and is still a project. Thornton is a rookie and rookie D-lineman don't fair well right away in this system. The rest are no names. Jones and Daniels almost have to start by default. I don't like it and I think we are going to get gashed in the run game....again....this year.

[pbmax]

Of all the people mentioned, the last one I am convinced of is Worthy for base. But as pitt mentioned, 2 of your preferred 4 haven't practiced yet.

[texaspackerbacker]

I don't believe it! Some people are still wishing for the big immobile clods in the D-Line? Bad enough we still have Raji there. Datone and Daniels, in rotation with Boyd is exactly what we need at DE in the base - people who actually have the capability to move a step or two and make a tackle on a running play, not to even mention the ability to rush the passer. I campaigned the whole off season to get rid of the pork and get people who could tackle in there. The D will be better for it.

I still have hope for Worthy - as at least a backup and an eventual replacement to Raji, but at some point, he needs to start playing like he did in college.

[Patler]

Since when did all d-lineman become part time laborers? This crap about "too many snaps" and saving so-and-so for certain situations is mostly just that, crap. Yes, there are pass-rush specialists, and a guy like Pickett probably needed to be monitored after he got into his 30's, but Daniels, Jones, and others should be able to play significant snaps.

As for Raji, I suspect he would be the same player today even if he had played 150 snaps less each year until now.

[Guiness]

IMO there is one shinning light at this point, and some of you will probably put a hex on my house for mentioning this.

Through family night and pre-season game 1, no one yet added to IR yet.

[Rutnstrut]

IMO there is one shinning light at this point, and some of you will probably put a hex on my house for mentioning this.

Through family night and pre-season game 1, no one yet added to IR yet.

Had to say it didn't you?

[Guiness]

Had to say it didn't you?

Impossible to ignore

[Just Jeff]

Unless you have the #1 pick every year, almost ALL picks fall to you. If he was such a lock, he would have been gone before the 24th pick. This argument is perhaps the worst I have seen on the board.

"The Packers don't grey credit for selecting the good player, 23 other teams get blame for passing on him."

If a guy projects as a 10 pick and he gets picked 9-11, or some such, he didn't fall, he got picked where he was projected. AR fell like a rock, no question. It was almost embarrassing at the time. In retrospect, of course, it was criminal. Almost every draft prognosticator had AR going before #24. Most had him as a top 10 pick. Almost ALL picks seldom fall. By the very nature of the number of draftees, there are as many that fall as there are "reaches". It is inarguable that if ANY GM in the NFL had ANY idea that AR would be as good as he is, clearly he doesn't fall to #24. Given that he was projected to go WELL before 24, if TT thought that AR was "his guy", he would have been a fool to not have traded up to get him, so that any one of the MANY other teams that passed on him, would not steal his gem. So to agree with Red, the pick was luck and the resultant careers of TT, MM and MM have largely been too.

[Patler]

Ridiculous. TT could have just as easily passed on Rodgers just as the other teams before him did, and pick more for need. Was it an ingenious pick? No, but it was a good, solid GM decision. He saw an opportunity that all those teams before him did not, and he took it. Trading up to get Matthews was also a good, solid GM decision, just as was trading down and being able to get the likes of Nelson.

How many of you who now claim it to be nothing but luck were the ones blasting TT for wasting a pick on a QB and that fall chuckling over AR's poor play initially? How many of you predicted Brohm was going to push AR away and become the starter? There were an awful lot at the time, most will not now admit it. Instead, now it is simply blind luck that TT got AR.

The fact that he was predicted to go high is meaningless for two reasons. It is not uncommon for the predictions to be wrong, and it is very common for the highly regarded players to fail miserably anyway.

If you "blame" TT for taking Hawk, you have to also credit him for taking AR. In reality, he is responsible for both.

[Cheesehead Craig]

If a guy projects as a 10 pick and he gets picked 9-11, or some such, he didn't fall, he got picked where he was projected. AR fell like a rock, no question. It was almost embarrassing at the time. In retrospect, of course, it was criminal. Almost every draft prognosticator had AR going before #24. Most had him as a top 10 pick. Almost ALL picks seldom fall. By the very nature of the number of draftees, there are as many that fall as there are "reaches". It is inarguable that if ANY GM in the NFL had ANY idea that AR would be as good as he is, clearly he doesn't fall to #24. Given that he was projected to go WELL before 24, if TT thought that AR was "his guy", he would have been a fool to not have traded up to get him, so that any one of the MANY other teams that passed on him, would not steal his gem. So to agree with Red, the pick was luck and the resultant careers of TT, MM and MM have largely been too.

TT made a solid call on waiting as Rodgers fell. After Tampa passed on him at #5, there were not any teams that had a definite need that year for a QB. The only other team that had him marked for the first round and needed a QB was Washington and they picked at #25 and they had Jason Campbell rated higher anyways from the stories back then. TT didn't have to trade up as he correctly determined that nobody else would take him once TB passed. There wasn't a need to trade up.