The Defense - Again, the Defense :(

[ThunderDan]

Philadelphia is probably better - they certainly kicked the crap out of us last year in Lambeau...

I want to address this point directly. Philadelphia did not kick the crap out of us last year. They barely beat the Pack. I was at the game.

The end score was 27-13 I believe. Two of PHI TDs that game were pure luck. The perfect example was the DeSean Jackson TD. Two Packers are going to intercept the ball, the two players collide, the ball hits the Packers player's shoulder pads and bounces straight to Jackson who walks into the end zone. After that play I turned to my wife and said there is no way we are going to win if the other team gets breaks like that. And they did later in the game on Cooper's TD.

Now the Pack O was "passable" but it was the Seneca Wallace gets hurt game and Tolzien had to come off the bench to run the O and threw two picks.

[3irty1]

I understand the Packers need to take desperate measures in order to avoid injury but should we be surprised that our starters miss this many tackles when the only contact they get before week 1 comes from a handful of reps in the preseason? This may just be a tradeoff that MM is willing to make in his preparation.

I'm always hesitant to blame playcalling because its usually and exercise in hindsight but there were some calls of Capers's that I just can't wrap my head around. We gave a 6 man front to some balanced sets in short yardage situations. I'm not sure we even have the horses to adequately challenge that kind of look with a 7 man front. Taking into account the mobility of their QB and he factors into the headcount, we were asking an awful lot of our guys in those situations. This defense does look like they'll be lights out against the pass though. The other Jones played alright, he was easily our best lineman which is nice to see. Burnett secretly had a decent day. Haha was in position to miss a lot of plays but it seems like he's got the hard part down. Firing Capers and executing Brad Jones are pretty drastic moves, but giving the playcalling duties to Winston Moss and sprinkling in some contact drill in practice might make this defense only half bad. It sure would be nice to get a thorn in the middle of this D like Seattle has but the way the draft and FA shook out I'm not sure who that would have been. Now that the safety and OLB positions seem patched up ILB is clearly the most pressing need of the team.

[wist43]

Not sure how wide you mean by your wide, but yes it changes things.

Its dependent on alignment (and I still haven't reviewed the game) but if that player is attacking the LOS and with no coverage responsibilities (unless zone blitz) then yes, he is behaving like a lineman. The stance might be an issue, but its less of an issue wide.

Remember the argument against the 2-4 nickel and dime is that its vulnerable to the run in the middle due to size. Replacing Matthews and Perry with Neal and Peppers is a size increase that offsets the lost size of a NT. Each guy wist wanted to put on the field in his 3-3 nickel was a 280-285 pound guy so that you could have beef and a little pass rush.

If you're going to go to a nickel in an either/or, down/distance situation - the jumbo nickel is idiotic, and it didn't stop either the run or the pass - for very logical reasons. Logical reasons that were completely lost on dunderdummy.

As for my dreamed of 3-3, I don't want any of the down linemen lined up outside the tackles, I think the alignment is best served with those down linemen lined up inside the tackles - there may be exceptions to that of course, depending on opponent, but for the most part it makes the most sense to have a stout, gap penetrating presence on the LOS.

That's probably dunderdummy's biggest flaw - he cares nothing about controlling the LOS, and it shows as we repeatedly get run over, and rarely generate pressure up the middle.

You can do a lot from that alignment. You can have your OLB's playing outside the T's and providing outside pass rush and setting the edge against the run, while roaming another guy along the line, be it Matthews, Neal, or Mulumba; or you can run a wide variety of stunts, blitizes, drops, and zone blitzes out of that alignment.

Call it exotic but sound - what Capers does is exotic and unsound; very, very unsound.

It affords a lot more flexibility, and offers better size/mobility/athleticism in your front. You can play a much more penetrating style, as opposed anything dunderdummy has been throwing out there for the past 3+ years.

And as an added bonus?? It gets either Hawk or Jones off the field - or both of them off the field!!!

[pbmax]

Wide as in the 9 alignment (outside shoulder of TE). I tend to think if he's that wide and standing up, I don't care if it's Howard Greene, he's an LB, not a DL.

Well, we have a hole in the nomenclature that can only be closed by looking at responsibilities.

If you think DL stands for Down Lineman and LB stands for Line Backer, then what do you call a standing lineman? Packers called him Elephant in camp.

If you think DL stands for Defensive Lineman, then there isn't a nomenclature problem at all.

[wist43]

The first few yes, NO maybe, but these no. That's just trying to seem smarter than everyone else by yelling the loudest.

I want to address this point directly. Philadelphia did not kick the crap out of us last year. They barely beat the Pack. I was at the game.

The end score was 27-13 I believe. Two of PHI TDs that game were pure luck. The perfect example was the DeSean Jackson TD. Two Packers are going to intercept the ball, the two players collide, the ball hits the Packers player's shoulder pads and bounces straight to Jackson who walks into the end zone. After that play I turned to my wife and said there is no way we are going to win if the other team gets breaks like that. And they did later in the game on Cooper's TD.

Now the Pack O was "passable" but it was the Seneca Wallace gets hurt game and Tolzien had to come off the bench to run the O and threw two picks.

Carolina was 12-4 last year - with a super-stout defense. I'm beginning to think Packer fans have been so seduced by "elite QB syndrome", and watching dunderdummy's "let's hope for a turnover defense", that you guys dismiss solid, punt producing defense as being so 1920's.

You've seen what outstanding defense does to Aaron Rodgers and our offense - Carolina's defense is certainly good enough to bitch slap our offense - just like SF and Seattle have been doing.

As for Philly... I think their offense is on a par with ours - and they do actually play a little defense, whereas we play none. Both teams at full strength?? It's probably a 50/50... also, Philly was just finding themselves under a new coach, with a different type of philosophy. It took them a while to find their bearings.

Detroit?? Their DL smacks the shit out of our OL every time we play... if they had any DB's at all... they would be the favorite to win the division. And Chicago is slightly below us IMO, but not by much... and they certainly can knock us off on any given Sunday.

The bottom line is, with no defense, and with our predictable cement-shoed OL start... we're no better than middle of the pack right now.

[3irty1]

If you're going to go to a nickel in an either/or, down/distance situation - the jumbo nickel is idiotic, and it didn't stop either the run or the pass - for very logical reasons. Logical reasons that were completely lost on dunderdummy.

As for my dreamed of 3-3, I don't want any of the down linemen lined up outside the tackles, I think the alignment is best served with those down linemen lined up inside the tackles - there may be exceptions to that of course, depending on opponent, but for the most part it makes the most sense to have a stout, gap penetrating presence on the LOS.

That's probably dunderdummy's biggest flaw - he cares nothing about controlling the LOS, and it shows as we repeatedly get run over, and rarely generate pressure up the middle.

You can do a lot from that alignment. You can have your OLB's playing outside the T's and providing outside pass rush and setting the edge against the run, while roaming another guy along the line, be it Matthews, Neal, or Mulumba; or you can run a wide variety of stunts, blitizes, drops, and zone blitzes out of that alignment.

Call it exotic but sound - what Capers does is exotic and unsound; very, very unsound.

It affords a lot more flexibility, and offers better size/mobility/athleticism in your front. You can play a much more penetrating style, as opposed anything dunderdummy has been throwing out there for the past 3+ years.

And as an added bonus?? It gets either Hawk or Jones off the field - or both of them off the field!!!

Most 3-3's I've seen would keep the equivalent of Hawk and Jones on the field since those positions are still read and react type roles. If the tradeoff is ultimately to take Matthews off the edge in order to get Hawk or Jones off the field then you can do that from a 2-4 or 4-2 as well especially with all the OLB/DE types we've got. So why specifically the 3-3?

[pbmax]

I understand the Packers need to take desperate measures in order to avoid injury but should we be surprised that our starters miss this many tackles when the only contact they get before week 1 comes from a handful of reps in the preseason? This may just be a tradeoff that MM is willing to make in his preparation.

I'm always hesitant to blame playcalling because its usually and exercise in hindsight but there were some calls of Capers's that I just can't wrap my head around. We gave a 6 man front to some balanced sets in short yardage situations. I'm not sure we even have the horses to adequately challenge that kind of look with a 7 man front. Taking into account the mobility of their QB and he factors into the headcount, we were asking an awful lot of our guys in those situations. This defense does look like they'll be lights out against the pass though. The other Jones played alright, he was easily our best lineman which is nice to see. Burnett secretly had a decent day. Haha was in position to miss a lot of plays but it seems like he's got the hard part down. Firing Capers and executing Brad Jones are pretty drastic moves, but giving the playcalling duties to Winston Moss and sprinkling in some contact drill in practice might make this defense only half bad. It sure would be nice to get a thorn in the middle of this D like Seattle has but the way the draft and FA shook out I'm not sure who that would have been. Now that the safety and OLB positions seem patched up ILB is clearly the most pressing need of the team.

I don't think the Packers went light on D lineman because they feared the passing attack or doubted the backend. They went light because they feared the speed with Harvin as the 3rd WR and Wilson.

So they play the new 4-2 nickel a lot and try to match quickness for quickness. Sometimes it works. But far too often it failed on the misdirection and sweeps.

Some of that I blame on the first game. Seattle got to rollout a bunch of new stuff with Harvin. And in that alignment, you are going to have trouble with Lynch.

But Lynch's yardage doesn't bother me as much as the fact that the new speed didn't make more of a dent in Seattle's ability to get the edge and break big plays. That plus penalty-fest hurt them a lot.

The one thing I liked, other than having mostly functional safeties, was the pass rush seemed a bit more threatening.

[3irty1]

I don't think the Packers went light on D lineman because they feared the passing attack or doubted the backend. They went light because they feared the speed with Harvin as the 3rd WR and Wilson.

So they play the new 4-2 nickel a lot and try to match quickness for quickness. Sometimes it works. But far too often it failed on the misdirection and sweeps.

Some of that I blame on the first game. Seattle got to rollout a bunch of new stuff with Harvin. And in that alignment, you are going to have trouble with Lynch.

But Lynch's yardage doesn't bother me as much as the fact that the new speed didn't make more of a dent in Seattle's ability to get the edge and break big plays. That plus penalty-fest hurt them a lot.

The one thing I liked, other than having mostly functional safeties, was the pass rush seemed a bit more threatening.

There's not enough speed in the world to make up for being frozen by misdirection. Maybe its lack of instincts or lack of preparation but I think the better call would have been to take away at least one thing instead of putting up a flimsy defense against everything.

[wist43]

I understand the Packers need to take desperate measures in order to avoid injury but should we be surprised that our starters miss this many tackles when the only contact they get before week 1 comes from a handful of reps in the preseason? This may just be a tradeoff that MM is willing to make in his preparation.

I'm always hesitant to blame playcalling because its usually and exercise in hindsight but there were some calls of Capers's that I just can't wrap my head around. We gave a 6 man front to some balanced sets in short yardage situations. I'm not sure we even have the horses to adequately challenge that kind of look with a 7 man front. Taking into account the mobility of their QB and he factors into the headcount, we were asking an awful lot of our guys in those situations. This defense does look like they'll be lights out against the pass though. The other Jones played alright, he was easily our best lineman which is nice to see. Burnett secretly had a decent day. Haha was in position to miss a lot of plays but it seems like he's got the hard part down. Firing Capers and executing Brad Jones are pretty drastic moves, but giving the playcalling duties to Winston Moss and sprinkling in some contact drill in practice might make this defense only half bad. It sure would be nice to get a thorn in the middle of this D like Seattle has but the way the draft and FA shook out I'm not sure who that would have been. Now that the safety and OLB positions seem patched up ILB is clearly the most pressing need of the team.

Peppers is just a stop-gap... he'll be what?? 36 next year??

How much longer is Hawk under contract?? And as much as we hate Jones - the Packers brain trust loves the guy. He is in the last year of his contract, yes?? Don't be surprised if they re-up him again!!!

As for the line... they had a good line last year, and they didn't use them, or misused them. Now this year, they boot all of their run-stuffing 3-4 lineman, and all we're left with is undersized, penetration guys - which screams 4-3. As a result, we got steamrolled for 207 yds on the ground in the opener!!!

The Packers brain trust has had years to create this mess. TT/MM/Dunderdummy... they put their collective heads together and this is what they've given us - after the mess they gave us the past 3 years. At some point you have to conclude, this is what they perceive as being the right approach to playing defense.

Obviously they are smoking crack.

[wist43]

I don't think the Packers went light on D lineman because they feared the passing attack or doubted the backend. They went light because they feared the speed with Harvin as the 3rd WR and Wilson.

So they play the new 4-2 nickel a lot and try to match quickness for quickness. Sometimes it works. But far too often it failed on the misdirection and sweeps.

Some of that I blame on the first game. Seattle got to rollout a bunch of new stuff with Harvin. And in that alignment, you are going to have trouble with Lynch.

But Lynch's yardage doesn't bother me as much as the fact that the new speed didn't make more of a dent in Seattle's ability to get the edge and break big plays. That plus penalty-fest hurt them a lot.

The one thing I liked, other than having mostly functional safeties, was the pass rush seemed a bit more threatening.

Why do you keep saying we played a 4-anything???!!!

We're back to this - why have any designation at all??

We had 4 down linemen on the field 1 time in the Seattle game - 1 time.

All the rest was either 2-4, 2-5, a little 3-4, and a little Elephant/Amoeba. The Elephant is not a 4-anything. If anything, if there are 5 DB's on the field - it is a 3-3. If it is base, it is more of a 3-4.

In no way are the Packers running a 4-anything.

[pbmax]

There's not enough speed in the world to make up for being frozen by misdirection. Maybe its lack of instincts or lack of preparation but I think the better call would have been to take away at least one thing instead of putting up a flimsy defense against everything.

That is the one big question I have for Dom. You are debuting a new D alignment. Its not a revolution, you have been playing a nickel 4-3 alignment under with 3-4 personnel for 4 years now. But you are using it for base as well if reporters can be believed.

Is that the time to go unconventional with the Actives?

[Guiness]

Well, we have a hole in the nomenclature that can only be closed by looking at responsibilities.

If you think DL stands for Down Lineman and LB stands for Line Backer, then what do you call a standing lineman? Packers called him Elephant in camp.

If you think DL stands for Defensive Lineman, then there isn't a nomenclature problem at all.

I equate 'Elephant' with being a DL/LB Hybrid, to you think of it similarly? And DL is Defensive Lineman.

So how do you classify the Elephant on any given play? Are you 3-4 or 4-3 when Peppers is essentially standing up across from the guy in the slot? It might be as you said, it come down to his assignment.

[3irty1]

Peppers is just a stop-gap... he'll be what?? 36 next year??

How much longer is Hawk under contract?? And as much as we hate Jones - the Packers brain trust loves the guy. He is in the last year of his contract, yes?? Don't be surprised if they re-up him again!!!

As for the line... they had a good line last year, and they didn't use them, or misused them. Now this year, they boot all of their run-stuffing 3-4 lineman, and all we're left with is undersized, penetration guys - which screams 4-3. As a result, we got steamrolled for 207 yds on the ground in the opener!!!

The Packers brain trust has had years to create this mess. TT/MM/Dunderdummy... they put their collective heads together and this is what they've given us - after the mess they gave us the past 3 years. At some point you have to conclude, this is what they perceive as being the right approach to playing defense.

Obviously they are smoking crack.

Peppers will be 35 next year I believe. I'm also not sure he'll follow normal aging rules being a freak and all. But stop-gap isn't really the right word, signing him for the contract he got was a deal too good to pass on. Its not like they'd have been in on the bidding with Allen or Ware if Peppers didn't work out. He's just an opportunity.

Both ILB are signed through 2015. But neither make much on team friendly contracts so its not the money that's keeping them around. Hawk I'm fine with because I've really grown to appreciate his durability on a defense of glass dolls but I'd be plenty surprised to see Jones extended based on his availability and lack of progress at the position. These guys aren't paid on commission, Jones was signed based on his fill-in performance in 2012 and hasn't built on or even sustained that level of play. Take solace in the fact that after Bulaga, Jones is a virtual lock to miss time. Maybe one of his backups can finally outplay him because I'm pretty sure there are people sitting at home who could have on Thursday.

Those smaller DL guys don't scream 4-3 they scream 1-gap. A 1-gapping 3-4 scheme should suit them just fine.

[pbmax]

I equate 'Elephant' with being a DL/LB Hybrid, to you think of it similarly? And DL is Defensive Lineman.

So how do you classify the Elephant on any given play? Are you 3-4 or 4-3 when Peppers is essentially standing up across from the guy in the slot? It might be as you said, it come down to his assignment.

It depends on what they are asked to do. You can say Elephant is a hybrid position, but if they only have responsibilities for the LOS, then the LB part of the hybrid really doesn't apply.

[pbmax]

If you want an argument that the Defense needs to get used to the new defense (alignment), and then will get better, here is your first argument:

“It made me late getting the call on the field because I was trying to match the personnel up. We had a number of different personnel groups. Because we were late [on those] two or three calls there, we went into halftime and adjusted and played one personnel group a little bit more consistently in the second half.”

Some of that second half performance (and a couple of blown plays in the first) can be attributed to trouble getting correct personnel on and off the field. Since Slocum is not on the D staff, I expect this will get fixed and being at home will help.

http://www.espnwisconsin.com/common/page.php?feed=2&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&id=15831&is_corp=1