PDA

View Full Version : 3-4 Discussion


Pages : [1] 2

GB12
12-01-2008, 10:12 PM
Alright here's the deal: Talk about the 3-4 has been filling up the rasicallegular discussion threads and other threads in the forum. So I have decided to take them all and put them in its own thread. In just the discussion thread alone I searched through over 20 pages and moved 128 posts to this thread. That made this a 6 page thread. A lot of talk about one issue and it doesn't appear like it will go away until a defensive coordinator is hired and we hear his plans.

Here's the run down: Basically the poster AtariBigby thinks we should move to a 3-4 and everyone else is against it. Multiple times we've gone through scenarios of what players fit where and so on. If you have been following from the beginning than everything up to post 156 you have already read. If you're looking at this for the first time you can either read through six pages of what was already discussed or jump in at the current topic.

Try to keep all posts about the 3-4 in this thread.

umphrey
12-07-2008, 06:02 PM
I'm all for moving to a 3-4 but we can't do it til we hit rock bottom. With the personnel we have we could do

Jenkins - Pickett - Kampman
Chillar - Barnett - Bishop - Hawk

Jenkins would be a good fit, we would have to get rid of some DTs and we don't have any true NTs. Barnett and Hawk would do well in the middle, but we don't really have any OLBs for the scheme, Chillar might do alright. You could arrange the LBs a number of ways.

This has been my pipe dream for awhile now. I really, really want it to happen but I know it wont.

Just get us a new DC!!!!!!

EvilMonkey
12-07-2008, 06:11 PM
I'm all for moving to a 3-4 but we can't do it til we hit rock bottom. With the personnel we have we could do

Jenkins - Pickett - Kampman
Chillar - Barnett - Bishop - Hawk

Jenkins would be a good fit, we would have to get rid of some DTs and we don't have any true NTs. Barnett and Hawk would do well in the middle, but we don't really have any OLBs for the scheme, Chillar might do alright. You could arrange the LBs a number of ways.

This has been my pipe dream for awhile now. I really, really want it to happen but I know it wont.

Just get us a new DC!!!!!!

3-4 would require a ton more personnel changes. Hawk and Barnett would be ok ILBs and Poppinga could possibly be able to play the outside since he was a DE in college, but we'd need to get 2 rush backers for sure. Chillar could be ok as a backup inside, but he's not a 3-4 OLB in any way. I dont know if Pickett at NT would work, might be better off with Jolly there. Also, if we go to a 3-4, Kamp should get traded because he would be wasted in that scheme so might as well trade him to a 4-3 team as he'd have insane value and it'd be stupid to keep him and have him be just an ok 3-4 DE.

That being said, i think we should keep it a 4-3 and just need a new DC. Preferably someone who blitzes a ton more. Even the sacks we get are coverage sacks half the time. Get some freaking pressure and our secondary could really thrive.

bearsfan_51
12-07-2008, 06:19 PM
Isn't Cole pretty stout? I imagine he could play as an NT, at least short term.

I agree though, the lack of 3-4 OLB's pretty much nullifies that possibility.

GB12
12-07-2008, 06:54 PM
I'm all for moving to a 3-4 but we can't do it til we hit rock bottom. With the personnel we have we could do

Jenkins - Pickett - Kampman
Chillar - Barnett - Bishop - Hawk

Jenkins would be a good fit, we would have to get rid of some DTs and we don't have any true NTs. Barnett and Hawk would do well in the middle, but we don't really have any OLBs for the scheme, Chillar might do alright. You could arrange the LBs a number of ways.

This has been my pipe dream for awhile now. I really, really want it to happen but I know it wont.

Just get us a new DC!!!!!!
I'm sorry, but that'd be ridiculously stupid. Yeah we could do it with what we have, but we'd suck a lot. The players we have fit much better in a 4-3 than a 3-4 as they should obviously because none of them were drafted to be put into a 3-4. The only front 7 players on our team that I think would be good starters in a 3-4 are Cullen Jenkins and AJ Hawk. Kampman would be a complete waste in a 3-4. He's one of the best 4-3 DEs in the league, but switch him to a 3-4 and he'd be average at best. Barnett does not translate well at all to a 3-4. Brandon Chillar might be a half decent fit as an inside ILB, but he shouldn't be played there. Poppinga could play as a 3-4 OLB, but you need top level guys there if you want to have success with a 3-4 and our OLBs would be no where near good enough. Ryan Pickett has the size, but he wouldn't be an ideal NT. I think bf51 got it right tha Cole would be the best NT option until we'd find a real one. I don't think Johnny Jolly fits in anywhere. Justin Harrell hasn't made an impact in our current system and would be worse if we switched. Mike Montgomery, Jason Hunter, and Jeremy Thompson would be worthless.

There's just absolutely no reason to switch to a 3-4. Nothing is in place and even if we somehow picked up some key pieces, the players we currently have would be wasted. We have a lot of parts for a top 4-3 we just need to put them together and perhaps get a couple upgrades.

PACKmanN
12-07-2008, 08:02 PM
I'm all for moving to a 3-4 but we can't do it til we hit rock bottom. With the personnel we have we could do

Jenkins - Pickett - Kampman
Chillar - Barnett - Bishop - Hawk

Jenkins would be a good fit, we would have to get rid of some DTs and we don't have any true NTs. Barnett and Hawk would do well in the middle, but we don't really have any OLBs for the scheme, Chillar might do alright. You could arrange the LBs a number of ways.

This has been my pipe dream for awhile now. I really, really want it to happen but I know it wont.

Just get us a new DC!!!!!!

If we ever do switch to a 34 it would be like this

SPACE- Pickett/Harrell- Jenkins/Jolly
Poppinga/Hunter- Hawk/Bishop- Barnett/Chillar- SPACE/Thompson

Kampman wouldn't be as effective, imo, in a 34 as he is now. The space would be made for us to add too.

I would love to take the Steelers LB coach and make him our DC, but he might want to import a 34.

tjsunstein
12-07-2008, 08:21 PM
We dont have the players or coaches for 3-4. Is it that much more evident that we draft T now though?

mqtirishfan
12-07-2008, 08:28 PM
I certainly hope we don't decide to waste Aaron Kampman in a 3-4.

tjsunstein
12-07-2008, 08:29 PM
3-4 will never happen

TitleTown088
12-07-2008, 08:34 PM
Green Bay is not moving to a 3-4 next season. No way.

Yes is really looks like Tauscher is gone for the season like packman said. I though he was gone this off season anyways, I'd say it's time to find some RT's in the draft now.
http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/ic/blogs/insider/index.shtml


Man ted could have some high picks to work with now. I'm also getting a feeling this season could be a blessing in disguise. Hopefully get some elite prospects and clean house on people like Sanders who need to go.

AtariBigby
12-25-2008, 05:20 PM
I'm still amazed that so many people (not all of course) act like the world is coming to an end and act like the Packers are a terrible team. They are not.

I pointed out after last year that there were 4 or 5 games last year that easily could have gone as losses instead of wins. One bad ref call or one unlucky bounce, and we could have lost all those games. This year it has been a total 180. Obviously.

Our offense, as a whole, is just as good as last year except the OL has been shakier. Their run blocking has been pretty close to 07, but the pass protection has had some serious lapses. Chad Clifton is showing how important he is because his penalties and sacks allowed have been disasterous this season.

However, if our defense was the Steelers, or the Ravens defense, we would still be 12-3 or 13-2 RIGHT NOW, maybe 14-1. Our offense is not a problem. It's about the #10 offense in the league currently, with a first-year starting QB and a shaky OL.

We need to fix the defense.

Why the crap can't we bring in a guy from Pittsburgh or Baltimore and bring that system to Green Bay? Those defenses, no matter who the players are, are always top 10 defenses, and usually top-3. See this year. And don't dismiss it and say it's cuz they have the greatest players. That's false. Yes Ray Lewis and Ed Reed are great, and so is Troy Polamalu. First of all, none of them were even top 10 picks, and second, those SYSTEMS have made stars of guys like Joey Porter, James Harrison, Lamar Woodley, Bart Scott, Adalius Thomas, Edgerton Hartwell even!

Hire one of their D-coaches and make him our D-coordinator.
Throw all the FA money at Albert Haynesworth, and make him the centerpiece NT of our new 3-4 aggressive defense. Overplay for big Al? Heck yah. The Vikings overpaid for Steve Hutchinson. They overpaid for Jared Allen too. Salaries keep going up so 2 years later, it will be par for the course.

Then draft Rey Maulaluga from USC. He's this year's Ray Lewis at LB. He's this year's Troy Polamalu as far as intensity is concerned. We need that.

Then, with our still-strong group of DBs, we'd have this:

DE- Jenkins, Harrell
NT- Haynesworth, Pickett
DE- Kampman, Bowen

OLB- Barnett
ILB- Maulaluga
ILB- Bishop
OLB- Hawk, Chillar

Gone will be Poppinga

PACKmanN
12-25-2008, 05:24 PM
I'm still amazed that so many people (not all of course) act like the world is coming to an end and act like the Packers are a terrible team. They are not.

I pointed out after last year that there were 4 or 5 games last year that easily could have gone as losses instead of wins. One bad ref call or one unlucky bounce, and we could have lost all those games. This year it has been a total 180. Obviously.

Our offense, as a whole, is just as good as last year except the OL has been shakier. Their run blocking has been pretty close to 07, but the pass protection has had some serious lapses. Chad Clifton is showing how important he is because his penalties and sacks allowed have been disasterous this season.

However, if our defense was the Steelers, or the Ravens defense, we would still be 12-3 or 13-2 RIGHT NOW, maybe 14-1. Our offense is not a problem. It's about the #10 offense in the league currently, with a first-year starting QB and a shaky OL.

We need to fix the defense.

Why the crap can't we bring in a guy from Pittsburgh or Baltimore and bring that system to Green Bay? Those defenses, no matter who the players are, are always top 10 defenses, and usually top-3. See this year. And don't dismiss it and say it's cuz they have the greatest players. That's false. Yes Ray Lewis and Ed Reed are great, and so is Troy Polamalu. First of all, none of them were even top 10 picks, and second, those SYSTEMS have made stars of guys like Joey Porter, James Harrison, Lamar Woodley, Bart Scott, Adalius Thomas, Edgerton Hartwell even!

Hire one of their D-coaches and make him our D-coordinator.
Throw all the FA money at Albert Haynesworth, and make him the centerpiece NT of our new 3-4 aggressive defense. Overplay for big Al? Heck yah. The Vikings overpaid for Steve Hutchinson. They overpaid for Jared Allen too. Salaries keep going up so 2 years later, it will be par for the course.

Then draft Rey Maulaluga from USC. He's this year's Ray Lewis at LB. He's this year's Troy Polamalu as far as intensity is concerned. We need that.

Then, with our still-strong group of DBs, we'd have this:

DE- Jenkins, Harrell
NT- Haynesworth, Pickett
DE- Kampman, Bowen

OLB- Barnett
ILB- Maulaluga
ILB- Bishop
OLB- Hawk, Chillar

Gone will be Poppinga
Kampman will get destroyed as a 34 DE, if we make a switch to a 34, we would have to lose Kampman and Barnett.

BTW, Hawk would be moved into the middle I don't understand why you would put him as an OLB in a 34.

Switching to a 34 would be a dumb move imo.

GB12
12-25-2008, 05:46 PM
Kampman will get destroyed as a 34 DE, if we make a switch to a 34, we would have to lose Kampman and Barnett.

BTW, Hawk would be moved into the middle I don't understand why you would put him as an OLB in a 34.

Switching to a 34 would be a dumb move imo.
Kampman would not get destroyed as a 3-4 DE, it'd just be a complete waste.

The rest you covered pretty well.

AtariBigby
12-25-2008, 07:22 PM
You don't NOT make a switch to a better system just because you want to cater to your best player, Kampman. Who cares? How's the system working with Kampman in it?

If you can trade him for a 1st or high-2nd round pick, take a pass rush OLB like a Lamar Woodley type, get pressure from both OLBers, and put in a decent bookend opposite Jenkins (who would be a great 34 DE), then you got something. This defense sucks, there's no sugar-coating it. The players are okay, the system sucks. The Steelers personnel on their front 7 is NOT any more talented than our guys are. They just employ a better system and I want that system. Blow this one up. Our DBs are way better than either the Steelers or Ravens are. We should be a top-5 defense easily with those DBs.

Desmond Bishop has the makings of a nasty 34 ILB.
I remember James Harrison before he was a star and Nick Barnett and AJ Hawk both have more talent than that guy has, and that guy's barely 6 foot tall. Hawk tested faster than him. I'm not sure about Barnett's speed anymore after the knee injury.

GB12
12-25-2008, 07:58 PM
You just don't understand football so I'm not even going to try and explain

Boston
12-25-2008, 08:35 PM
You don't NOT make a switch to a better system just because you want to cater to your best player, Kampman. Who cares? How's the system working with Kampman in it?

If you can trade him for a 1st or high-2nd round pick, take a pass rush OLB like a Lamar Woodley type, get pressure from both OLBers, and put in a decent bookend opposite Jenkins (who would be a great 34 DE), then you got something. This defense sucks, there's no sugar-coating it. The players are okay, the system sucks. The Steelers personnel on their front 7 is NOT any more talented than our guys are. They just employ a better system and I want that system. Blow this one up. Our DBs are way better than either the Steelers or Ravens are. We should be a top-5 defense easily with those DBs.

Desmond Bishop has the makings of a nasty 34 ILB.
I remember James Harrison before he was a star and Nick Barnett and AJ Hawk both have more talent than that guy has, and that guy's barely 6 foot tall. Hawk tested faster than him. I'm not sure about Barnett's speed anymore after the knee injury.

http://ninapaley.com/Portfolio/this_is_your_brain_on_milk.gif

AtariBigby
12-25-2008, 08:44 PM
You just don't understand football so I'm not even going to try and explain
If you're saying that the Packers defense wouldn't be better if it brought in the Steelers or Ravens system, then please DO go ahead and explain that logic for me, Einstein.

As far as not understanding football goes: you really have no idea if you are talking to me. I've watched every game almost, on the Sunday Ticket since 1994. I've seen the Packers play in person from Green Bay to Tampa Bay, St Louis to Dallas, Detroit to San Diego, Seattle to Arizona.

And I remember the Packers under the reigns of David Whitehurst, Randy Wright, Rich Campbell...... I suspect your first Packer QB of memory is either Favre or Majkowski.

GB12
12-25-2008, 08:47 PM
As far as not understanding football goes: you really have no idea if you are talking to me. I've watched every game almost, on the Sunday Ticket since 1994. I've seen the Packers play in person from Green Bay to Tampa Bay, St Louis to Dallas, Detroit to San Diego, Seattle to Arizona.

And I remember the Packers under the reigns of David Whitehurst, Randy Wright, Rich Campbell...... I suspect your first Packer QB of memory is either Favre or Majkowski.
None of that means ****. I can tell from reading 1 of your posts that you don't understand the game.

bearsfan_51
12-26-2008, 12:34 AM
It's true, no 4-3 team has ever been good at playing defense.

umphrey
12-26-2008, 02:02 AM
I like the 3-4 way more but it's just totally unfeasible to switch to it right now. Bring it up again when we have 3 or less wins

AtariBigby
12-26-2008, 07:42 AM
It's true, no 4-3 team has ever been good at playing defense.
Wow, brilliant. Do you write jokes for Letterman or for Lenow?

Do you like our 4-3 defense? Yes or no?

AtariBigby
12-26-2008, 07:47 AM
I like the 3-4 way more but it's just totally unfeasible to switch to it right now. Bring it up again when we have 3 or less wins

Of course no switch right now. But as soon as that Lions game is over, you release Colonel Bob Sanders, and you work on hiring the guy from Pittsburgh or Baltimore that will take a promotion to become our DC, and you start pinpointing FA's and College players who are built for the 3-4. We need 2 pass-rushing studs at OLB, and we need another big DE. I'm not exactly sure which of our LBers would play best where in a 3-4. Geniuses like Kiper, McShay, Mayock, and the most brilliant of all, GB12, often act like they know exactly how every player will play in the future, but many times nobody knows until the right coach gets to them. And if the wrong coach gets to them (i.i. Sanders), then we have a guy like Hawk who people are calling a bust. I think in the right system, he can become the stud we all hoped for. Bob Sanders system was not that.

Plus the fact that no other NFC North teams play a 3-4 would give us an advantage, by the way, over the Queens and the Brrrrs.

bearsfan_51
12-26-2008, 09:00 AM
Wow, brilliant. Do you write jokes for Letterman or for Lenow?

Do you like our 4-3 defense? Yes or no?

"Lenow"? Are you for serious?

Yatta!
12-26-2008, 09:57 AM
The defense can be fixed without changing scheme. Some solid additions to the line is all we need. Implementing a 3-4 would take 2/3 years to do effectively and while we have not played well this year, there is no need to start a rebuilding effort.

AtariBigby
12-26-2008, 10:20 AM
The defense can be fixed without changing scheme. Some solid additions to the line is all we need. Implementing a 3-4 would take 2/3 years to do effectively and while we have not played well this year, there is no need to start a rebuilding effort.
I disagree. That's the "band-aid" version you are talking about. The "patch-it-up" version. We have had the best set of DBs you could ever hope for, and we ever will have, the past 3 seasons, and yet we're basically an average defense. Some good streches and some bad.

This whole scheme needs to go.

As for it taking 2 to 3 years: Not true. Look at the Giants last year. They began the season with a totally new defensive scheme, brought to them by Steve Spagnola. He was the Eagles DB coach under Jim Johnson. Yes, the Giants struggled early last season, against Dallas and the Packers they got blown out. But we saw how good their defense was by mid-season and the end of the season.

And with the loss of Strahan AND Osi Umenyiora (neither played a down this year), their defense was still great this year so that shows that it wasn't just a matter of adding a good player here and there. It's the scheme. It's a good scheme coached by a good coach. Our DC is NOT a good coach. I don't know what it will take to convince some people of that. Bob Sanders NEVER deserved to be a D-coordinator.

Blow this scheme up, send Sanders down the road, and bring in the Steelers or Ravens system. What more do those 2 defenses have to do to convince you that those systems are the best?
Go 20 years of top-5 defenses instead of just the past 10 years?

Read last week's Sports Illustrated.

PACKmanN
12-26-2008, 10:26 AM
1. Changing schemes with players who haven't played under it will result in terrible play.

2. We have a perfect scheme with perfect players to run he scheme, just need a better DC to create a better playbook.


as you said we have a talented team. We would have to sort of rebuild the defense front 7 if we want to run a 34. Won't happen and it shouldn't. I can also throw a name in Sean McDermott

AtariBigby
12-26-2008, 10:45 AM
Of our best front 7 guys, for sure 4 of them would be just as good, or better, on a 3-4.

Cullen Jenkins and AJ Hawk would be a lot better.
I think Ryan Pickett as a NT would be fantastic. He's bigger than the Steelers NT is. I believe Nick Barnett would be better in a 3-4. Justin Harrell would be a better 3-4 DE than he is a 4-3, but since he's always hurt, it doesn't matter. I don't know why Desmond Bishop isn't getting more playing time. He's shown a knack for the big play in his limited opps, and the mistakes he has made can be fixed with more playing time. In this crappy season, this is the perfect time for those learning opps.

With our salary cap space, or high draft picks, and our 5-10 record, there's no better time than now to move in a new defensive scheme. There's no better time than THIS off-season.

PACKmanN
12-26-2008, 10:52 AM
Of our best front 7 guys, for sure 4 of them would be just as good, or better, on a 3-4.

Cullen Jenkins and AJ Hawk would be a lot better.
I think Ryan Pickett as a NT would be fantastic. He's bigger than the Steelers NT is. I believe Nick Barnett would be better in a 3-4. Justin Harrell would be a better 3-4 DE than he is a 4-3, but since he's always hurt, it doesn't matter. I don't know why Desmond Bishop isn't getting more playing time. He's shown a knack for the big play in his limited opps, and the mistakes he has made can be fixed with more playing time. In this crappy season, this is the perfect time for those learning opps.

With our salary cap space, or high draft picks, and our 5-10 record, there's no better time than now to move in a new defensive scheme. There's no better time than THIS off-season.
Cullen Jenkins is an all pro at DE in a 43
AJ Hawk can't break through linemen, imagine him in a 34
I doubt Pickett would do anything in a 34, size doesn't mean anything
Barnett would be horrible in a 34, he would be thrown around by other teams OT
Harrell is a much better prospect at DT then DE
Bishop is slow and would have a hard time in coverage, that is why he not starting.

Why would we want to go threw another scheme change...I still remember the ZBS attempt

you can not say they would be better if they haven't played in one....

tjsunstein
12-26-2008, 01:20 PM
I agree that our defense would be better in a 3-4 considering our DBs we already have but I think it would take more than just this offseason to switch systems. I like the 34 more than the 43 but our players aren't right for it IMO. Our LBs are too slow on the outside. There's only certain things holding us back from the 34.

1. A new defensive coaching staff. We'd have to get rid of our DC, DL, and LB coach.
2. Our Linebackers.
3. Aaron Kampman.
4. Justin Harrell.

GB12
12-26-2008, 01:48 PM
I agree that our defense would be better in a 3-4 considering our DBs we already have but I think it would take more than just this offseason to switch systems. I like the 34 more than the 43 but our players aren't right for it IMO. Our LBs are too slow on the outside. There's only certain things holding us back from the 34.

1. A new defensive coaching staff. We'd have to get rid of our DC, DL, and LB coach.
2. Our Linebackers.
3. Aaron Kampman.
4. Justin Harrell.
Which is basically the whole defense. I don't know why we have to go through this so much, but we are not in any way a team that can make an easy transition to a 3-4. I don't feel like going through this all again, so I'll just repost what I wrote earlier this month.
I'm sorry, but that'd be ridiculously stupid. Yeah we could do it with what we have, but we'd suck a lot. The players we have fit much better in a 4-3 than a 3-4 as they should obviously because none of them were drafted to be put into a 3-4. The only front 7 players on our team that I think would be good starters in a 3-4 are Cullen Jenkins and AJ Hawk. Kampman would be a complete waste in a 3-4. He's one of the best 4-3 DEs in the league, but switch him to a 3-4 and he'd be average at best. Barnett does not translate well at all to a 3-4. Brandon Chillar might be a half decent fit as an inside ILB, but he shouldn't be played there. Poppinga could play as a 3-4 OLB, but you need top level guys there if you want to have success with a 3-4 and our OLBs would be no where near good enough. Ryan Pickett has the size, but he wouldn't be an ideal NT. I think bf51 got it right tha Cole would be the best NT option until we'd find a real one. I don't think Johnny Jolly fits in anywhere. Justin Harrell hasn't made an impact in our current system and would be worse if we switched. Mike Montgomery, Jason Hunter, and Jeremy Thompson would be worthless.

There's just absolutely no reason to switch to a 3-4. Nothing is in place and even if we somehow picked up some key pieces, the players we currently have would be wasted. We have a lot of parts for a top 4-3 we just need to put them together and perhaps get a couple upgrades.

AtariBigby
12-26-2008, 02:54 PM
You guys think you need All-Pro DE's to make this work?
You think you also need All-Pro ILB's to make this work?

Name the Steelers DL, other than NT Casey Hampton. Name their 2 ILBers.
Cullen Jenkins would be a beast at DE in a 3-4. He'd be better there than Kampman is NOW in our 4-3.

3 or 4 new starters, via FA or high draft picks, plus a real D-coordinator with a proven system, would not be a bad thing. Some growing pains, sure, just like the Giants in the first part of 2007. It was worth it in the end for them wasn't it?

Do you like the Packers defense you see this year, or last year against Dallas?

Shoot higher. Reach for the stars, not the clouds.

Jpack18
12-26-2008, 02:58 PM
I'm all for getting rid of Sanders as our DC, but changing the system to a 3-4 is not the answer. Remember our defense before Jenkins got hurt? We are 1-2 D-linemen away from being a top defense. If we can get another pass rushing DE to rotate with Jenkins that alone would contribute greatly to our defense. Another run stuffer in the middle wouldn't hurt either.

PACKmanN
12-26-2008, 03:02 PM
You guys think you need All-Pro DE's to make this work?YET WE HAVE 2 AT DE...
You think you also need All-Pro ILB's to make this work?YET WE HAVE 2...

Name the Steelers DL, other than NT Casey Hampton. Name their 2 ILBers.
Cullen Jenkins would be a beast at DE in a 3-4. He'd be better there than Kampman is NOW in our 4-3.

3 or 4 new starters, via FA or high draft picks, plus a real D-coordinator with a proven system, would not be a bad thing. Some growing pains, sure, just like the Giants in the first part of 2007. It was worth it in the end for them wasn't it?

Do you like the Packers defense you see this year, or last year against Dallas?

Shoot higher. Reach for the stars, not the clouds.
just stop...

If the 34 fixes everything then that should be everyone's solution to fixing a defense then...

AtariBigby
12-26-2008, 03:11 PM
Ryan Pickett has the size, but he wouldn't be an ideal NT. I think bf51 got it right tha Cole would be the best NT option until we'd find a real one. I don't think Johnny Jolly fits in anywhere. Justin Harrell hasn't made an impact in our current system and would be worse if we switched. Mike Montgomery, Jason Hunter, and Jeremy Thompson would be worthless.

#1- Pickett would be an ideal NT. He's perfect for a NT.

#2- Don't tell me you're too afraid to make the upgrade at DC/Defense because you don't want to ruin what you're gettting currently from Justin Harrell, Mike Montgomery, Jason Hunter, and Jeremy Thompson. Those guys are all worthless and are easily upgradable in FA and our first 4 draft picks.

Jeremy Thompson hasn't come close to sniffing one sack as a 3-4 DE. He was a carefully-chosen draft pick of TT, just like Justin Harrell was.
I think he has some potential though, but you still don't NOT make an upgrade to a system/team because one or two guys, three, etc. don't fit the style as the corrent FAILING system does. It's a no-brainer.

Change it, or lose again. We've already wasted 3 great years from Charles Woodson and have wasted Donald Driver, Mark Tauscher, Al Harris, and Chad Clifton's final good seasons of their career. If it was me, I would have hired Rex Ryan in 2005 from Baltimore. He had already had 6 years in that system.

But I think we went with a promotion from within there, AS ALWAYS, with Bob Slowik.
We've had Donatel, Slowik, Bates, and Sanders. That system sucks compared to the Steelers/Ravens system. You guys see the Broncos defense now under Slowik? How's it working there? Crappy that's how.

Naive fans always blame the players, lack of talent, but it's the system. Our DBs are great. Hawk and Barnett are 1st round picks. Pickett is a 1st round pick. Kampman is a Pro Bowler. Cullen Jenkins is potentially a Pro Bowler. It's not a lack of talent.

The Ravens and Steelers get injuries just like everybody else, but somehow they are almost always in the top 5 for overall defenses. Imagine how nice that would be if our offense didn't need to score 31+ to win very week.

bearsfan_51
12-26-2008, 03:16 PM
Jesus Christ this is such a stupid and lazy argument.

The Cleveland Browns and San Francisco 49'ers ran the 3-4 too. How'd that work out for them?

The Steelers and Ravens have elite defenses because they draft incredibly well. Mike Nolan and Marvin Lewis left Baltimore and neither of their defenses could do ****. This ultra talented defense you think the Packers have doesn't exist.

PACKmanN
12-26-2008, 03:16 PM
#1- Pickett would be an ideal NT. He's perfect for a NT.

#2- Don't tell me you're too afraid to make the upgrade at DC/Defense because you don't want to ruin what you're gettting currently from Justin Harrell, Mike Montgomery, Jason Hunter, and Jeremy Thompson. Those guys are all worthless and are easily upgradable in FA and our first 4 draft picks.

Jeremy Thompson hasn't come close to sniffing one sack as a 3-4 DE. He was a carefully-chosen draft pick of TT, just like Justin Harrell was.
I think he has some potential though, but you still don't NOT make an upgrade to a system/team because one or two guys, three, etc. don't fit the style as the corrent FAILING system does. It's a no-brainer.

Change it, or lose again. We've already wasted 3 great years from Charles Woodson and have wasted Donald Driver, Mark Tauscher, Al Harris, and Chad Clifton's final good seasons of their career. If it was me, I would have hired Rex Ryan in 2005 from Baltimore. He had already had 6 years in that system.

But I think we went with a promotion from within there, AS ALWAYS, with Bob Slowik.
We've had Donatel, Slowik, Bates, and Sanders. That system sucks compared to the Steelers/Ravens system. You guys see the Broncos defense now under Slowik? How's it working there? Crappy that's how.

Naive fans always blame the players, lack of talent, but it's the system. Our DBs are great. Hawk and Barnett are 1st round picks. Pickett is a 1st round pick. Kampman is a Pro Bowler. Cullen Jenkins is potentially a Pro Bowler. It's not a lack of talent.

The Ravens and Steelers get injuries just like everybody else, but somehow they are almost always in the top 5 for overall defenses. Imagine how nice that would be if our offense didn't need to score 31+ to win very week.
wow, what a smart move, switch to a scheme when we don't have players for, then spend money on FA and our first day draft picks to build the scheme and think everything will be better....

I'm going to say this the last time, we spent too much of our cap on this defense to be build as a 43 defense, it is not as easy to rebuild it and take the hit then overpay for free agents....it doesn't work like that. Why don't you check how long it took the Ravens and Steelers to have all the pieces together.....

We have a strong core for a 43 to switch to a 34, that would be dumb.

AtariBigby
12-26-2008, 03:16 PM
just stop...

If the 34 fixes everything then that should be everyone's solution to fixing a defense then...

Because too many people are lazy or scared, it doesn't work that way.
But if you can deny that the Steelers, Ravens, and Patriots have been basically the best 3 defenses of this decade, then I guess you can deny that the 3-4 works better.

I can't deny it because I bet on those guy's games all the time, and I have seen the results over the past 6-8 seasons in today's NFL.

I also see our results. Unless you are telling me that every single one of our 4 DC's in the past 7 years was bad, then either A) the system sucks or B) the players suck or C) the players suck because the GM mis-evaluates the talent all the time. You choose which.

Because we have never been a top 1, 5, even top 10 defense. Last year was as close as we'll come because we were extraordinarily healthy.

Boston
12-26-2008, 03:20 PM
You guys think you need All-Pro DE's to make this work?
You think you also need All-Pro ILB's to make this work?

Name the Steelers DL, other than NT Casey Hampton. Name their 2 ILBers.
Cullen Jenkins would be a beast at DE in a 3-4. He'd be better there than Kampman is NOW in our 4-3.

3 or 4 new starters, via FA or high draft picks, plus a real D-coordinator with a proven system, would not be a bad thing. Some growing pains, sure, just like the Giants in the first part of 2007. It was worth it in the end for them wasn't it?

Do you like the Packers defense you see this year, or last year against Dallas?

Shoot higher. Reach for the stars, not the clouds.

That's funny, it turns out that's really all we need to turn the defense we have now into a great one...

AtariBigby
12-26-2008, 03:25 PM
Jesus Christ this is such a stupid and lazy argument.

The Cleveland Browns and San Francisco 49'ers ran the 3-4 too. How'd that work out for them?

The Steelers and Ravens have elite defenses because they draft incredibly well. Mike Nolan and Marvin Lewis left Baltimore and neither of their defenses could do ****. This ultra talented defense you think the Packers have doesn't exist.

You refuted yourself there bearsfan, and you don't have to call me Jesus, and why are you always in our forum and not the Bears one? We don't play you until 2009 again.

Mike Nolan and Marvin Lewis both were successful as DCs. When the became head coaches, they did NOT run the everyday defenses. They appointed different guys to run their defenses. They all failed. It's the same with Romeo Crennel in Cleveland. And get this, it was also the same with Buddy Ryan and Dick LeBeau, the Steelers DC. Ryan and Lebeau were both FAILURES as head coaches.

LeBeau went back and became a DC again, and you see the results in Pittsburgh. You try and chalk it up to blind luck, or say they are exceptional talents. That's crap.

Go from #1-#11 on that Steelers defense and you won't find any guys drafted higher than AJ Hawk or Charles Woodson were. Barnett and Pickett were also 1st round picks and Kampman and Harris and Collins are Pro Bowlers and many think Cullen Jenkins could be. Oh, and Justine Harrell also was taken higher than guys like Casey Hampton and James Harrison and LaMar Woodley and Joey Porter.

To just pretend like they got the good players and we have crappy players is just ignorant. There's no magic powder in Pittsburgh. It's their system and it's Dick LeBeau's system.

Our defensive system has sucked under now 4 straight coordinators. Not dead-last #32 suck, but average at best. That's not good enough, as we see on the field. Blow it up. If Kampman is that great, then cash him in for a 1st round draft pick like the Chiefs did to the Vikings for Jared Allen.

bearsfan_51
12-26-2008, 03:38 PM
You are honestly making the case that because the Packers players were drafted before the Steelers players they must be better.

That. Is. Classic.

drowe
12-26-2008, 03:56 PM
You are honestly making the case that because the Packers players were drafted before the Steelers players they must be better.

That. Is. Classic.

yeah. obviously the higher you're drafted, the better you are. JUST ASK THE GUY WITH THE ATARI BIGBY USER NAME!!!!

I <3 Irony.

TitleTown088
12-26-2008, 04:44 PM
Change always=success. always... In every circumstance.

AtariBigby
12-26-2008, 06:52 PM
Change doesn't always = success does it, ask Detroit and Matt Millen. They stuck with it year after year after year, even though the fans knew about 4 years sooner than the clown was actually fired.
Band-Aids might equal temporary relief, but they don't cure anything. Our defense has pretty much 'stayed the course' for 6 seasons. A few tweaks here and there.

As far the claim that the higher they're drafted means the better they are: It's not true, not always.

Just like your claim that the reason the Steelers defense is better has to be beause their players are better. That's also false.

They just run a better system. Under a better D-coordinator. They draft and sign the type of athlete that they think can fit into their system. Ted has drafted the type of soft athletes he thinks can fit into Sanders system. How's that working out on the front 7 for us? How's that working out on the OL for us?

It's like Toyota vs Ford. You're philosophy is saying that their employees on the ground for the past 30 years are all better than the Americans over here. Toyota just reported their FIRST EVER quarterly loss by the way. Ford has been going down the tubes for years. You would have me believe it is because of their employees doing the actual work compared to ours.

The fact of the matter is their system is better, while Ford's sucks.

Our defensive coordinator is atrocious. It's pretty simple.

Twiddler
12-26-2008, 07:14 PM
Jesus Christ (and I'm not calling you it), who are you to decide where everyone can and can't go on this forum? BF is fine coming in here, much like any other fan of any other team, as long as they are adding to an overall intelligent discussion instead of posting stupid rival **** talk. Anyways...

Yep, we have a bad year and all of a sudden we need to ditch the system that we've brought talent in for years now and start from scratch. Obviously that is the answer. In fact, lets trade everyone who has some value and start building the systems that are working best this year. And when we suck next year and our new systems don't work, we can do it all over again!

Seriously, this isn't Madden.

AtariBigby
12-26-2008, 07:39 PM
Did I tell the Bears fan not to come in here?
Or did I ask him WHY he was in here all the time?
You must still be a student, college or high school.

If you want more of the same, then fine, keep the same system again..... tell Bob Sanders to coach a little better.
Tell his players to try a little harder and be a little smarter. Perhaps, if he yells more, it will all be fixed next year.

Good idea. We'd hate to have to jettison guys like Brady Poppinga, Colin Cole, Justin Harrell, Brandon Chillar, Mike Montgomery because they're such good guys. I'd hate to replace them with some new blood fit for the 3-4. Bring em all back and cross your fingers that Jenkins doesn't get hurt again, because remember our defense was great in weeks 1-4 when CJ was still healthy, right?

nrk
12-26-2008, 08:01 PM
Go from #1-#11 on that Steelers defense and you won't find any guys drafted higher than AJ Hawk or Charles Woodson were. Barnett and Pickett were also 1st round picks and Kampman and Harris and Collins are Pro Bowlers and many think Cullen Jenkins could be. Oh, and Justine Harrell also was taken higher than guys like Casey Hampton and James Harrison and LaMar Woodley and Joey Porter.


How does where you were drafted effect anything? David Carr > Tom Brady !! Terrible argument dude.

AtariBigby
12-26-2008, 09:38 PM
How does where you were drafted effect anything? David Carr > Tom Brady !! Terrible argument dude.

I tell you what, you give me the first round (32 picks), and I will give you the 2nd-7th rounds then (192 picks) and I bet you my team ends up a lot better than your team, even though you have 160 more picks than I do. For every Tom Brady, I'll give you a Marino or Elway or Aikman or Manning. Or another Manning.

Besides that being true, that's not my point. My point is the Steelers system, and throw in the Ravens system, THRIVES/DOMINATES because of the system. NOT because of the pristine talent that they unearth at picks #27 and #24 all the time.

Steelers/Ravens a consistent dominant defense because of magical drafting or a great system/coaching/fundamentals? Anyone....?

PS, David Carr and Joey Harrington went #1 & #3 overall in the famous 1999 draft, that had:
Julius Peppers, #2
John Henderson, #9, U of Tennessee
Dwight Freeney, #11
Albert Haynesworth, #15, U of Tennessee (how good was that DL for the Vols)
Ed Reed, #24
Brian Westbrook, #91

What a phenomenal class other than the 2 clown, overrated, QB's
http://www.databasefootball.com/draft/draftyear.htm?lg=nfl&yr=2002

PackerLegend
12-27-2008, 02:59 AM
Person with the boner for a 3-4, hate to break it to you but we aren't switching to it. So save your time and stop filling every page with 3-4 talk because it isn't happening.

AtariBigby
12-27-2008, 08:35 AM
Person with the boner for a 3-4, hate to break it to you but we aren't switching to it. So save your time and stop filling every page with 3-4 talk because it isn't happening.

Oh yeah, well tell us: what will be happening?
What changes will we see on the defensive coaching staff starting with Bob Sanders?

Now, onto another topic where I knew better than our GM (just like in 1998 with Randy Moss being passed by us, and in 1989 when Barry Sanders was passed over by us):

Here's an old article about Justin Harrell by Lenny Pasqarelli. He mentioned that many of WE THE FANS were very displeased with the pick at the time. But that arrogant, God-complex, GM felt he could work draft-magic so he swung for the center field fence.

Packers, first-round pick Harrell agree to six-year deal
By Len Pasquarelli
ESPN.com

July 28, 2007
GREEN BAY - The Green Bay Packers reached a contract agreement late Friday night with first-round draft pick Justin Harrell, the former University of Tennessee defensive tackle who their coaches feel can be a dominating interior player, ESPN.com has learned.
Harrell will sign a six-year contract that voids to five seasons if he reaches certain playing time levels, agent Eugene Parker confirmed. The deal has a maximum value of just under $15 million and slightly more than $8 million in guarantees.

Parker, who wrapped up the negotiations just before midnight, and following a long day of bargaining, lauded the professionalism and creativity of Green Bay vice president Andrew Brandt in helping craft the deal. "He deserves a lot of credit," Parker said.

Green Bay officials were criticized by some of their fans for the selection of Harrell with the 16th overall pick in April. But Harrell is a player whose stock rose dramatically in the weeks leading up to the draft (yeah, in the weight room and track fields, NOT on the football field where he rarely was and where he rarely sniffed the QB), and he is a player with a tremendous upside.
The concerns about Harrell, a standout tight end and basketball forward in high school, come from the fact he missed considerable time because of injuries during his Vols' career.

Two major setbacks, a broken right ankle that required surgery in 2003 and a torn bicep that limited him to just three games in 2006, marred his college career. Most talent evaluators felt that, without issues about his durability, Harrell might have been a top 10 selection. (Yeah, well, if I was a foot taller, I would have made $50 million in the NBA too)

Because of the injuries, Harrell appeared in just 35 games in four seasons. He registered 85 tackles and four sacks.
Harrell has very good size (6-feet-4 ˝, 300 pounds), but can probably afford to add more weight to his frame. Surprisingly fluid for his size, Harrell can be a disruptive defender for stretches of games, but probably needs to develop more consistency. He is expected to be a part of the Packers' tackle rotation as a rookie.

Senior writer Len Pasquarelli covers the NFL for ESPN.com

tjsunstein
12-27-2008, 11:32 AM
AtariBigby, if you knew better than Thompson on Harrell and know for a fact that the 3-4 will win us every super bowl for the next 20-30 years then I suggest you march up to the Packers Front Office and try to convince them. Spewing your worthless 34 talk around on this forum is not going to change the system, no matter how many posts you have dedicated to it. Actually, get a HC job somewhere.

PackerLegend
12-27-2008, 11:54 AM
Oh yeah, well tell us: what will be happening?
What changes will we see on the defensive coaching staff starting with Bob Sanders?


Bob Sanders will be gone, but other then that who knows what TT will do. Nobody really knows for sure but everyone here besides you seems to realise the Packers arent going to a 3-4. Since they aren't there isn't any point to sit here and keep talking about it. Its pointless.

AtariBigby
12-27-2008, 12:56 PM
That's why I posted the story on Justin Harrell, but you preferred to ignore that bozo the clown story to talk about the 3-4 again. Classic.

GB12
12-27-2008, 01:01 PM
That's why I posted the story on Justin Harrell, but you preferred to ignore that bozo the clown story to talk about the 3-4 again. Classic.
Why exactly did you post the story on Justin Harrell?

AtariBigby
12-28-2008, 06:28 PM
Most of you guys were still in diapers when I was playing college football in the early 90's. You think you've seen it all?

Whatever you have seen, I've seen triple what you have seen and then some. I don't watch college football every single game, but I have watched the Sunday Ticket since 1994 every week except when I have had to go to games in person. I've seen the pulse of the Ravens and Steelers defense every year.

If anyone here tries to say that their defensive success year-in, year-out is always due to magically having better players, then I'm going to punch you in the mouth if I see you because that's Matt Millen-dumb. They moved from Joey Porter, to James Harrison, a guy nobody drafted, a guy who had been cut many times, a guy who's under 6-feet tall, and now he's the NFL Defensive Player of the Year in that system.

They are good year after year on defense because of their systems and their good coaching. I wouldn't expect anyone over the age of 21 to possibly be dumb enough to argue that fact.

Now, if you say it takes too long to change to a 3-4, you have a sell job to do because other teams have done it. Why can't we with a coach who has done it before? Let me hear why there's no time anymore in the NFL to make a switch. Is the off-season shorter nowadays than it was before?

Also, if you say that our DL and LB talent is JUST TOO GOOD to risk switching systems in between now and 2009, then tell me who these great young players are, and tell me who these guys and why he cannot play a 3-4.

Or do you say that because we have uncharasmatic TT running the show, that we couldn't succeed in luring a top-notch DC like Dick Nolan, or the guy under Dick LeBeau in Pittsburgh.

Explain yourself !

umphrey
12-28-2008, 06:33 PM
George Bush and Dickey Chaney have seen lots of politics in action thus they are great president and VC. Your logic is ********. Don't act like such a smart ass because you think you've watched more football than anyone here.

Switching systems means throwing out every single player on the front seven except for Jenkins and a NT we decide to keep. We would move from possible contenders to full on rebuilding Lions style.

For every great 3-4 defense you can come up with I can cite 3 great 4-3 or other defenses.

GB12
12-28-2008, 06:40 PM
Most of you guys were still in diapers when I was playing college football in the early 90's. You think you've seen it all?

Whatever you have seen, I've seen triple what you have seen and then some. I don't watch college football every single game, but I have watched the Sunday Ticket since 1994 every week except when I have had to go to games in person. I've seen the pulse of the Ravens and Steelers defense every year. None of that means a damn thing and nobody cares, so you can stop bringing it up.

The rest isn't worth explaining because you'll just feed us the same crap again.

bearsfan_51
12-28-2008, 09:25 PM
Most of you guys were still in diapers when I was playing college football in the early 90's. You think you've seen it all?

Whatever you have seen, I've seen triple what you have seen and then some. I don't watch college football every single game, but I have watched the Sunday Ticket since 1994 every week except when I have had to go to games in person. I've seen the pulse of the Ravens and Steelers defense every year.
Wow you sound like a total douche.

middlelinebacker54
12-28-2008, 11:35 PM
Projected Offseason

2009 NFL Draft
1st Brian Orakpo/DE/Texas
2nd Peria Jerry/DT/Ole Miss
3rd Troy Kropog/OT/Tulane
3rd Tyrone McKenzie/OLB/South Florida
4th Brandon Underwood/CB/Cincinnati
5th Jarrett Dillard/WR/Rice
6th Chris Miller/P/Ball State
6th Brian Toal/OLB/Boston College
7th Mitch King/DE/Iowa


Free Agency
Resign:
OT Mark Tauscher

Hire:
Defensive Coordinator Mike Nolan

PACKmanN
12-29-2008, 11:31 AM
Projected Offseason

2009 NFL Draft
1st Brian Orakpo/DE/Texas
2nd Peria Jerry/DT/Ole Miss
3rd Troy Kropog/OT/Tulane
3rd Tyrone McKenzie/OLB/South Florida
4th Brandon Underwood/CB/Cincinnati
5th Jarrett Dillard/WR/Rice
6th Chris Miller/P/Ball State
6th Brian Toal/OLB/Boston College
7th Mitch King/DE/Iowa


Free Agency
Resign:
OT Mark Tauscher

Hire:
Defensive Coordinator Mike Nolan

what scheme would Nolan be running? and I think some of your picks are taken a round late or early.

AtariBigby
12-29-2008, 11:41 AM
what scheme would Nolan be running? and I think some of your picks are taken a round late or early.
Why are you so paranoid about the defensive scheme?
Unreal. It it ain't broken, don't fix it.
If it IS BROKEN, fix it.
Band-Aids don't work. You'll learn that someday son. Hopefully.

Nice mock the guy made, by the way.

PACKmanN
12-29-2008, 12:30 PM
Why are you so paranoid about the defensive scheme?
Unreal. It it ain't broken, don't fix it.
If it IS BROKEN, fix it.
Band-Aids don't work. You'll learn that someday son. Hopefully.

Nice mock the guy made, by the way.

And hopefully you learn that we have a good defense that can run a 43 just needs better coaching...

bigboiajhawk
12-29-2008, 12:35 PM
And hopefully you learn that we have a good defense that can run a 43 just needs better coaching...

Ding Ding Ding...we have a winner

Can we please get a DC that blitzes atleast five times in a game. I mean we can start out at five blitzes, then maybe six the next game, then we might get to seven in the next.

AtariBigby
12-30-2008, 01:15 AM
And hopefully you learn that we have a good defense that can run a 43 just needs better coaching...
Really?
Just better coaching, of the same scheme?
So we had Donatel, Slowik, Bates, and now Sanders, same scheme..... but we just need a better coach to coach it? Who you gonna get, Fritz Shurmer from the grave?
Or are you too young to know that name?

Amazing. It's no wonder America is in the shape it's in with logic like that. Wait, you're in Canada... isn't that the 51st state of the USA?

johbur
12-30-2008, 03:25 AM
TT doesn't draft for the next year. He drafts for two seasons away it seems. He drafts a high number of players to create roster competition and deal with the injuries and free agents or traded players.
I like the offense, but I'd like to see an OT brought in or drafted as Taush likely out.
The defense pained me all year. Expecting guys with serious injuries to suddenly become the players they used to be before injury is not realistic IMO. I don't think Barnett or Jenkins are going to be equal to what they were. Bigby might be. Harrell could be having yet another back surgery. How many pro players come back from 4 back surgeries and not being able to work out hard for three years to be anything in the NFL? Jolly could be in prison. I like Cole as a Wave player and goal line guy, but he's not a starter. With KGB off the team, that leaves plenty of roster spots open for competition on the d-line. Montgomery, Thompson and Hunter will compete at DE, but do you really think they are the answer? They haven't been.

As far as 3-4, 4-3, it always depended on who your best players were. If you had more great LBs, go 3-4. More great DLs, 4-3. If the Packers picked up a couple of LBs in FA/draft, this'd actually be a good year to move to the 3-4, personnel wise. AK, Pickett, Jenkins as the front three, or maybe Jolly or Montgomery as the third end, depending on who's healthy and not tapping ass in prison. An FA or draft pick could be the third end, also. If Barnett is capable, you'd have him paired with Hawk in the interior and Chillar and B-Pop outside. This'd also let you rush B-Pop a heck of a lot more. Bishop and Lansanah are already on the team along with Havner. If you brought in a good free agent and drafted a linebacker from USC you'd have the horses to play however you wanted to play. Due to how they've been drafting, the LBs have worked out better than the DLs, so it'd be the best year to make the move in recent memory, not that they'd do it it, mind you.

AtariBigby
12-30-2008, 11:05 AM
he made the team, haha. Fact is we have no idea if Pat Lee will be anything in the future because as fans we didn't get to see jack of him. The Packer's coaching obviously knows more than we do though....

Be careful about that thinking. Just because the GM drafts him or signs him doesn't mean it's a good move.
Don't forget about the Jon Ryan/Scott Frost disaster, or the Justin Harrell pick. Those were carefully calculated moves by our GM that have caused catastrophic results.

You don't always have to give them the benefit of the doubt. Sometimes they're wrong and the consequences are severe (see 6-10).

JOHBUR,
You are correct about our LB core being better than our DL core, and if we use our #1 pick on one of the many talented LBers, it is the PERFECT time to switch to a 3-4. Remember A) LBers make an immediate impact way more often than DLs do as rookies, and B) the fact that we have a great back end in the DB spots makes it a good time to switch.

Imagine if you had Ahmad Carroll and Michael Hawthorne back there with Marques Anderson or Darren Sharper at safety , with Jarrett Bush still the nickel back.
You'd never risk making any kind of change up front because those guys would cause disaster every passing play.

PACKmanN
12-30-2008, 11:08 AM
this guy is really starting to piss me off, how do you block people?

AtariBigby
12-30-2008, 11:28 AM
You're easy to get under your skin (= fragile psyche, mentally weak).
All I have to do is say something or agree with somebody else about something you don't like. Easy.

PACKmanN
12-30-2008, 11:50 AM
You're easy to get under your skin (= fragile psyche, mentally weak).
All I have to do is say something or agree with somebody else about something you don't like. Easy.

no its because we spent over 2-3 pages of us telling you how dumb it would be to switch to a 34 yet you continue with this garbage. If our team felt that it was better for us to use a 34 we would have done it before we built this team in a 43 defense, but we didn't and what does that mean to you.....it will not happen so drop it.

AtariBigby
12-30-2008, 11:59 AM
no its because we spent over 2-3 pages of us telling you how dumb it would be to switch to a 34 yet you continue with this garbage. If our team felt that it was better for us to use a 34 we would have done it before we built this team in a 43 defense, but we didn't and what does that mean to you.....it will not happen so drop it.
Just because OUR TEAM FELT something doesn't mean it's right and doesn't mean they won't change. They felt Scott Frost was an upgrade on Jon Ryan.
We changed to the ZBS a few years ago even though our best two OL (Clifton and Tauscher) were not built for it. Explain that one tough guy.

Now, just because you and a couple of your unwise cohorts have convinced yourself that the 4-3 must remain, it doesn't mean crap. In fact, here is what LeRoy Butler just said about it.... dude knows a lot more about football than you do that's for sure. And he mentioned the #1 guy I want, Maualuga. I wish Butler was running the war room for us in April.

Q. How far are the Packers away from being a playoff team again?

A. I think they're one or two players (away from being a playoff team) and I think four or five players away from going to the NFC Championship again. This is a crucial offseason for the Packers free agent-wise and draft-wise. I’d like to see the Packers understand that you can add talent that can get you to the NFC Championship Game. There are some free agents out there who can help them. And with a top-10 pick in the draft, they can get a pretty good player. I'd like to see them draft the linebacker from USC (Rey Maualuga) or the defensive tackle from Oklahoma (Gerald McCoy) or Michael Jenkins, the cornerback from Ohio State. I would love to see them go for a defensive lineman, but that linebacker from USC would make sense if they decide to play the 3-4 next year. If they stick with a 4-3, they need to get a defensive tackle

PACKmanN
12-30-2008, 12:06 PM
Just because OUR TEAM FELT something doesn't mean it's right and doesn't mean they won't change. They felt Scott Frost was an upgrade on Jon Ryan.
We changed to the ZBS a few years ago even though our best two OL (Clifton and Tauscher) were not built for it. Explain that one tough guy.

Now, just because you and a couple of your unwise cohorts have convinced yourself that the 4-3 must remain, it doesn't mean crap. In fact, here is what LeRoy Butler just said about it.... dude knows a lot more about football than you do that's for sure. And he mentioned the #1 guy I want, Maualuga. I wish Butler was running the war room for us in April.

Q. How far are the Packers away from being a playoff team again?

A. I think they're one or two players (away from being a playoff team) and I think four or five players away from going to the NFC Championship again. This is a crucial offseason for the Packers free agent-wise and draft-wise. I’d like to see the Packers understand that you can add talent that can get you to the NFC Championship Game. There are some free agents out there who can help them. And with a top-10 pick in the draft, they can get a pretty good player. I'd like to see them draft the linebacker from USC (Rey Maualuga) or the defensive tackle from Oklahoma (Gerald McCoy) or Michael Jenkins, the cornerback from Ohio State. I would love to see them go for a defensive lineman, but that linebacker from USC would make sense if they decide to play the 3-4 next year.If they stick with a 4-3, they need to get a defensive tackle
He said IF they switch...all he is doing is giving his thoughts on options they COULD do...and if we spend a top 10 pick on a LB, I will be really disappointed.

We switch to a ZBS and drafted players for it, unlike the defense, we stuck with the 43 and draft players who they felt fit the defense, not a 34 defense. TT said you draft BPA and players who fit the scheme, which means if they do decide to switch to a 34, they wouldn't fit it as well as they would to a 43.

You think it is as easy to switch a scheme and have it running to the full, well I'm here to tell you is isn't...

AtariBigby
12-30-2008, 01:15 PM
He said IF they switch...all he is doing is giving his thoughts on options they COULD do...and if we spend a top 10 pick on a LB, I will be really disappointed.

We switch to a ZBS and drafted players for it, unlike the defense, we stuck with the 43 and draft players who they felt fit the defense, not a 34 defense.

You think it is as easy to switch a scheme and have it running to the full, well I'm here to tell you is isn't...
If we switch to a 3-4, we'll do it soon and we'll draft accordingly.... in April.
And free agency before that. It's not that complicated.

It's much easier for our LBers to go from a 3 to a 4, then it was for Clifton and Tauscher to go from standard to a ZBS.

Like with all changes, of course there will be some growing pains. But the Giants defense had growing pains last year to start their season when the Cowboys scored 45 on them and we scored 35 or 38 on them and they were 0-2.
They seemed to get it figured out though, and if we get a good DC, and our players are smart, we'll figure it out as well.

Maualuga would be fantastic in Green & Gold and give our defense some intensity and their first legi intimidator in years.

He'd be like when the Seahawks got Lofa Tatupu from USC at LB and he led their defense to the Super Bowl his rookie year.

We need to get LeRoy into the war room.

bigboiajhawk
12-30-2008, 01:57 PM
Why would we need to swith defenses to draft Maualuga? Hawk-Maualuga-Barnett would be really amazing. Barnett has already got his MLB money in his new contract, so I feel he would be more apt to make a change. TT drafts BPA as he says he does, so I think Rey will be high on his list because he is the best player on the best defense in college football.

PACKmanN
12-30-2008, 02:56 PM
If we switch to a 3-4, we'll do it soon and we'll draft accordingly.... in April.
And free agency before that. It's not that complicated.yes it is because we already have so much money invested into the 43 that it would hurt our cap if we change schemes and add more players to the defense. What don't you understand, we built this defense for the future, we can not destroy it and rebuild it...

It's much easier for our LBers to go from a 3 to a 4, then it was for Clifton and Tauscher to go from standard to a ZBS.Our LBers can not escape from linemen once they are being blocked by them, its a fact, and you can't have that when you switch to a 34...

Like with all changes, of course there will be some growing pains. But the Giants defense had growing pains last year to start their season when the Cowboys scored 45 on them and we scored 35 or 38 on them and they were 0-2.
They seemed to get it figured out though, and if we get a good DC, and our players are smart, we'll figure it out as well.They didn't change schemes, just philosophy...

Maualuga would be fantastic in Green & Gold and give our defense some intensity and their first legi intimidator in years.I am not putting more money into the LB core, that would be a waste...and where do you even play him since WE are not switching shcemes...

He'd be like when the Seahawks got Lofa Tatupu from USC at LB and he led their defense to the Super Bowl his rookie year.yet we are not in a need for a MLB...

We need to get LeRoy into the war room.no he shouldn't, all he did was list popular names and what he thinks, I could do that too, maybe I should be in the war room.
the ZBS has nothing to do with this other then the fact that its an example of how things do not change for the positive if you destroy and rebuild something.

Yatta!
12-30-2008, 02:56 PM
Drafting Maualuga would be a big mistake. Hawk was a much better prospect and he hasn't eactly set the world alight.

Jenkins, Orakpo and Oher/Monroe/Smith are all better prospects and greater needs.

Twiddler
12-30-2008, 03:15 PM
Why would we need to swith defenses to draft Maualuga? Hawk-Maualuga-Barnett would be really amazing. Barnett has already got his MLB money in his new contract, so I feel he would be more apt to make a change. TT drafts BPA as he says he does, so I think Rey will be high on his list because he is the best player on the best defense in college football.

If we stay in the 4-3 (which we will) drafting a linebacker high would be a big mistake. I can understand trying to acquire some depth a little later on but having Hawk, Barnett and another high pick LB means that one will spend a good amount of time off the field in passing situations. It wouldn't be worth the money or the pick, and I think we'd be much better off spending that pick on someone to help with one of the lines (whether offensive or defensive). Although I don't really know the high end prospects in this draft yet so I'm not sure who it would be.

PACKmanN
12-30-2008, 03:23 PM
Why would we need to swith defenses to draft Maualuga? Hawk-Maualuga-Barnett would be really amazing. Barnett has already got his MLB money in his new contract, so I feel he would be more apt to make a change. TT drafts BPA as he says he does, so I think Rey will be high on his list because he is the best player on the best defense in college football.

Barnett will not move outside, he has said it over and over...

AtariBigby
12-30-2008, 08:07 PM
The rest of 'us' are NOT saying that.
The rest of 'us' know that Mister Thompson doesn't draft according to his positional depth charts.

BPA is the way he goes. As much as many people do not like that route he chooses, THAT is how he drafts. So forget about our positional depth charts and who you think is good, not good, not good enough, needs to be replaced, etc. You say drafting a linebacker high would be a big mistake. Are you satisfied with our LB play and the way they cover TEs and RBs? The only LB that I noticed blowing up holes in the backfield this year EVER was Desmond Bishop 2 times.

Here's what we can all wonder though: Was Justin Harrell really the BPA out of any position when Ted took him? If he thought so, that's bad.

Twiddler
12-30-2008, 09:53 PM
The rest of 'us' are NOT saying that.

I'm not talking about that point specifically, I'm talking about the way you come across as a poster to the rest of the fans on this site. There's a reason that you've faced a lot of resistance here.

BPA is the way he goes. As much as many people do not like that route he chooses, THAT is how he drafts. So forget about our positional depth charts and who you think is good, not good, not good enough, needs to be replaced, etc.

Trust me, I realize that he drafts BPA. However, I think it is BPA within reason. Unless he has plans for either Hawk or Barnett in the next few years, I just can't see him taking a linebacker as high as the ninth pick. I don't think that second round and later on is out of the question though.

You say drafting a linebacker high would be a big mistake. Are you satisfied with our LB play and the way they cover TEs and RBs?

As I said earlier, I still think it would be a mistake if he wasn't planning on doing anything with Hawk or Barnett in the next few years. For the play of the linebackers, I think its obvious that a good portion of the blame lies with them, but I still think that we can help them out a lot by getting better pressure from the defensive line and giving them some space to make plays. That's why I wouldn't be surprised if he wanted to invest a high pick in the defensive line.

Here's what we can all wonder though: Was Justin Harrell really the BPA out of any position when Ted took him? If he thought so, that's bad.

That is a good question. Obviously only Ted knows what he was thinking, but I don't think he thought that Harrell was the BPA at that point in time. However, I do think that he felt that Harrell had a high ceiling and he just kind of rolled the dice on whether or not he would be able to stay healthy. Of course, that hasn't worked in our favor so far, but I still think there is a chance (rather slim) that he can pull it around.

PACKmanN
12-30-2008, 09:55 PM
The rest of 'us' are NOT saying that.
The rest of 'us' know that Mister Thompson doesn't draft according to his positional depth charts.

BPA is the way he goes. As much as many people do not like that route he chooses, THAT is how he drafts. So forget about our positional depth charts and who you think is good, not good, not good enough, needs to be replaced, etc. You say drafting a linebacker high would be a big mistake. Are you satisfied with our LB play and the way they cover TEs and RBs? The only LB that I noticed blowing up holes in the backfield this year EVER was Desmond Bishop 2 times.

Here's what we can all wonder though: Was Justin Harrell really the BPA out of any position when Ted took him? If he thought so, that's bad.
How the hell is he going to improve that? He is a terrible cover guy who is better suited for a 34, aka Willis...get your stuff straight.

GB12
12-30-2008, 09:57 PM
How the hell is he going to improve that? He is a terrible cover guy who is better suited for a 34, aka Willis...get your stuff straight.
I agree with what you're saying, but you're wrong there. Willis is probably better suited for a 4-3, and he is no where near Willis.

PACKmanN
12-30-2008, 10:00 PM
I agree with what you're saying, but you're wrong there. Willis is probably better suited for a 4-3, and he is no where near Willis.

I agree, I'm just saying that asking Maualuga to cover running backs and tight ends in this league at a 43 scheme is the dumbest thing to ask. He is a great run stuffer and rusher, not covering. Plus, we will not even draft him because there no need or reason for him.

We need to get a guy with better philosophy then changing the scheme.

GB12
12-30-2008, 10:02 PM
I agree, I'm just saying that asking Maualuga to cover running backs and tight ends in this league at a 43 scheme is the dumbest thing to ask. He is a great run stuffer and rusher, not covering. Plus, we will not even draft him because there no need or reason for him.

We need to get a guy with better philosophy then changing the scheme.
Oh I get that, and you're right on there. Just saying that bringing up Willis didn't make any sense.

AtariBigby
12-31-2008, 07:50 PM
I'm not talking about that point specifically, I'm talking about the way you come across as a poster to the rest of the fans on this site. There's a reason that you've faced a lot of resistance here.
The reason I go after the resistance here is because the one guy from Canada with the ugly mugshot avatar believes that because he had 2 pages of discussion about the 3-4 (weeks ago before I came back into the forum), that it's a done deal and that he proved that no team should ever switch to a 3-4 because it takes too long.

We are the YOUNGEST team in the NFL statistically. What team should change to it, the oldest team in the NFL?

I understand the point he'd like to make that this defense has been carefully hand-crafted and molded to dominate only in a 4-3 scheme. The problem with that theory is it's not true.
Hawk and Barnett would be better in a 3-4, and I think Desmond Bishop could even be an effective 3-4 ILB.

And only having to roll out 3 DL instead of 4 would actually be a good thing for this team as we have seen that our DL depth sucks. Plus I think Cullen Jenkins is better than Aaron Kampman at this point in their careers and CJ would be a great 3-4 DE. Perfect blend of size and agility.

Besides that, and there's been plenty of discussion in the media THIS week about possible scheme changes, no kid GB12 or PACKmanN, is going to tell me that they already covered this week ago and proved that there's no way or reason for the team to switch so just drop it. Nobody tells me what to say or not to say, especially when I am correct. Plus arrigo told me Nolan will be the guy and he will switch it to a 3-4, so there.

Whistler6
01-01-2009, 11:50 AM
The reason I go after the resistance here is because the one guy from Canada with the ugly mugshot avatar believes that because he had 2 pages of discussion about the 3-4 (weeks ago before I came back into the forum), that it's a done deal and that he proved that no team should ever switch to a 3-4 because it takes too long.

We are the YOUNGEST team in the NFL statistically. What team should change to it, the oldest team in the NFL?

I understand the point he'd like to make that this defense has been carefully hand-crafted and molded to dominate only in a 4-3 scheme. The problem with that theory is it's not true.
Hawk and Barnett would be better in a 3-4, and I think Desmond Bishop could even be an effective 3-4 ILB.

And only having to roll out 3 DL instead of 4 would actually be a good thing for this team as we have seen that our DL depth sucks. Plus I think Cullen Jenkins is better than Aaron Kampman at this point in their careers and CJ would be a great 3-4 DE. Perfect blend of size and agility.

Besides that, and there's been plenty of discussion in the media THIS week about possible scheme changes, no kid GB12 or PACKmanN, is going to tell me that they already covered this week ago and proved that there's no way or reason for the team to switch so just drop it. Nobody tells me what to say or not to say, especially when I am correct. Plus arrigo told me Nolan will be the guy and he will switch it to a 3-4, so there.

Explain how Hawk and Barnett would be better in a 3-4.. Look at the Steelers LBers. They can shed blockers AND blitz the quarterback. Both Barnett and Hawk get swallowed up when they blitz or take on an O-linemen. They generate zero pass rush when they blitz.

This is soley my opinion, so you do not need to bash me and go on any more rants.

PACKmanN
01-01-2009, 11:57 AM
The reason I go after the resistance here is because the one guy from Canada with the ugly mugshot avatar believes that because he had 2 pages of discussion about the 3-4 (weeks ago before I came back into the forum), that it's a done deal and that he proved that no team should ever switch to a 3-4 because it takes too long.

We are the YOUNGEST team in the NFL statistically. What team should change to it, the oldest team in the NFL?

I understand the point he'd like to make that this defense has been carefully hand-crafted and molded to dominate only in a 4-3 scheme. The problem with that theory is it's not true.
Hawk and Barnett would be better in a 3-4, and I think Desmond Bishop could even be an effective 3-4 ILB.

And only having to roll out 3 DL instead of 4 would actually be a good thing for this team as we have seen that our DL depth sucks. Plus I think Cullen Jenkins is better than Aaron Kampman at this point in their careers and CJ would be a great 3-4 DE. Perfect blend of size and agility.

Besides that, and there's been plenty of discussion in the media THIS week about possible scheme changes, no kid GB12 or PACKmanN, is going to tell me that they already covered this week ago and proved that there's no way or reason for the team to switch so just drop it. Nobody tells me what to say or not to say, especially when I am correct. Plus arrigo told me Nolan will be the guy and he will switch it to a 3-4, so there.
Oh so were putting words in other people's mouths now are we...

"Nolan has experience in a 4-3 as well as a 3-4, so my guess is that they would keep a 4-3 and sprinkle a 3-4 look every now and then."

PACKmanN
01-01-2009, 11:58 AM
Explain how Hawk and Barnett would be better in a 3-4.. Look at the Steelers LBers. They can shed blockers AND blitz the quarterback. Both Barnett and Hawk get swallowed up when they blitz or take on an O-linemen. They generate zero pass rush when they blitz.

This is soley my opinion, so you do not need to bash me and go on any more rants.

That is what I said in the beginning...we already have terrible mlb play vs. the run now you want to rely on Barnett and Hawk in the middle to stop the run, isn't going to happen.

edit: and weren't the Packers prating some 34 plays during the off-season, you now know how effective it was since we haven't even seen any of the plays used on the field...

TitleTown088
01-01-2009, 03:40 PM
LBers aren't the damn problem with the run defense. Its a bit difficult for them to constantly shed off Oline blocks because the Dline is crap.

The packers are not switching to a freaking 3-4 either, let it go.

johbur
01-01-2009, 06:48 PM
LBers aren't the damn problem with the run defense. Its a bit difficult for them to constantly shed off Oline blocks because the Dline is crap.

The packers are not switching to a freaking 3-4 either, let it go.

I thought Hawk was decent in the middle. Chillar, to me, should be a starter next year at OLB. If Barnett comes back solid, he could move to OLB. Toss in Poppinga, the guys that TT is bringing along like Lansanah and Havner and a potential first round guy like Malaleuga, that's a really solid LB crew, and a crew that you could go 3-4 with.

Out of any year since 1990 or so, the Packers have the LB crew to switch over, if they choose to do so.

Bob Sanders did not call blitzes often for the LBs, so who actually knows how well these guys rush? Hawk had nine sacks his last year in college. If Sanders is cut, then the new guy might be more of a blitzer and the new guy might decide he has more playmaking LBs than playmaking DLs, which is really the bottom line.

For a three man line, AK, Pickett and Jenkins would be a solid group because they all are solid against the run, and Jenkins and Kampman would be solid rushers, depending on Jenkins' recovery. I could see Jolly as an end and Cole has NT all over him. Given the injuries and legal status, who knows what this group is going to look like in TC.

The fact is that the defense was very dissappointing, didn't get pressure n the QB and couldn't stop opponents at the end of games and instead of being 10-6 (or better) the Packers are 6-10. Whatever we were doing this year didn't work out so good, so it just might be time to look at doing something else. McCarthy has no problem saying that all schemes and personnel will be reviewed:

All of our schemes are under evaluation right now. That's what you do right now. That's what this time is for. We'll look at the run defense, we'll look at all those things. We'll look at the base concepts in normal d-and-d all the way through. That's what you spend the time for. That's why you make educated decisions. It will be no different when I sit down with the offense and special teams.

AtariBigby
01-01-2009, 07:15 PM
Right, none of us know at this point. Hopefully MM has a gameplan though and it includes a big change.
We have a young team, with the best (but old) pair of CB's in the NFL. I can't think of a better time for a mini-roster overhaul than now, on that side of the ball.

Our pathetic DL this year did have A LOT to do with the LBers crappy performance.
As for Hawk and Barnett not being able to shed blocks: Most LBers have trouble shedding blocks from 305-pound OL coming at them.

Now, in an updated sidenote press release, somewhat-related since they are our rivals:
EDEN PRAIRIE, Minn. – Plenty of good seats are still available for Minnesota's playoff game against Philadelphia.

The Vikings reported 8,000 tickets remaining at noon New Year's Day for Sunday's game against the Eagles. The NFL has granted an extension until 3:30 p.m. local time Friday to reach a virtual sellout, but the possibility of a local TV blackout looms.

The blackout would not only encompass the Twin Cities, but secondary markets in the region as well. It includes satellite, cable and over-the-air systems, so nobody in the area could watch the game unless they're in attendance at the Metrodome.

Vice president of sales and marketing Steve LaCroix said the team has hired extra holiday help to solicit potential buyers. The Vikings haven't had a game blacked out since 1997.

PACKmanN
01-01-2009, 07:32 PM
I thought Hawk was decent in the middle. Chillar, to me, should be a starter next year at OLB. If Barnett comes back solid, he could move to OLB. Toss in Poppinga, the guys that TT is bringing along like Lansanah and Havner and a potential first round guy like Malaleuga, that's a really solid LB crew, and a crew that you could go 3-4 with.

Out of any year since 1990 or so, the Packers have the LB crew to switch over, if they choose to do so.

Bob Sanders did not call blitzes often for the LBs, so who actually knows how well these guys rush? Hawk had nine sacks his last year in college. If Sanders is cut, then the new guy might be more of a blitzer and the new guy might decide he has more playmaking LBs than playmaking DLs, which is really the bottom line.

For a three man line, AK, Pickett and Jenkins would be a solid group because they all are solid against the run, and Jenkins and Kampman would be solid rushers, depending on Jenkins' recovery. I could see Jolly as an end and Cole has NT all over him. Given the injuries and legal status, who knows what this group is going to look like in TC.

The fact is that the defense was very dissappointing, didn't get pressure n the QB and couldn't stop opponents at the end of games and instead of being 10-6 (or better) the Packers are 6-10. Whatever we were doing this year didn't work out so good, so it just might be time to look at doing something else. McCarthy has no problem saying that all schemes and personnel will be reviewed:

All of our schemes are under evaluation right now. That's what you do right now. That's what this time is for. We'll look at the run defense, we'll look at all those things. We'll look at the base concepts in normal d-and-d all the way through. That's what you spend the time for. That's why you make educated decisions. It will be no different when I sit down with the offense and special teams.
and you don't need to something dumb and drastic by changing the scheme to get results, just a change in the philosophy of a DC will give you results.

BTW, would you really want to use another first round pick and bring in a LB? like you said, A LB will not be successful unless you give him linemen in front of him to eat up blockers. IMO, the LB position is the least important on an defense.

AtariBigby
01-01-2009, 07:50 PM
BTW, would you really want to use another first round pick and bring in a LB? like you said, A LB will not be successful unless you give him linemen in front of him to eat up blockers. IMO, the LB position is the least important on an defense.
That part is a good point but here's the thinking:
LBers in the draft consistently have much more immediate impact than do DL guys, especially rookie DEs. Look at Vernon Gholson and even Chris Long this year. They didn't have anywhere the impact that recent rookie LB studs like Patrick Willis, Jerod Mayo have. Most defensive rookie of the years are LBers.

With that being said, it would require that TT utilizes free agency to address the DL position prior to drafting the LB. I'm sure we won't land Haynesworth though, sadly. He'd change everything.

GB12
01-01-2009, 09:20 PM
That part is a good point but here's the thinking:
LBers in the draft consistently have much more immediate impact than do DL guys, especially rookie DEs. Look at Vernon Gholson and even Chris Long this year. They didn't have anywhere the impact that recent rookie LB studs like Patrick Willis, Jerod Mayo have. Most defensive rookie of the years are LBers.

With that being said, it would require that TT utilizes free agency to address the DL position prior to drafting the LB. I'm sure we won't land Haynesworth though, sadly. He'd change everything.
Vernon Gohlston was drafted to be a 3-4 LB...

PACKmanN
01-01-2009, 09:30 PM
That part is a good point but here's the thinking:
LBers in the draft consistently have much more immediate impact than do DL guys, especially rookie DEs. Look at Vernon Gholson and even Chris Long this year. They didn't have anywhere the impact that recent rookie LB studs like Patrick Willis, Jerod Mayo have. Most defensive rookie of the years are LBers.

With that being said, it would require that TT utilizes free agency to address the DL position prior to drafting the LB. I'm sure we won't land Haynesworth though, sadly. He'd change everything.

I'm not giving a player big money who hasn't played a full season. Long is more of a run stuffer then he was a pass rusher. I think Long needs to develop into a pass rusher while Gholston is a 34 OLB.

RockJock07
01-01-2009, 10:23 PM
Why are you so paranoid about the defensive scheme?
Unreal. It it ain't broken, don't fix it.
If it IS BROKEN, fix it.
Band-Aids don't work. You'll learn that someday son. Hopefully.

Nice mock the guy made, by the way.


If nolan is hired and wants to run a 3-4 fine by me, however that's not something that can happen with the players the packers have now. First and foremost you need a nosetackle that can handle getting swallowed up every play for 3 hours. There are no Casey Hamptons in FA or the draft and to run the 3-4 you need one of those like the Steelers and Ravens have. Also you need pass running LB's, we don't have those either.

My point is that you need to have a couple of off-seasons to get the right players in to run the 3-4 right.

Also looking at the FA class this year, it's not great by any means however the Dolphins didn't sign any big name FA's last season, they brought in some role playing veteren free agents, had a great draft and committed to playing defense. We know the packers can draft, now lets sign some veteren mid-level free agents and get a DC that can coach. If the Dolphins and Falcons can turn around their teams the Packers can do the same.

AtariBigby
01-02-2009, 06:12 AM
What's the size comps of Casey Hampton of the Steelers, and Ryan Pickett?
Anyone?

princefielder28
01-02-2009, 08:32 AM
What's the size comps of Casey Hampton of the Steelers, and Ryan Pickett?
Anyone?

Hampton : 6'1" 325
Pickett : 6'2" 330

Yatta!
01-02-2009, 11:43 AM
Hampton : 6'1" 325
Pickett : 6'2" 330

But that does not mean that Pickett would be any better as an NT than he is at DT. Please can we move on from the 3-4 talk.

Mockie
01-02-2009, 12:52 PM
All you Madden kids need to learn the NFL isn't a video game. You don't just go switching schemes completely in the middle of a building process. The only way the Packers go 3-4 is if McCarthy gets canned and they bring in a coach who runs the 3-4. It doesn't even make sense to the make the switch, the Packers don't have a single player who would be an effective pass rusher in the 3-4 (which is what the scheme is built on, getting after the quarterback).

princefielder28
01-02-2009, 01:09 PM
But that does not mean that Pickett would be any better as an NT than he is at DT. Please can we move on from the 3-4 talk.

He wanted to the numbers, so I gave him the numbers...I do not support a switch to a 3-4; it's idiotic.

Yatta!
01-02-2009, 06:31 PM
He wanted to the numbers, so I gave him the numbers...I do not support a switch to a 3-4; it's idiotic.

I know dude. It's just starting to annoy me that this debate is still going on even though the vast majority of us are severely against it.

AtariBigby
01-04-2009, 12:44 AM
It doesn't matter if we the fans are for it, or against it.
Until we see who our next coordinator is going to be, or if it's going to still be Colonel Sanders, then it's open for debate.

As far as "you don't go switching schemes in the middle of a building process" goes. You tell me, when do you switch schemes? When a defense has 3 dominant years with medicore talent, or has 3 average years with above-average talent?

I don't know exactly what the answer is. It could be the next guy from Philly. But I do know that Sanders ain't the answer. He's part of the problem and it's not because he doesn't care or doesn't try.

I was impressed by the Chargers defense tonight and that despite not having their only good pass rusher, Merriman.

AtariBigby
01-04-2009, 02:25 AM
Wow, I just saw this stat in the paper.... this is the perfect thing to show how terrible our DL really was. Yuck. Gerald McCoy would really be a welcome addition.

Cullen Jenkins-
Combination end/tackle was off to a torrid start with 2˝ sacks and 10 pressures until a torn pectoral muscle ended his season after only four games. Finished second on the team in pressures despite missing the final 12 games.

That is really disgusting. We lose one good DL like Jenkins, and we become the Minnesota Gophers DL? Maybe that's why I want to go to a 3-4 so that we only need to play 3 of em instead of throw 4 of em out there.

princefielder28
01-04-2009, 11:45 AM
Wow, I just saw this stat in the paper.... this is the perfect thing to show how terrible our DL really was. Yuck. Gerald McCoy would really be a welcome addition.

Cullen Jenkins-
Combination end/tackle was off to a torrid start with 2˝ sacks and 10 pressures until a torn pectoral muscle ended his season after only four games. Finished second on the team in pressures despite missing the final 12 games.

That is really disgusting. We lose one good DL like Jenkins, and we become the Minnesota Gophers DL? Maybe that's why I want to go to a 3-4 so that we only need to play 3 of em instead of throw 4 of em out there.

I know some people are tired of this discussion but I'll address this.

It is true that you only need to account for 3 DL in the 3-4 scheme, but the main key is the NT and I don't think the Packers have someone who could fill that void successfully in the 3-4. Can Ryan Pickett? Possibly but he didn't impress me too much in comparison to years past. BJ Raji will be available at the 9th pick so we would be able to address the need there, but if we take him then we're left with a big contract DT that will be a backup and taking up cap space. Who translates to 3-4 DE? Justin Harrell might but he never stays healthy and we can't rely on him. Cullen Jenkins would probably be our best option at 3-4 end, but it's hard to tell because this team is built for 4-3. Moving past the line, do we have the LBs capable of a 3-4? I would say hell no. Looking inside Barnett and Hawk are nice LBs but Barnett is the only one on the roster that could be considered "impact." You look at other teams that use the 3-4 and do it well, Pittsburgh and Baltimore, they have an impact LB inside, Farrior and Ray Lewis, and then they have sick pass rushers at OLB. Brady Poppinga and Jeremy Thompson/Aaron Kampman(?) would currently be slotted as leading candidates if we made that move. Now look at a LB corp of Thompson-Hawk-Barnett-Poppinga, they lack a big time impact inside and definitely miss rush off of the edge; not missing one piece of a successful 3-4 LB corp but both. The personnel on this squad is far from capable of transitioning to a 3-4, and the financial investments in alot of our DL and LBs makes it even more difficult to consider the move.

AtariBigby
01-04-2009, 01:24 PM
In other words, our personnel on the DL and LB is currently crappy in a 4-3 and a 3-4 scheme. That sounds like bad drafting and bad financial decisions.
Justin Harrell has robbed the Packer bank. He should be charged with Grand Theft for his 2 years of extortion.
Not quite as bad as Joe Johnson was though.

princefielder28
01-04-2009, 02:47 PM
In other words, our personnel on the DL and LB is currently crappy in a 4-3 and a 3-4 scheme. That sounds like bad drafting and bad financial decisions.
Justin Harrell has robbed the Packer bank. He should be charged with Grand Theft for his 2 years of extortion.
Not quite as bad as Joe Johnson was though.

The front seven has depth and pretty good talent when healthy but outside of Aaron Kampman it lacks a true impact player.

AtariBigby
01-04-2009, 03:21 PM
Cullen Jenkins-
Combination end/tackle was off to a torrid start with 2˝ sacks and 10 pressures until a torn pectoral muscle ended his season after only four games. Finished second on the team in pressures despite missing the final 12 games.

That is really disgusting. We lose one good DL like Jenkins, and we become the Minnesota Gophers DL? Maybe that's why I want to go to a 3-4 so that we only need to play 3 of em instead of throw 4 of em out there.
I wouldn't call that depth, or pretty talented.
I'd call those guys (other than Kampman and CJ) just "bodies".

GB12
01-04-2009, 09:09 PM
Suggs would be a DE if he was put into a system like ours.

johbur
01-04-2009, 09:28 PM
Suggs would be a DE if he was put into a system like ours.

And I think he'd do fine. He weighs 260 pounds, and I think he could go up to 270 in a 4-3 and not lose his PR skills. I know how much ya'all love this topic, but if TT actually plucked T-Sizzle from the Ravens, the Packers could seriously think about a 3-4 and they could bring in a new DC to do it. AK, Pickett (maybe trade down a bit for BJ Raji), Jenkins and then Chillar, Hawk, Barnett, and T-Sizzle, with B-Pop and the rest rounding it out. If you sign a guy like Suggs, you look at how best to make him most effective. Maybe he'd be even better as a 4-3 DE than he is now as a 3-4 OLB, but maybe you change your scheme to get all your playmakers on the field.

TitleTown088
01-04-2009, 09:41 PM
http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/2009/01/breaking-news-packers-fire-sanders/

YYYYYEEEEEEAAAAAAAHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!

YwEMxYggoKQ

Also, please shu tup and let the 3-4 talk go. Its not ******* happening.

umphrey
01-05-2009, 01:35 AM
The possible DC candidates available are absolutely amazing this year. I want Haslett, but Nolan or a few others would be great too. Getting rid of Bates was my #1 want for the Packers offseason.

I like the way this regime has little tolerance for failure. It seems like we get rid of coaches and players as soon as we can when they have shown they can't do the job.

I can't be sure we won't go to a 3-4 with this news. It's possible we move towards the direction of a 4-3 3-4 hybrid.

AtariBigby
01-05-2009, 08:51 AM
The possible DC candidates available are absolutely amazing this year. I want Haslett, but Nolan or a few others would be great too. Getting rid of Bates was my #1 want for the Packers offseason. YOU MEAN SANDERS

I like the way this regime has little tolerance for failure. It seems like we get rid of coaches and players as soon as we can when they have shown they can't do the job.

I can't be sure we won't go to a 3-4 with this news. It's possible we move towards the direction of a 4-3 3-4 hybrid.

You can't be sure, I can't be sure, the Green Bay Press Gazette guys can't be sure, the Milwaukee Journal guys Bob McGinn can't be sure, Greg Bedard can't be sure, even McCarthy is not yet sure, but yet we have a couple kids in here WHO ARE 100% SURE that there's no chance this team evolves away from a 4-3. Isn't that amazing. We should be paying a few of these posters in here who know it all.

princefielder28
01-05-2009, 12:00 PM
All signs pointing to Mike Nolan, who wants to bring in his own guys. If Winston Moss was going to be the new DC, he wouldn't have had all the other coaches fired because how and where is Moss gonna bring in a total new staff from.

Who else would Nolan bring in? Anyone leftover from his defensive staff on Baltimore?

If Nolan was brought in I could see Mike Pettine coming over from Baltimore to work with Mike. Dennis Thurman is another coach who could join Nolan.

I could see this....

DL coach : Phil Zacharias
LB coach : Mike Pettine/Winston Moss
DB coach : Dennis Thurman

AtariBigby
01-05-2009, 12:06 PM
How does anything there equate all signs point to Nolan? He's a possibility, but far from the only canidate.
He's the front-runner as we speak, according to most.
Nobody said there are no other candidates, however.

drowe
01-05-2009, 01:35 PM
He's the front-runner as we speak, according to most.


such as? without a source, this statement is pretty baseless.

also, what about rod marinelli? bad as a head coach..but, by all accounts a great defensive mind.

RockJock07
01-05-2009, 04:10 PM
YwEMxYggoKQ

Also, please shu tup and let the 3-4 talk go. Its not ******* happening.

I would have agreed with you until today when all the defense coaches were fired. I still think a 3-4 is a long way away however after today it's more likely.

AtariBigby
01-06-2009, 09:55 AM
Who has an intelligent answer for this?
Any of you guys ever play basketball?
I did.

In basketball, most defenses call plays. Sometimes they man-up, sometimes they play a zone.
A 2-3, a 2-1-2, a box & 1, etc.
The MIX IT UP.

Remember when Al Harris got BBQ'd by Plaxico when we lost the NFC Title game? The rest of our defense was still good, but because Eli and the Gents KNEW our exact man-to-man pass defense over & over, once Plax got inside leverage, or outside leverage, it was like stealing from the blind.

Why can't a defense learn man-to-man AND a couple of effective zones, and mix it up and always keep the QB and WR's confused?
I can't imagine it's because football players are dumber than basketball players.

Also, football players have 6 days of practice/prep time for every 1 game. basketball is about 2 or 3 to 1.

AtariBigby
01-06-2009, 10:11 AM
such as? without a source, this statement is pretty baseless.

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/37126084.html
Former San Francisco 49ers coach Mike Nolan looks like the leading candidate for the job


http://media.jsonline.com/images/nolan010509.jpg

Nolan, meanwhile, is an accomplished coordinator who left Baltimore to become San Francisco's head coach in 2005. He hired McCarthy to be his offensive coordinator and then allowed him to interview with Packers general manager Ted Thompson the next season.

Another factor with Nolan is whether the Packers would be willing to go to a 3-4 defense....... Said Cullen Jenkins: I have never played in one before....but if it's something that they decide to go with, it's your job. It would be my job to adjust to it and play my responsibilities and I'd do a good job in it."

An assistant who is getting a lot of attention is Philadelphia secondary coach Sean McDermott, the current longest-tenured assistant under defensive coordinator Jim Johnson. McDermott, 34, would presumably run Johnson's blitz-happy scheme. The success of New York Giants defensive coordinator Steve Spagnuolo, another Johnson disciple, has helped his cause.

Unless McDermott's contract expires after this season, the Eagles would have to give permission to the Packers to interview him. The Packers can't ask to speak to him until after the Eagles are done playing.

Another 3-4 possibility would be Pittsburgh linebackers coach Keith Butler, who has been identified by some as a potential defensive coordinator. The Steelers would have to finish playing before Butler would be available for an interview. - BUTLER is the guy I'd be happiest with. The Steelers always produce great from the LB position. James Harrison was not drafted and was CUT 4 different times. This SYSTEM turned him into a star. Our current system REQUIRES STARS on the DL. I'd much rather depend on a system that can produce stars then depend on TT to keep drafting and signing FA stars. How is that working out for his #1 picks on defense, Hawk and Harrell?
Hawk, Barnett, Poppinga, Chillar, even Bishop would have had big success if they were on the Steelers. We've wasted them. Hawk has similar size, speed and strength and more ability than James Harrison ever dreamt of. That's why he went to Kent St and was undrafted while AJ was the All American and #5 overall pick.
Bring Butler in to instill and install that Blittsburgh aggression. If you have to mix in a 4-3 and a 3-4 to do it, that's fine. Just start bringing the heat.

Smokey
01-06-2009, 11:02 AM
3-4 vs 4-3

This is puzzling and if Nolan is brought in and institutes the 3-4 there will certainly be holes to fill. If a disciple of the Jim Johnson 4-3 blitzing scheme comes in we can certainly make do with the personnel we have with a few upgrades.

Line:

NT: Ryan Pickett perhaps doesn't have the size to play a 3-4 nose tackle. That role has to be filled by a monster of a man. Casey Hampton in Pittsburgh though is of similar size and has filled that role for years. Good news is that BJ Raji should be available when we pick in the draft. Colin Cole could fit a 3-4 NT as well.

DE: These guys are hybrids of a sort. Light DTs or heavy DEs. Kampman might be a bit on the light side and his sack totals would certainly suffer in this system, in theory rolling over to the OLB. Could Kampman play OLB? The way that guy works I wouldn't put it past him. He would be able to bulk up to 285-290 and fill this role but a 3-4 DE is a roleplayer not a glamour position. Cullen Jenkins has the size to be perfect for this role. Harrell, if he could get healthy and improve, might fit this role.

LB: The OLBs are your real pass rushers in this system. Light DEs or heavy LBs with speed in the 245-265 range. Poppinga might fit this role well as his pass rushing has been touted but would Hawk? Could Barnett and Hawk both fill the MLB spots? Is Barnett big enough? Could Hunter or Thompson adjust to filling one of the OLB spots? Where would Chillar fit? A good many questions concerning the LBs.

Secondary: My understanding is that a good deal of zone is generally played in the 3-4 while our current personnel is built for press coverage. Do we have the players for a effective Cover 2? The strong safety is a bit of a roamer as well most especially seen in Troy Polamalu. Bigby seems to love sticking his nose in and might flourish in this role.


I'd be interested in theory to see the Packers implement a 3-4 but there'd certainly be growing pains. The Ravens defenses under Nolan were outstanding and remain so but how much is personnel and how much is coaching? I have read that the Ravens D loved Nolan and loved playing for him. The Packers D last year lacked a killer instinct and a fiery D coordinator might be just what the doctor ordered.

AtariBigby
01-06-2009, 11:27 AM
The Ravens defenses under Nolan were outstanding and remain so but how much is personnel and how much is coaching? I have read that the Ravens D loved Nolan and loved playing for him. The Packers D last year lacked a killer instinct and a fiery D coordinator might be just what the doctor ordered.

Well the Ravens have had 2 Hall of Famers the whole time in safety Ed Reed and LB Ray Lewis. That cannot be overestimated.

The Steelers have had Polamalu, but not for as long as the Ravens guys have been there.

Both teams have thrown in different guys as the pass-rushing OLB and turned them into stars. Same with the ILB position.

The Steelers 2 DEs are just lunch-pail guys. No need for marquee guys there per the Steelers success. Casey Hampton is good, but I think Pickett is very similar, even a bit larger. Both, ironically, were 1st round picks the same draft, I believe.

I don't see why Hawk can't succeed as a 3-4 OLB with his speed and size, compared to James Harrison. Hawk wowed everybody with his skills at the combine/his pro day. He's a legit talent and his well built. He's not gotten home a lot in our previous system, but has on occasion. Size & speed-wise, he compares favorably to Harrison.
It comes down to execution, which = system and desire, IMO.

I don't know about Barnett, plus the ACL is a ?

Smokey
01-06-2009, 11:58 AM
The more I think about it the more I'm intrigued by the possibility. I think you might be spot on with Hawk. Perhaps he can fit the OLB spot more responsible for coverage and Chillar's also shown that ability.

PACKmanN
01-06-2009, 12:33 PM
Well the Ravens have had 2 Hall of Famers the whole time in safety Ed Reed and LB Ray Lewis. That cannot be overestimated.

The Steelers have had Polamalu, but not for as long as the Ravens guys have been there.

Both teams have thrown in different guys as the pass-rushing OLB and turned them into stars. Same with the ILB position.

The Steelers 2 DEs are just lunch-pail guys. No need for marquee guys there per the Steelers success. Casey Hampton is good, but I think Pickett is very similar, even a bit larger. Both, ironically, were 1st round picks the same draft, I believe.

I don't see why Hawk can't succeed as a 3-4 OLB with his speed and size, compared to James Harrison. Hawk wowed everybody with his skills at the combine/his pro day. He's a legit talent and his well built. He's not gotten home a lot in our previous system, but has on occasion. Size & speed-wise, he compares favorably to Harrison.
It comes down to execution, which = system and desire, IMO.

I don't know about Barnett, plus the ACL is a ?

there is a huge different between Harrison and Hawk. Harrison can rush the passer and get off blockers why Hawk hasn't shown that yet...

AtariBigby
01-06-2009, 02:27 PM
there is a huge different between Harrison and Hawk. Harrison can rush the passer and get off blockers why Hawk hasn't shown that yet...
And I don't buy that.
I don't think 100% of the fans in America and 100% of the scouts in America were that wrong.
If they were that wrong, then Hawk should have not been drafted at all, or else Harrison should have been a #5 overall pick.
Hawk didn't suddenly lose his ability. Harrison didn't magically put on 40 pounds or have the light bulb come on in his head. He got into that system at that position, and it works for him. He blossomed into a star, like Joey Porter was there.

Similar things have happened with the Ravens LBers other than Lewis. It made Edgerton Hartwell into a coveted FA.
Ravens fans know. They don't give a crap if they lose Bart Scott this off-season while most other team's fans thing Scott would be this magical upgrade. Have to realize it's the system, and the greatness of Lewis & Reed that make it easier for the others around them.

When our DL was good, it made our LBers look better. When our DL sucked like this year, it made our LBers look crappy.

In the Steelers system, I bet nobody here can even name the Steelers 2 starting DE's.

Yatta!
01-06-2009, 02:37 PM
I think Hawk would be a nice surprise in a 3-4. He has the athletic ability and he had something like 10 sacks during his senior year at Ohio State.

Still, I'd be disappointed if we switched to a 3-4. A couple of impact players on the DL and the defense will be fine. A 3-4 would not fit our personnel and would take years to get right - we should not be rebuilding at this point.

Also the argument about the Steelers DEs in irrelevant - Aaron Smith is one of the best in the game. He gets quite a lot of love on this site as well. Yes the Steelers and Ravens seemingly churn out quality linebackers but they have had quality players on the DL as well, not a bunch of nobodies.

narf029
01-06-2009, 02:56 PM
When Hawk came out one of his cons was that he had trouble shedding and getting around blockers. 3-4 OLB's are primarily defensive ends in college, because they require those pass rushing skills. Hawk doesn't have the right pass rushing skills. I don't see Hawk being a good fit in the 3-4 at OLB, maybe move him inside in a 3-4. James Harrison has been in a 3-4 for 5 years. He watched and learned from the Joey Porter, and he worked hard to improve. If all that mattered were size and speed A.J. Hawk's college teammate and first round pick Bobby Carpenter would be just as good as DeMarcus Ware. Last I checked Carpenter was doing a solid job.. on the kickoff team. 4-3 OLB's struggle more to play the outside on a 3-4 than anybody because it's a completely different position.

I don't want the 3-4 however, because it eliminates the playmakers we already have. Kampman is too small to be a 3-4 DE now (though he did play at the right weight effectively early in his career), probably too slow and not skilled enough in coverage to be OLB. His best bet would be putting weight on and stuffing him at DE. If he were to become a 3-4 DE that would pretty much eliminate his playmaking ability, because 3-4 ends really don't do much.

I feel like Barnett has the chance to be really good in a 4-3, but his game is similar to Jonathan Vilma's (built on speed). Small, quick linebackers are not the right fit for a 3-4. I feel like Woodson would be able to adjust to zone, but I don't even want to see Al Harris try to change his physical style this late in his career.

I wouldn't be against the 3-4, because fundamentally, I like it more. But the Packers don't have the personnel to run it, and to pretend Brady Poppinga could be our DeMarcus Ware is not fair to Poppinga. We'd have to dedicate our draft to picking up 3-4 players.

PACKmanN
01-06-2009, 03:05 PM
And I don't buy that.
I don't think 100% of the fans in America and 100% of the scouts in America were that wrong.
If they were that wrong, then Hawk should have not been drafted at all, or else Harrison should have been a #5 overall pick.
Hawk didn't suddenly lose his ability. Harrison didn't magically put on 40 pounds or have the light bulb come on in his head. He got into that system at that position, and it works for him. He blossomed into a star, like Joey Porter was there.

Similar things have happened with the Ravens LBers other than Lewis. It made Edgerton Hartwell into a coveted FA.
Ravens fans know. They don't give a crap if they lose Bart Scott this off-season while most other team's fans thing Scott would be this magical upgrade. Have to realize it's the system, and the greatness of Lewis & Reed that make it easier for the others around them.

When our DL was good, it made our LBers look better. When our DL sucked like this year, it made our LBers look crappy.

In the Steelers system, I bet nobody here can even name the Steelers 2 starting DE's.

there is a huge difference in College offensive linemen and NFL offensive linemen. He has not proven he can get off of NFL offensive linemen and I'm not going to play the "what if" game.

Smokey
01-06-2009, 03:33 PM
We'd have to dedicate our draft to picking up 3-4 players.

I think this is a given however you look at it. We'd be loading up on defense anyway (with the exception of OT & possibly a TE) so the question is which type of defensive player.

GB12
01-06-2009, 03:38 PM
DE: These guys are hybrids of a sort. Light DTs or heavy DEs. Kampman might be a bit on the light side and his sack totals would certainly suffer in this system, in theory rolling over to the OLB. Could Kampman play OLB? The way that guy works I wouldn't put it past him. He would be able to bulk up to 285-290 No, Kampman could not play OLB in a 3-4. That's a huge problem I have. We'd either have to trade him away or waste his talent by putting him at a 3-4 DE. I also really doubt he could add 20-25 pounds like you said. I think he could probably still handle the role being undersized for it, but like I said it'd be a complete waste and he'd go from one of the best 4-3 DEs in the NFL to a below average-average 3-4 DE.

LB: The OLBs are your real pass rushers in this system. Light DEs or heavy LBs with speed in the 245-265 range. Poppinga might fit this role well as his pass rushing has been touted but would Hawk? Could Barnett and Hawk both fill the MLB spots? Is Barnett big enough? Could Hunter or Thompson adjust to filling one of the OLB spots? Where would Chillar fit? A good many questions concerning the LBs.
Poppinga gets a lot of talk about being a 3-4 OLB, but I think he'd be pretty terrible at it. If we were to try and make a 3-4 using only the players on our current roster he'd be the first one placed there, but I don't think he'd be any good. Being a DE in college he has prior experience as a pass rusher and even got a chance to do it this year at DE in passing downs, but he's not that good at it. He could be a stop gap, but if Poppinga is supposed to be our DeMarcus Ware or Shawne Merriman it's going to fail miserably.

I've said before that I think Chillar could actually be a decent 3-4 ILB. Like pretty much everywhere else on the front seven we'd have to replace him to get the system going in full swing, but I think he'd be alright there for a year if needed. Barnett is a pretty poor fit, and I think Hawk would be ok inside only. I don't think Hawk would benefit from a change though. It'd probably be the same as we get from him now, if anything a little worse.

Jason Hunter I would not bother with trying to convert, Jeremy Thompson could be a possibility. There was talk that Thompson could be drafted as a 3-4 OLB. It'd take quite a while for him to develop into that role if ever I'd imagine though.

GB12
01-06-2009, 04:14 PM
When our DL was good, it made our LBers look better. When our DL sucked like this year, it made our LBers look crappy.
Which is why if we add some players to help Kampman out on the line we can have a pretty damn good 4-3 defense. We have the base for a good 4-3 we're just missing a few pieces. In 2007 we had the 7th best defense in points and the 11th best in yards. Just because we sucked this season does not mean that we should junk all that and attempt to build a 3-4.

We have:

A top 5 DE in Kampman

A very good DE who would have had a monster season if not for injury

On of the better MLBs in Nick Barnett. Yes he wasn't playing well this season and then got hurt, but he could/should have been a probowler 4 of his first 5 seasons in the league and was an all pro last year.

A top 5 secondary. Up until the New Orleans game we ranked first in nearly every major pass defense category and even after we got lit up a couple times finished highly in all categories. And this was with out a pass rush and no Atari Bigby most of the year. Al Harris, Charles Woodson, and Tramon Williams are a lot better than most teams' starters and nickel, and after a couple solid but unspectacular seasons Nick Collins really turned into a good player.

That is a great start for a 4-3. We also have AJ Hawk, who while he hasn't lived up to expectations yet is a solid starter. We have good rotational depth at DT. Could use another starter, but once we get that the depth is quite good. I also like Brandon Chillar as a starting SLB. Get a better line in front of him and have him play next to Barnett and Hawk and I think he's alright.

We need:

A pass rushing defensive end. We get Cullen Jenkins back to be the force in the middle on passing downs, so a penetrating DT isn't a need, but we desperately need a speed rushing end.

Another DT would be nice. Again Jenkins ability to play both end and tackle might not make it such a big need. Especially if we get a more rounded DE that can play the run if asked at times too instead of just a rusher.


I think people have gotten way too down on our defense. It's not like we're the Lions and have nothing so might as well do something new. We have the key parts to a 4-3 and aren't too bad off at the rest. We could turn around into a top ten defense again with few changes in players and scheme.

GB12
01-06-2009, 04:19 PM
That's true. Our brilliant minds felt that because our #3 CB Tramon Williams was one of their best 4 DB's, that it made sense to take Charles away from the position he played best at, and move him so safety, to get Tramon onto the field at CB.
As much as I hate that we took Woodson out of corner I'd rather start him at safety and Williams at corner than start Rouse if we play a team with a half decent passing offense.

bigboiajhawk
01-06-2009, 05:03 PM
Which is why if we add some players to help Kampman out on the line we can have a pretty damn good 4-3 defense. We have the base for a good 4-3 we're just missing a few pieces. In 2007 we had the 7th best defense in points and the 11th best in yards. Just because we sucked this season does not mean that we should junk all that and attempt to build a 3-4.

We have:

A top 5 DE in Kampman

A very good DE who would have had a monster season if not for injury

On of the better MLBs in Nick Barnett. Yes he wasn't playing well this season and then got hurt, but he could/should have been a probowler 4 of his first 5 seasons in the league and was an all pro last year.

A top 5 secondary. Up until the New Orleans game we ranked first in nearly every major pass defense category and even after we got lit up a couple times finished highly in all categories. And this was with out a pass rush and no Atari Bigby most of the year. Al Harris, Charles Woodson, and Tramon Williams are a lot better than most teams' starters and nickel, and after a couple solid but unspectacular seasons Nick Collins really turned into a good player.

That is a great start for a 4-3. We also have AJ Hawk, who while he hasn't lived up to expectations yet is a solid starter. We have good rotational depth at DT. Could use another starter, but once we get that the depth is quite good. I also like Brandon Chillar as a starting SLB. Get a better line in front of him and have him play next to Barnett and Hawk and I think he's alright.

We need:

A pass rushing defensive end. We get Cullen Jenkins back to be the force in the middle on passing downs, so a penetrating DT isn't a need, but we desperately need a speed rushing end.

Another DT would be nice. Again Jenkins ability to play both end and tackle might not make it such a big need. Especially if we get a more rounded DE that can play the run if asked at times too instead of just a rusher.


I think people have gotten way too down on our defense. It's not like we're the Lions and have nothing so might as well do something new. We have the key parts to a 4-3 and aren't too bad off at the rest. We could turn around into a top ten defense again with few changes in players and scheme.



Bravo...Well put.

jackalope
01-06-2009, 05:15 PM
Yeah, It's kind of ridiculous. Three starters go down for the season and now people think we need to switch schemes to have success. Had Jenkins not gone down we would have been a lot better. If we get him back and add a DE that lets him shift over on passing downs we'll be fine. We were a good defense a year ago (11th in yards, 6th in points) without Collins or Tramon Williams playing up to where they have this year. To go through a major rebuilding of the defense when we're still a very good team would be a terrible idea.

AtariBigby
01-06-2009, 08:58 PM
such as? without a source, this statement is pretty baseless.

From now on, now that you see that my source is usually a day or two ahead of what you hear from your source, then don't act like I'm arrigo-ing you or some BS like that. You may not like or agree with the message I bring, you and the hockey guy may have talked each other into the belief that you know what's best or what's coming, but this team always does things none of us expect.
This is on the front page NOW of the PackersNews.com from the Press Gazette.

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/section?category=PKR01

Sources: Nolan likely to run defense

Mike Nolan has emerged as the clear front-runner to become the Green Bay Packers’ next defensive coordinator.............

AtariBigby
01-06-2009, 09:09 PM
How does anything there equate all signs point to Nolan? He's a possibility, but far from.......
So either I know how to read between the lines from my years of experience, or else I have a source that knows some things before the fellas at the Sentinel or Gazette publish anything. Doesn't matter.

It just doesn't look good when you fire darts at the messenger.

It doesn't look good when you act like hockey guy's 4 pages of discussions against the 3-4 mean that McCarthy or Thompson have followed along with you and were swayed by you. Those guys don't give a rat's *** what any forum guys say. McCarthy doesn't know what defense will be run next season, but he knows the guy he's after and he knew the guy he was after before he let Colonel Sanders go.

Oh, and that guy won't know for sure what defense he will have until he can assess the personnel here, and assess what targets he can have first in free agency and then with the draft. They need the #9 pick to be a guy that contributes well immediately if they are to make a switch to 3-4, plus they need 2 new bodies, one being the healthy return of Cullen Jenkins and the other an impact FA acquisition. They will be able to get at least one FA addition this year and I would bet on 2 or 3 not 1.

We all want what's best for the Packers, no question about it. We all want to win the Super Bowl next season, and the one after it.

Some think we should clone the best defense in the NFL, the Steelers, even if it means a wasted year in transition. But think about this, no matter how many growing pains that a 3-4 would have in year one, they can't be any worse than our D was this year, and we still were in every game except 1 really. Plus we had a lot of bad breaks this year. I don't think we'd waste any season, but even so, it would be worth it to replicate Blittzburgh.

None of us know exactly what the team is actually going to do because if we did, we'd have a nice mansion in Vegas filled with topless waitresses and showgirl applicants on tryout, and we would never have to work in our life.

The Favre saga caused much of PackerNation to be split. We need to Unite. But we don't have to all think the same on everything. I personally think Ryan Grant ran hard this year. I give him a solid 'B' for his season this year. I hear a lot of people say he sucked this year, and we need to move on. What? What did we have, an All-Pro OL opening up holes left & right? This guy had 1200 yards despite being hampered for the first 1/3 of the season.

AtariBigby
01-06-2009, 09:15 PM
No, Kampman could not play OLB in a 3-4. That's a huge problem I have. We'd either have to trade him away or waste his talent by putting him at a 3-4 DE. I also really doubt he could add 20-25 pounds like you said. I think he could probably still handle the role being undersized for it, but like I said it'd be a complete waste and he'd go from one of the best 4-3 DEs in the NFL to a below average-average 3-4 DE.
I hear ya brother, but that's false in a big way.
On run downs, you rest Kampman.
On passing downs, you put him in there at DE in the 3-4. He's still gonna be matched up against the RT's usually, like he has been.
The difference will be that the rest of the OL doesn't know who and where other guys are going to be coming hunting the QB. If they pay too much attention to AK74, that's good for us in that system.

If they leave AK one-on-one all the time, he'll revert back to his sack totals of 06 and 07. The dude has been worn out to death the past 4 years.
Making him a pass rush specialist (still about 60% of the plays), would be a wise thing for him at this age and mileage in his career.

If he's as great as some of our fans think he still is, then we can cash him in for a late 1st round pick and draft a great OLB like a James Harrison. But I think AK would relish the role of pass rush specialist in a 3-4 or 4-3 actually. But in a 4-3, we can't afford him in that role. In a 3-4, we can because on run downs, the 2 DE's are just block occupyers and cloggers. Name the Steelers and Ravens and Cowboys DE's. We all know their OLBers though.

GB12
01-06-2009, 09:31 PM
I hear ya brother, but that's false in a big way.
On run downs, you rest Kampman.
On passing downs, you put him in there at DE in the 3-4. He's still gonna be matched up against the RT's usually, like he has been.
The difference will be that the rest of the OL doesn't know who and where other guys are going to be coming hunting the QB. If they pay too much attention to AK74, that's good for us in that system.

If they leave AK one-on-one all the time, he'll revert back to his sack totals of 06 and 07. The dude has been worn out to death the past 4 years.
Making him a pass rush specialist (still about 60% of the plays), would be a wise thing for him at this age and mileage in his career. Like I said he would be wasted in a 3-4. Our best player on the defense is a horrible fit for the system, that's usually a sign not to switch. He's too good of a player to be used like that. He played 95% of the snaps this season to cut it down to 60 like you're suggesting would be stupid. I'm sure he wouldn't be too happy about it either.
If he's as great as some of our fans think he still is, then we can cash him in for a late 1st round pick and draft a great OLB like a James Harrison. But I think AK would relish the role of pass rush specialist in a 3-4 or 4-3 actually.I think that if we do switch to a 3-4 the only logical thing to do would be to trade Kampman. Trading away a DE that good is really ******* stupid, but it'd be better to get the picks than to waste him in a 3-4.

Name the Steelers and Ravens and Cowboys DE's. We all know their OLBers though. Aaron Smith for the Steelers, Haloti Ngata and Trevor Price for the Ravens, Chris Canty and Marcus Spears for the Cowboys. Richard Seymour for the Patriots, Igor Olashansky and Luis Castillo for the Chargers, Vonnie Holliday and Kendall Langford for the Dolphins. That's all without looking. I can't remember the DE opposite Smith for the Steelers, but I think I've shown enough to disprove your point.

PACKmanN
01-06-2009, 09:34 PM
I hear ya brother, but that's false in a big way.
On run downs, you rest Kampman.
On passing downs, you put him in there at DE in the 3-4. He's still gonna be matched up against the RT's usually, like he has been.
The difference will be that the rest of the OL doesn't know who and where other guys are going to be coming hunting the QB. If they pay too much attention to AK74, that's good for us in that system.

If they leave AK one-on-one all the time, he'll revert back to his sack totals of 06 and 07. The dude has been worn out to death the past 4 years.
Making him a pass rush specialist (still about 60% of the plays), would be a wise thing for him at this age and mileage in his career.

If he's as great as some of our fans think he still is, then we can cash him in for a late 1st round pick and draft a great OLB like a James Harrison. But I think AK would relish the role of pass rush specialist in a 3-4 or 4-3 actually. But in a 4-3, we can't afford him in that role. In a 3-4, we can because on run downs, the 2 DE's are just block occupyers and cloggers. Name the Steelers and Ravens and Cowboys DE's. We all know their OLBers though.
you are really underrating the d-lines of these 34 teams.

neko4
01-06-2009, 09:36 PM
Yeah, It's kind of ridiculous. Three starters go down for the season and now people think we need to switch schemes to have success. Had Jenkins not gone down we would have been a lot better. If we get him back and add a DE that lets him shift over on passing downs we'll be fine. We were a good defense a year ago (11th in yards, 6th in points) without Collins or Tramon Williams playing up to where they have this year. To go through a major rebuilding of the defense when we're still a very good team would be a terrible idea.

I think the discussion of switching schemes sprung up, because of talk that Nolan could be our DC

Anyway, I really like the versatility that Jenkins gives our Dline. I dont think we need to draft a DT/DE in the first, because all we really need is a guy who can work in a rotation.

neko4
01-06-2009, 09:38 PM
Aaron Smith for the Steelers, Haloti Ngata and Trevor Price for the Ravens, Chris Canty and Marcus Spears for the Cowboys. Richard Seymour for the Patriots, Igor Olashansky and Luis Castillo for the Chargers, Vonnie Holliday and Kendall Langford for the Dolphins. That's all without looking. I can't remember the DE opposite Smith for the Steelers, but I think I've shown enough to disprove your point.

Keisel I think. And I doesnt Phillip Merling get signifigant PT at DE too? Or was he playing DT?

tjsunstein
01-06-2009, 09:56 PM
Asking people to name certain players is contingent on who you ask. Someone may not know that Kenyon Coleman plays opposite Shaun Ellis on the Jets but they may know they run the 3-4. I don't get what asking people to name certain players proves. The OLB'ers get the stats and are thus more popular than the D-linemen in the 3-4 but just because they are more known than the linemen doesnt mean the D-line is interchangeable like your making it seem. Or am I getting this confused in a way? The DL is just as important as any other unit on any defense as you have seen with the 2008 Packers. Them not getting pressure resulting in ugly things for our secondary in NO on MNF. The DL not getting a push and clogging holes is the reason our run defense is ranked so low. Just because we run the 4-3 doesnt mean the same wouldnt happen in the 3-4. If a unit doesnt do their job, essentially the whole defense is exposed and that's what happened with us. Switching to the 3-4 would only set us back. The Jets have run it for 4 years now and don't have the right pieces for it yet after investing a first, second, and two large FA contracts in it. I know this post is all over the place but what I'm saying is that it would be much more suitable to stick to the 4-3 right now and add a necessary piece rather than devoting draft picks and FA contracts to it. I don't think we should switch our defense until we have hit rock bottem, and even then it would be costly.

Mr. Goosemahn
01-06-2009, 11:56 PM
For AtariBigby:

Yeah I can't figure out why nobody goes after your guys. Your defense is phenomenal.
With our offense, plus that defensive system and our peresonnel, we'd roll to 10-6 to 12-4 for sure in the NFC and the Viqueens and Burrrrrrs would be in big trouble with that scheme.

Correct me where I am wrong about the scheme:
It seems to me you just need bigger DEs, who don't have to be stars. You need a good NT who's big and holds his ground. Do any of those positions have to be exceptional pass rushing DL guys? Do you still have a pass rushing specialist at DE and NT?

Yeah, you're pretty much right on this. Our NT has to be stout and strong at the point of attack. He takes up two blockers, maybe even three, but rarely has a man-to-man block; if he does have this, then he should easily push the other guy around (as was the case in the game against the Patriots right before half-time). He also has to be a great run-stopper. Our DE also have to be good run-stoppers and are usually around the 290-300 lbs. range. For us, Brett Keisel is something like 289 and Aaron Smith is 298. They too have to be very strong and consume multiple blockers. The most essential part of the D-Line is that they stay "patient" and stay on their gaps. This, in turn, opens up holes for the LB's to either pursue the RB or get to the QB. As for having a pass-rushing specialist at DE or NT, we definitely don't. In our 3-4 scheme, the pass-rushers are the OLB's. Sure, the D-Line guys will get a sack every now and then, but that's not their specialty. They get sacks if they shed their blockers really quickly. But no, they don't have the pass-rushing arsenal of weapons that guys like Mario Williams, Julius Peppers, and Jared Allen use.

And at LB, I know you guys always have a blitz-maniac like Harrison and Porter before him. The Ravens have Suggs and used to have Adalius Thomas, who did it all.
What about the other OLB and the 2 ILBers? What do they need to bring to the table? One of each, or bigger, faster, better vs the run, all blitzers, what?

In our scheme, the other OLB would be Woodley, and he's also a great pass-rusher. At the beginning of the season both Harrison and Woodley were constantly getting sacks, but nearing the end of the season Woodley seemed to be more focused in containing the QB in the pocket than actually sacking him (or so it seemed). In any case, the OLB's have to be pass-rushing specialists. As mentioned before, we have Harrison and Woodley, and have had Joey Porter, Jason Gildon, and Kevin Greene, to name a few. OLB's also have to be good against the run and in coverage. Harrison and Woodley are both good in all areas of their game. Also, our OLB tend to be tweener DE's. Woodley is 266 lbs. and played DE at Michigan. Clark Haggans and Joey Porter also played DE in university, and I'm not sure about Harrison. The two ILB have to be, for starters, great tacklers. They clean up the inside run in case the D-Line missed it, and also have to be agile enough to drop into coverage quickly. Sometimes they get inside blitzes, and they also have to have speed to get to the QB quickly. Currently we have Farrior and Foote as starters, with Timmons being the back-up. Farrior is a sure-fire tackler; he rarely misses guys. He's great in coverage and is the veteran LB leader. Foote is not as talented as Farrior and might miss a couple more tackles, but he's still a good starter. What's more, they complement each other really well, which enables them to function much more effectively as a unit than as individual talents. As for Timmons, he's a physical freak at LB. He's real fast for an ILB, and demonstrates great explosiveness, speed, and agility. He's knows how to blow up RB's and QB's, and is also a great pass-rusher; if he makes the transition to OLB (and I'm pretty sure this will happen sooner or later) he's gonna be another great Steeler OLB. In games, he normally covers the #3 receiver (such as Chris Henry in both games vs. the Bengals), TE's, or skittery and agile backs (like Westbrook). As long as each player focuses on their role, work together with the D-Line, they can wreak havoc in almost any play.

I can't figure out if AJ Hawk would finally be unchained and allowed to utilize his speed and intensity, or not. He's good good size too, and was faster than crap. But he's had little impact for his in our crappy system. What about our boy Nick Barnett? He's been our MLB. I guess he would still play inside in a 3-4?

I haven't really seen that much of either Hawk or Barnett, to be honest, but if Hawk has great explosiveness and is a good tackler, then he should be OK as an OLB. But first, you'd need to modify your D-Line to allow him to be unleashed. As for Barnett, he might be able to switch to a 3-4 ILB, but again, I don't really know these players good enough. If you do change, by all means try moving them around. But yeah, my insight on Packers' LB's is sadly very limited. :(

We have the #9 pick. For your system, would we be best off going after a pizzed off ILB like a Ray Lewis in Rey Maualuga?
Or would we be best off going after a guy like Aaron Curry? Or a high pick on a DE?

If you want an ILB for our system, then Rey Maualuga would be the ideal pick. He's the "thumper" ILB, meaning he's good against the run and hits like a bag of bricks. He'd have to improve his coverage a bit, bit I think he'll manage. But yeah, Maualuga is the ideal 3-4 ILB. As for a DE with the 9th pick, there's not really any 3-4 DE with such value. Heck, there aren't even that many 3-4 DE's in the draft to begin with. You can, however, take someone like Brian Orakpo and switch him to OLB. He's gonna post a monster combine and is incredibly strong; plus, he's a great pass-rusher, and that's what OLB's in our system have to be. He, too, would be an ideal LB in our system. If you want a 3-4 D-Lineman then I guess you could take B.J. Raji as he seems to be the consensus #1 3-4 NT for the draft. It would, however, be a major reach. As for Aaron Curry, I'm not sure how he'd fare in a 3-4 scheme. I know he's an incredible athlete and I'm quite sure he would work in our scheme, but maybe as an ILB. In any case, I think that either Maualuga or Orakpo would be much better fits for a 3-4 defense.

Can the DBs still play man-to-man most of the time like ours do?
If Atari Bigby can get healthy, we like our 2 safeties with him and Nick Collins. If not, maybe we get our Polamalu or Ed Reed with Taylor Mays? But Collins is already a serious ball hawk.

In our scheme, we tend to play more Zone coverage. I know for a fact that Ike Taylor, our #1 CB, is phenomenal in Man-to-Man, but that's not the case always. The CB's should be physical and not afraid to lay the big hit, but it's zone for the most part. I'm pretty sure that you could find a way to incorporate more Man-to-Man in our scheme, but for now the Zone is working beautifully, so why fix something that's not broken. As for your safeties, they need their roles kinda' defined for a scheme like the Steelers'. In our defense, the FS has to be more patient and "allow the play to develop." I put this in quotation marks to simply state that they have to follow the development of the play, but shouldn't allow it to develop. It might be confusing, but lemme explain with an example. By having Ryan Clark as the FS, we can unleash Polamalu and have him roam the entire field making his wild plays. Sure, if we had someone like Ed Reed, Polamalu could literally do whatever he'd like on some plays, but that's not the case. Clark has to play more deep than the CB's, and this allows Polamalu to go up to the line of scrimmage and either show blitz, actually blitz, or take some kind of zone coverage. It messes with the opposing QB's head and confuses him on what Polamalu will actually do. This means that the strong safety has to be extremely athletic. Polamalu is blazing fast and can deliver devastating hits whenever he wants to. Plus, he's developed a real knack for snatching passes and being around the ball, evidenced by his league-leading 7 interceptions and him being at least two meters away from every single tackle. Regarding Bigby and Collins, it's the same situation as with Barnett and Hawk; I haven't seen that much of them. I think that Mays would be a great safety in our 3-4 scheme,but that's cause Polamalu would be granted complete freedom. For the Packers, Mays would undoubtedly become a sensational FS, but he'd have a different role than Polamalu. He'd still, however, be a great playmaker. This would also allow either Collins or Bigby, whoever would be the SS, more space to roam.

If anyone has all this down and doesn't want to post it here, feel free to quote & copy it over to our forum, or PM me.

Thanks, and go Steelers. I see an easy win over the uncharged Bolts. As long as big Ben doesn't get slippery fingers all day long.....sometimes I swear it seems that guy enjoys wrestling with DL and LBers.

So yeah, that's pretty much it. Anyone feel free to add or explain things.

Jpack18
01-07-2009, 12:32 AM
From now on, now that you see that my source is usually a day or two ahead of what you hear from your source, then don't act like I'm arrigo-ing you or some BS like that. You may not like or agree with the message I bring, you and the hockey guy may have talked each other into the belief that you know what's best or what's coming, but this team always does things none of us expect.
This is on the front page NOW of the PackersNews.com from the Press Gazette.

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/section?category=PKR01

Sources: Nolan likely to run defense

Mike Nolan has emerged as the clear front-runner to become the Green Bay Packers’ next defensive coordinator.............

I don't know if anyone actually read this article and I believe someone already mentioned this but Nolan is the type of coordinator that does the best with what he has,and he clearly doesn't have the right stuff for a 3-4 in GB. so don't get all high and mighty on the 3-4 scheme just yet, even in SF they started in the 4-3 and slowly transitioned into a 3-4. If that happens in GB then so be it but the 3-4 scheme will not be the immediate solution to our defensive problems

narf029
01-07-2009, 01:31 AM
Exactly, just because we hire a 3-4 guy doesn't mean we HAVE to run a 3-4. It would be downright stupid to waste away Kampman's prime years with a 3-4, or to get rid of him just because of a change in D-Coordinators. I know he's not the D-Coordinator, but Mike Tomlin's backround was in the Tampa 2, and when he took over as Pittsburgh's coach I remember mock drafts were going crazy giving Pittsburgh 4-3 personnel... clearly Pittsburgh is not running a Tampa 2 defense. So just because we hire a coach doesn't mean we'll automatically change to the defense that he's run most recently. All of these pro coaches are great defensive minds, and Nolan will know that Kampman and Barnett are the foundation for a solid 4-3.

AtariBigby
01-07-2009, 09:32 AM
Aaron Smith for the Steelers, Haloti Ngata and Trevor Price for the Ravens, Chris Canty and Marcus Spears for the Cowboys. Richard Seymour for the Patriots, Igor Olashansky and Luis Castillo for the Chargers, Vonnie Holliday and Kendall Langford for the Dolphins. That's all without looking. I can't remember the DE opposite Smith for the Steelers, but I think I've shown enough to disprove your point.
No you DID prove my point. It also proves you know more than just the Packers, which I can appreciate.
But look at those names. Aaron Smith and Travis Kirshcke I think are the Steelers TWO starting DE's. They ain't Pro-Bowlers or anything like that.

Trevor Price of the Ravens is an NFL Journeyman. Most people think Ngata is their NT, but he's not. Their NT is nothing special. That's the point. You don't need to find gems across the 3-4 line to make it work well.
In our system, they admit it requires the DL to apply pressure on their own most of the time. That's unrealistic. Now if Jim Johnson was our guy, it would have been fine. But we didn't think ahead to go after Spagnola like the Giants did. I don't know if McDermott could do the same job. If he can, bring him in and keep the 4-3, that's fine. But why on God's green & gold earth would anyone not want to clone the Steelers defense? So what if there are growing pains. Remember our team was ranked the NFL's youngest again.

AtariBigby
01-07-2009, 09:45 AM
For AtariBigby:

So yeah, that's pretty much it. Anyone feel free to add or explain things.

Everybody, give Mr. Goosehahn some + cred for his taking the time for all that education for us, and for him bringing it over into our forum.

AtariBigby
01-07-2009, 09:59 AM
We have a coveted #9 spot in the draft and I expect we'll see if we can get some LB/DE type who can do what Merriman or DeMarcus Ware does, and James Harrison does. To think, the Vikings drafted Troy Williamson with both Merriman and Ware still on board, partly because they don't run a 3-4.

With $40 million to spend on free agency as well as the #9 overall pick, I think we can make the personnel transition a lot less painlessly than some have suggested.

drowe
01-07-2009, 10:14 AM
We have a coveted #9 spot in the draft and I expect we'll see if we can get some LB/DE type who can do what Merriman or DeMarcus Ware does, and James Harrison does. To think, the Vikings drafted Troy Williamson with both Merriman and Ware still on board, partly because they don't run a 3-4.

With $40 million to spend on free agency as well as the #9 overall pick, I think we can make the personnel transition a lot less painlessly than some have suggested.

yes. but it's still a transition. the defense is not at all far away from being good. we have the tools. we have the talent. getting cullen jenkins back will be the biggest "offseason accquisition" the packers make.

switching to the 3-4 would cause more problems than it would solve.

some old saying says some crap like "don't shoot a horse with a broken leg..just cut off the leg." we already cut off the leg when we fired bob sanders. starting over from scratch is NOT what this defense needs.

bigboiajhawk
01-07-2009, 10:36 AM
yes. but it's still a transition. the defense is not at all far away from being good. we have the tools. we have the talent. getting cullen jenkins back will be the biggest "offseason accquisition" the packers make.

switching to the 3-4 would cause more problems than it would solve.

some old saying says some crap like "don't shoot a horse with a broken leg..just cut off the leg." we already cut off the leg when we fired bob sanders. starting over from scratch is NOT what this defense needs.



I completely understand what you are saying here, and I agree, but I really dont think Mike Nolan (assuming he is the new DC) is going to completely get rid of the 4-3 in his first year.

That is because 1) he doesnt have the ideal players for the 3-4 system 2) we have the personnel for the 4-3 right now, and 3) "Nolan also has appeal because though he prefers to run a 3-4 defense, he's also worked in the 4-3 and mixed that in extensively as coach of the 49ers. In his first season with San Francisco, the 49ers ran mostly a 4-3 and gradually evolved into primarily a 3-4 defense over his three-plus seasons with the team. McCarthy also might prefer a slower transition to the 3-4, because the Packers' roster is built to play a 4-3, and switching to primarily a 3-4 in one offseason could be difficult and require major changes in personnel." -from Packersnews.com

I really dont think switching to a 3-4 in the next couple of years changes the draft strategy of this year. We can still draft a DE like Orakpo or Brown, because they are interchangeable as a 4-3 DE or a 3-4 OLB. We are still going to need an OT, and there is a really strong group in the draft. I still feel we need a safety and there are some good ones in this years draft as well. Also, TT needs to make this years first round pick a star, we cant afford a bust especially in the #9 spot.

I will be pumped if we get Nolan because he is someone with DC experience, and that is exactly what we need. If we eventually make a full shift to a 3-4, I could care less, I just want someone to coach our players, who has experience and can put together a defense that plays well for four quarters.

Smokey
01-07-2009, 12:03 PM
Appreciate Goose's post. He's clearly educated in the 3-4.

Everyone please bear in mind that this is all academic. When we hear Nolan mentioned as a possible DC the mind leaps to the possibilities of the 3-4.

You must admit having the sort of highly effective and exciting defenses we've seen in Pittsburgh, Baltimore, New England and San Diego and trying to apply that standard to the Packers is an interesting mental exercise.

drowe
01-07-2009, 12:32 PM
yeah, the more i read about nolan, the more i think he'd be a good choice. i have absolutely no problem with a 43/34 hybrid. could be fun to watch. i just don't think this is the time to be scrapping our defense and starting over.

narf029
01-07-2009, 12:55 PM
I'd be fine with a hybrid defense too, as long as it was 4-3 based with the occasional play where we have our new OLB/DE stand up and move around like Miami used Jason Taylor when he won DPOY.

AtariBigby
01-07-2009, 01:12 PM
I'd be fine with a hybrid defense too, as long as it was 4-3 based with the occasional play where we have our new OLB/DE stand up and move around like Miami used Jason Taylor when he won DPOY.

If it makes one of our guys DPOY, I'm in favor of it whatever the hell the system is called/used/hybrided, etc. Bring it.

GB12
01-07-2009, 03:29 PM
AtariBigby that is something that needs a link to be posted with it. Not a big deal, just remember for next time.

As for the hybrid, as long as it is strongly 4-3 based it could work. We'd have to take an Orakpo, Brown, or English to use as an OLB in those packages. If only used a couple times a game it's something that we could do. If we'd use it limitedly we could play Pickett at Nose, Kampman and Jenkins at ends, drafted player and Poppinga at OLB, and Hawk and Chillar/Barnett inside. As a base defense that'd be pretty crappy, but to mix it up for a couple plays that wouldn't be too bad. If Nolan wants to do something like that it could work, but I still believe we have to be primarily 4-3 based. I'm talking 90+% 4-3 in non nickel/dime situations.

Mr. Goosemahn
01-07-2009, 03:58 PM
Just so you guys know, I posted a list of draft prospects that would fit our 3-4 defensive scheme, as well as video footage of each one of them. There are players from most positions, and you can sort of see what defensive guys interest us. Take a look if you want to.

Here's the link to the post:
http://draftcountdown.com/forum/showthread.php?t=24206&page=53

Enjoy.

drowe
01-07-2009, 04:10 PM
so.......all the transition to 3-4 costs us is our best defensive lineman, 2 of our top 3 draft picks and free agent money that could go elsewhere?

yeah. i'm totally sold.

like i said. a 3-4 hybrid where we ease into a 3-4 over the next few years is ok. but, you really have us taking drastic measures to make the switch overnight. not a fan.

GB12
01-07-2009, 04:48 PM
No you DID prove my point. It also proves you know more than just the Packers, which I can appreciate.
But look at those names. Aaron Smith and Travis Kirshcke I think are the Steelers TWO starting DE's. They ain't Pro-Bowlers or anything like that. They aren't Pro Bowlers because they are 3-4 defensive ends. They are the players in that defense that don't get stats and therefore no votes. 4-3 gets defensive ends to the probowl, 3-4 gets OLBs. Aaron Smith is a very good player, Ngata is a beast, Richard Seymour is a rare exception that has been a probowler. In fact he's been to the pro bowl 5 times. The fact that he was one of the recognizable figures of the Patriots during their Super Bowls is the reason he got noticed because people ignore the position otherwise. Just because they don't get a lot of attention does not mean that there aren't good players at those positions. It also isn't a position where you plug in just any big body.

Trevor Price of the Ravens is an NFL Journeyman.
Trevor Pryce is not a journeyman. He was a Bronco his whole career until 2006 when he joined the Ravens where he has been the past 3. He is also a 4 time pro bowler, but that came when he was in a 4-3.

Most people think Ngata is their NT, but he's not. Their NT is nothing special. Kelly Gregg is underrated even when talking specifically about 3-4 NTs, but he is a good player. He's been hurt this year so Justin Bannan has been starting for him who has done a good job, but the Ravens would be even better than they are now if they still had Gregg.

That's the point. You don't need to find gems across the 3-4 line to make it work well. As I've pointed out you can't just stick anyone in those positions and have success. You need good players that fit those roles. They are harder to find than you realize too. If you want a good 3-4 you need talent on the DL.

In our system, they admit it requires the DL to apply pressure on their own most of the time. That's unrealistic. It's not unrealistic, we just didn't have the players for it. We traded Corey Williams, KGB wasn't the same as last year and we lost Cullen Jenkins. We could have used another pass rusher before all of that too. I really like these kinds of defenses, but like any other schemes you need the right players to be successful in it. You also need the right guy behind it which Bob Sanders was not.
But why on God's green & gold earth would anyone not want to clone the Steelers defense? So what if there are growing pains.
If we could have what the Steelers have right away then yeah I'd go for it, but it's not that easy. The Steelers have been running their system for years and have been drafting players specifically for that system during those years. We don't have a single player that was drafted to play in that kind of defense. It would be a lot more severe than just growing pains. It takes time to get the 3-4 going like the ones you are thinking of.

AtariBigby
01-07-2009, 05:06 PM
so.......all the transition to 3-4 costs us is our best defensive lineman, 2 of our top 3 draft picks and free agent money that could go elsewhere?

yeah. i'm totally sold.

like i said. a 3-4 hybrid where we ease into a 3-4 over the next few years is ok. but, you really have us taking drastic measures to make the switch overnight. not a fan.
In case you didn't notice, we just took drastic measures. Firing almost the whole defensive staff is pretty drastic.

It doesn't cost us Kampman. Kampman nets us a guy who will bring fireworks to the new defense for years after Kampman is on the way down in his career.

You were against the 3-4 from before day one, so until the adults put it on actual display for you, and you allow it a little bit of time (same season) for your eyes to see it work on the field, then you'll never be sold on it. I know people like you.

AtariBigby
01-07-2009, 05:17 PM
AtariBigby that is something that needs a link to be posted with it. Not a big deal, just remember for next time.
I don't think Scott wants a link posted to FF.
I just put a list up there now and took away the link you put in there.
Everybody should know who those guys are anyway.

As for the hybrid ratio:
We have 7 spots on the front 7 and only 4 of them need new guys to get the right personnel for a 3-4.
If we can't use our $40 million in free agency and the draft, and fill those 4 spots with instant upgrades, then Ted Thompson needs to go. With a good coach of it, it will be good by mid-season, and it will be better than our 2008 defense by week 3. Well worth it.

Don't fear change people.

GB12
01-07-2009, 05:51 PM
I don't think Scott wants a link posted to FF.
I just put a list up there now and took away the link you put in there.
Everybody should know who those guys are anyway.

As for the hybrid ratio:
We have 7 spots on the front 7 and only 4 of them need new guys to get the right personnel for a 3-4.
If we can't use our $40 million in free agency and the draft, and fill those 4 spots with instant upgrades, then Ted Thompson needs to go. With a good coach of it, it will be good by mid-season, and it will be better than our 2008 defense by week 3. Well worth it.

Don't fear change people.
That's alright I guess.

I think it's more like 6 of them that need new guys. Cullen Jenkins being the one that's a great fit for the system. And I'm having an extremely difficult time finding the quote now, but on JSOnline Jenkins said that he has never played in a 3-4 but that from watching Corey Williams play in one in Cleveland that he does not like it. He also said that if that's the system that's put in he'd play in it and obviously he wouldn't really have a choice but to do what the coach says, but there's a little insight from what the players are think of it.

Also I think our cap space is closer to $25 million and we need to use that to lock up some of our young talent still. We'd still have plenty of room to sign someone if we choose though. Even if we had unlimited amount of cap space we couldn't do much in free agency. The only 3-4 player of note that I think will actually hit free agency is Bart Scott and no way would I want to give him a big contract.

narf029
01-07-2009, 05:57 PM
I don't fear change I fear throwing away everything the defense has. Our defense last year was not malleable and consistently predictable. That is all about coaching. Running strictly a 3-4 would be unnecessary, and stupid. Sure it would be good for the long run, but right now it's not what we have. We have built the foundations for a very goof 4-3, so why scrap it? Kampman, Barnett, and Hawk are all good young players, 2 of the 3 play consistently at or near a pro bowl level. Of those 3 Hawk is the only one who would be a good 3-4 player, and he'd have to change positions. I don't fear change. I fear stupidity, and I fear a wasted season with a good team. We can't turn into the Steelers overnight. I'll be excited to see our defense mix it up a little bit and actually have the QB's guessing (for once). We can do that with only a couple upgrades to our current personnel, rather than scrapping most of our talent on defense.

GB12
01-07-2009, 07:28 PM
Read the first post please.

bigboiajhawk
01-07-2009, 07:54 PM
Here are my two cents on the whole situation.

#1-After seeing AtariBigby's post on trading Aaron Kampman away for a second round pick, I was amazed at even the thought of it crossing anyone's mind. So you trade away an All-Pro for a guy that has never played a snap of football in the NFL, thats just stupid, and I would pray that TT is not that stupid

#2-I have the feeling Nolan is going to be the Defensive Coordinator, and with that comes the 3-4. As of right now we have an average to above average 4-3 defense right now and that defense is maybe an actual blitz package away from being a good defense. Thus immediately switching to a 3-4 and getting rid of the 4-3 has to be out of the question. However, I really want to mix the 3-4 look into the defensive gameplan for the pure sake of confusing the offenses we face. Then maybe after a year or two later make the 3-4 a more prominent possibly even base defense. If our offense can use multiple formations, then why cant our defense?

#3-For whomever becomes the defensive coordinator, whether or not it is Nolan, and whether or not we use a 3-4 or 4-3, be aggressive. We have Hawk, Barnett, and Chillar, and they are all effective blitzers. I mean for as bad of a year as what our LBs played they still got sacks in our ultra-conservative 4-3.

#4-It all starts with the big boys up front. Whether we switch to the 3-4 or mix in different defenses, we need better play from our DL. Whether the players are just pathetic or it was the coaching, the DL play needs to improve greatly. It truly doesnt matter what defense we play, but if our DL sucks, our whole defense is affected in a negative way.

AtariBigby
01-07-2009, 08:02 PM
Aaron Kampman is not an All-Pro anymore. What gametapes are you watching? You must be going off memory from 2006 or maybe parts of 2007.
He was not near All Pro level this year and using the weak defense around him is no excuse. He still was bottled up 1-on-1 much easier than ever before. Stats will backup the fact that he peaked in 2006. I love the guy though, great motor, big heart. If he's as great still as you think he is, then maybe we can find a deal like the Chiefs got for Jared Allen. But he's not at Allen's level anymore.

AJ Hawk is not being utilized in the 4-3. There's no way he could be anyworse than he was this year if he went to a 3-4. You might think he was to blame for him being crappy this year. I believe he's better than that. I think the guy is a legit speciman and in a 3-4, we'll start to understand why he was the consensus #5 overall pick in 2006.

Mr. Goosemahn
01-07-2009, 08:19 PM
Gonna post a mock offseason soon (pretending you guys switch to 3-4).

bigboiajhawk
01-07-2009, 08:29 PM
Aaron Kampman is not an All-Pro anymore. What gametapes are you watching? You must be going off memory from 2006 or maybe parts of 2007.
He was not near All Pro level this year and using the weak defense around him is no excuse. He still was bottled up 1-on-1 much easier than ever before. Stats will backup the fact that he peaked in 2006. I love the guy though, great motor, big heart. If he's as great still as you think he is, then maybe we can find a deal like the Chiefs got for Jared Allen. But he's not at Allen's level anymore.

AJ Hawk is not being utilized in the 4-3. There's no way he could be anyworse than he was this year if he went to a 3-4. You might think he was to blame for him being crappy this year. I believe he's better than that. I think the guy is a legit speciman and in a 3-4, we'll start to understand why he was the consensus #5 overall pick in 2006.


I will take a guy, who in a bad year had 9.5 sacks, played all game and rarely came out, and led our DL in tackles over an unknown anyday of the week, anyday.

Also on AJ, yes he had a bad year, I really feel injuries and a poor job of using him led to his poor performance. He still led the team in tackles, and I have to say he is the best tackler on the team. When guys run into him they stop. He needs to be let loose, I feel he was constantly trying to play the scheme that they were in perfectly, and instead of just playing he was thinking.

GB12
01-07-2009, 08:38 PM
Aaron Kampman is not an All-Pro anymore. What gametapes are you watching? You must be going off memory from 2006 or maybe parts of 2007.
He was not near All Pro level this year and using the weak defense around him is no excuse. He still was bottled up 1-on-1 much easier than ever before. Stats will backup the fact that he peaked in 2006.
Do you need to read this again?
Other than Woodson Kampman was our best defensive player this season and he is more important to the defense than anyone else including Woodson. He is still great. It's ridiculous to think otherwise. His sack total isn't as high as it was the past two years, but that's because he was the only player on our defense that could provide a pass rush. It's impressive that he was able to get 9.5 when you take that into condsideration. The second defensive lineman in sacks is Cullen Jenkins who was put on IR after week 4. Kampman accounted for 33% of our team's stats, Demarcus Ware who lead the league in sacks this year had 34% of the Cowboys' sacks. Also by just looking at sacks you aren't taking into consideration how great he is against the run. Kampman is still one of the best DEs in the league, he just needs some help on the defensive line so he doesn't have to do it all himself.

And as for your stats, even with what I said he was 3rd in the NFL amongst DEs in tackles and 9th in sacks.

drowe
01-07-2009, 09:05 PM
In case you didn't notice, we just took drastic measures. Firing almost the whole defensive staff is pretty drastic.

It doesn't cost us Kampman. Kampman nets us a guy who will bring fireworks to the new defense for years after Kampman is on the way down in his career.

You were against the 3-4 from before day one, so until the adults put it on actual display for you, and you allow it a little bit of time (same season) for your eyes to see it work on the field, then you'll never be sold on it. I know people like you.

1-i don't like how ya put yourself on a pedestal as an adult and imply the rest of us our mere children. i'm 29 and i'm smarter than you. so, back off.

2-the measures you have us taking are way too drastic. we're scrapping our defensive line, and devoting our whole draft and offseason to a new scheme when there is nothing wrong with the players or scheme we have now.

3-it WOULD cost us Kampan. to say the second round pick we'd get for him would be an upgrade in any way, shape or form is ignorant.

AtariBigby
01-07-2009, 09:17 PM
And as for your stats, even with what I said he was 3rd in the NFL amongst DEs in tackles and 9th in sacks.
1- What other guys besides Pickett were going to fight Kampman for tackles on this team this year?

2- Did you notice that the #1, 2 and #4 guys in sacks were OLBers in 3-4 schemes? And that's a year without Merriman up there as he missed the year.

Look, I love Kampan. I have his white jersey. And if we had more guys like him in 06 & 07, we'd have been ever better. But he's good now, not great. You think he's Superman? He's been worn down big time, run to the ground. Dude never gets plays off on this crappy DLine. We couldn't afford to sit him because without him, the QB's could make a phone call while waiting for the WR's to all get wide open.

But if we go to a better defense (3-4) under Nolan, sign me Terrell Suggs and trade Kampman for a 1st round pick if you think he still has that kind of value. And draft a guy who can play the other 3-4 OLB spot and let them loose. Clint Stinim would work.

GB12
01-07-2009, 09:27 PM
But if we go to a better defense (3-4)
If the 3-4 is this vastly superior defense like you seem to think then why don't all 32 teams run it?

AtariBigby
01-07-2009, 09:29 PM
I don't want to lose Kampman either. I love the guy.... probably my favorite player. Even though the team is bigger to me than any player, I'd rather keep him.
And if all he would command would be a 3rd round pick, forget it.

But I am not the one who made the drastic changes by firing the whole staff. I am happy about it though. I feel like our coaches and system have been holding this defense back for awhile.

29 huh? How many days until the 20's are behind you?
Don't put me on a high horse though, I am afraid of heights. I'm just pointing out to you that drastic times call for drastic measures, and we're in the middle of them. Don't blame me. I thought we'd at least go as far as last year.

AtariBigby
01-07-2009, 09:31 PM
If the 3-4 is this vastly superior defense like you seem to think then why don't all 32 teams run it?
Because A) many people think like you guys. Few think like 3-4 guys.
B) there are fewer coaches who have run it successfully. Nolan is one of them.

Would the NFC North be ready to face it?

GB12
01-07-2009, 09:42 PM
Because A) many people think like you guys. Few think like 3-4 guys.
B) there are fewer coaches who have run it successfully. Nolan is one of them.

Would the NFC North be ready to face it?
Ready for a crappy 3-4 defense? Yeah, I'm sure Minnesota would love for us to switch defense this offseason. Sure makes winning the division a lot easier for them.

Boston
01-07-2009, 09:47 PM
Aaron Kampman is not an All-Pro anymore. What gametapes are you watching? You must be going off memory from 2006 or maybe parts of 2007.
He was not near All Pro level this year and using the weak defense around him is no excuse. He still was bottled up 1-on-1 much easier than ever before. Stats will backup the fact that he peaked in 2006. I love the guy though, great motor, big heart. If he's as great still as you think he is, then maybe we can find a deal like the Chiefs got for Jared Allen. But he's not at Allen's level anymore.

AJ Hawk is not being utilized in the 4-3. There's no way he could be anyworse than he was this year if he went to a 3-4. You might think he was to blame for him being crappy this year. I believe he's better than that. I think the guy is a legit speciman and in a 3-4, we'll start to understand why he was the consensus #5 overall pick in 2006.

You don't seem to realize the fact that Kampman had 9.5 sacks this year, closely followed by Woodson and Hawk with 3, and Jenkins with 2.5. 4 of those sacks came in the first 3 weeks when he had somebody competant rushing the passer from the other side in Jenkins. When Jenkins went down, we had no other threat, at all, to consistently rush the passer. Do you think other teams are going to make note of this? You don't seem to put much thought, if any, into a majority of your posts...

Mr. Goosemahn
01-07-2009, 10:34 PM
If we could have what the Steelers have right away then yeah I'd go for it, but it's not that easy. The Steelers have been running their system for years and have been drafting players specifically for that system during those years. We don't have a single player that was drafted to play in that kind of defense. It would be a lot more severe than just growing pains. It takes time to get the 3-4 going like the ones you are thinking of.

While it could take a couple of years to switch and be an elite defense, I think it could take about 2 seasons to get a good 3-4 defense and run it both consistently and succesfully. As long as you have two good drafts and off-seasons, you can pull it off.

For example, take this mock offseason (not assuring anything will happen, and this would be ONLY IF you switch to the 3-4. I know not many Packer fans would like the switch, but I'm simply creating a scenario).

Leave as Free Agents:
RT Mark Tauscher:
He's on the wrong side of 30, and although he's a good player, he's gonna want a large contract. Plus, the OT draft class is pretty deep this year, and a good replacement wouldn't be too hard to find.

DE Michael Montgomery:
He's a reserve defensive end who wouldn't really have a role in a 3-4 defense, unless he gained around 20 lbs. It also seems he's constantly injured, so this isn't that big a loss.

DT Colin Cole:
Yeah, he might be a good run-stuffer, but you guys have a lot of DT's on your roster, and he's also one of the older DT's you have.

CB Jarrett Bush:
Seemingly a ST player, I think he could be replaced with someone else.

DE Jason Hunter:
Another DE who wouldn't fit in the 3-4 defensive scheme.

TE Tory Humphrey:
3rd in depth chart, and has had role reduced by rookie Jermichael Finley and injuries; another player who could be replaced.

Re-Sign
S Atari Bigby:
A great player who has a bright future. Definitely has the ability to adapt to a 3-4 scheme. A bright spot for the defense.

CB Tramon Williams:
A good return man who had greatly improved in two seasons. A cheap but good, versatile player.

WR Ruvell Martin:
A good blocking WR, good depth and could also improve. Also, he comes cheap.

FB John Kuhn:
A Steeler legend. Period. :) No, but really, he's a good blocker, catcher and a useful power runner. He also comes cheap.

Sign
RT Vernon Carey - Miami Dolphins:
A very good tackle who could become a Pro-Bowler pretty darn soon. I'd love him in a Steeler uniform, but I think we go for an inside lineman since Willie Colon is set at RT. Anyway, he's an instant replacement for Mark Tauscher, is just 27 years old, and has a great frame at 6'5 and 335 lbs. He's a great run-blocker, an above-average pass-protector, and I'm pretty sure he can pick up the zone-blocking scheme you guys want. He'd warrant a moderately large contract, but it wouldn't be too far off what Tauscher might want.

DT Shaun Cody - Detroit Lions:
A guy who hasn't met expectations at DT for the Lions, Cody was a 30-something pick three years ago. He is, however, a great prospect for a 3-4 DE, as he's around 6'5 and 310 lbs. He's also very young at 25. He could provide good depth for now, or maybe surprise and earn a starting role. He'd also come cheap.

DE Steven Bowen - Dallas Cowboys
Another guy who could be an upgrade for the 3-4 D-Line. He's had a good season in rotation with Canty and has good run-stopping skills, an essential asset for 3-4 DE's.

DRAFT
Round 1 - A
Brian Orakpo - DE - Texas
http://i240.photobucket.com/albums/ff30/BarkingCarnival/ncf_orakpo_400.jpg

Just look at the picture. Please. :) For starters, Orakpo is a physical freak. He's strength is not human, and he has incredible explosiveness. Definitely one of the better pass-rushers in the draft. He's got a great frame at 6'4 and 260 lbs. Would make the transition to OLB for the 3-4 scheme, but he's definitely a great addition. As previously stated, he's a phenomenal pass-rusher, which is a must for a 3-4 OLB. He's also good against the run. He needs to improve in coverage, but it'll work out. With his physical ability, there's no way a team switching to 3-4 could pass him up. He's gonna be a great player for many years to come.

Round 1 - B
Clint Sintim - OLB - Virginia
http://www.techsideline.com/football/2007/pics/uva_sintim2007_01.jpg
This pick would be acquired after trading Aaron Kampman. As good a DE as he is, there's no place for him in a 3-4 defense. You definitely get good value for him, and a playoff team that really wants him would not hesitate to get him. I believe you get an either late 1st pick or early 2nd pick, as well as a later pick (in this case I call it a 4th). In either scenario, you could still nab Clint Sintim. And just like that, you guys have twin pass-rushing demons in Orakpo and Sintim, and what could potentially become the best 3-4 pair of OLB in the future. I know it would seem weird to take two LB's in the first round, and some of you guys might be against this and call it ridiculous, but there's nothing like having two great OLB in a 3-4 scheme. The linebackers are what make the scheme so great, and these two guys have more talent that what most LB's dream of. Sintim is the prototypical 3-4 OLB. He has experience playing in this scheme in Virginia, and has learned all he needs to be extremely successful. He's a ferocius pass-rusher, is great against the run, and also has a great frame at 6'3 and 254 lbs. He, too, would be an invaluable asset for a 3-4 defensive scheme.

Round 2
Jamon Meredith - OL - South Carolina
http://media.scout.com/Media/Image/45/455294.jpg
It seems you guys also want help on the offensive line. Signing Carey would give you an instant starter at RT, but Meredith gives you many possibilities. He can play both tackle and guard, and I've read he would be ideal in a zone-blocking scheme. He might be a starter at guard from day 1, or could serve as a back-up to either tackle. In any case, he's gonna be a good player, and it would be wise to take him here. With his versatility, you guys would find somewhere to use him and enjoy him for years to come.

Round 3 - A
Ron Brace - NT - Boston College
http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/0asQ2YQ6zXeig/610x.jpg
Branded by many as a pure 3-4 NT, Brace is a great run-stopper and fits the ideal mold for such a position. He's very strong, 6'3 and 324 lbs. He might have to lose a little weight to gain some agility, but he'd still develop into a great NT. He would, however, have to compete with your abundant DT's for a starting job. I think it takes him about a year to get it, maybe less; but once he gets it, it'll probably be his for a long time.

Round 3 - B
Jasper Brinkley - ILB - South Carolina
http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a252/waverydr069/jasper_edited.jpg
A true 3-4 ILB, Brinkley is a massive hitter. He's 6'2 and weighs around 270 lbs. He's a great "thumper" at ILB, and would be another great addition to your LB core that already consists of Barnett, Hawk, Orakpo, and Sintim. Another prototypical 3-4 player, he'd provide great stability in the "center" of your defense. Is better in coverage than people think he is. Another smart move in your switch to a 3-4 defense.

Round 4 - A
Sherrod Martin - CB - Troy
http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/0abvfnHdQ25pz/340x.jpg
Played both CB and FS for Troy. He's a tough player who'll deliver the big hit and provides very good depth with good position versatility. Give him time to learn the 3-4 defense and he could be a solid #2 corner after the Charles Woodson and Al Harris era.

Round 4 -B
Shawn Nelson - TE - Southern Miss
http://images.sundaymorningqb.com/images/admin/Nelson_Score.jpg
A good pass-catching TE, he's another good target for Aaron Rodgers. He has the potential to be a good starter. Isn't that great as a blocker. Replacement for Tory Humphrey, but Nelson is on a whole new level.

Round 5
Arian Foster - RB - Tennessee
http://3rdsaturdayinblogtober.files.wordpress.com/2008/07/foster2.jpg
Once tagged as a second round prospect, he returned for his senior year and played through injuries. He's a good back with good potential, and would really benefit from a revamped offensive line. Could definitely earn a spot on the roster and might provide great depth as an occasional back, for those moments when teams simply need new, fresh legs.

Round 6 - A
Jorvorskie Lane - FB - Texas A&M
http://media.collegepublisher.com/media/paper410/stills/qfhc69qw.jpg
A 280 lbs. fullback who'd compete for a job. He runs people over and is a good blocker. He isn't, of course, better than KUHN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :)

Round 6 - B
Thomas Morstead - P - SMU
http://blog.smu.edu/forum/thomas-morstead-200.jpg
Heard somewhere that you guys could use an upgrade at punter. Enter Morstead. A good punter who was considered for the Ray Guy award, he could easily become a good punter in the NFL.

Round 7
Maurice Crum - ILB - Notre Dame
http://oldnotredame.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/crum.jpg
A kid with great attitude and drive for improvement, he could be a special teams ace or eventual back-up. Would probably start off in the PS. He, too, is a good model for a 3-4 ILB.

And that's the draft. I know it's very defense oriented, but remember, I'm following a scenario in case you guys do switch to a 3-4. After a draft like and off-season like this, you'd have to try out Bigby, Collins, and other good 4-3 players to see how the fit in the new scheme. If they don't, then you can find some good FA or draft guys next season. Then give them a little bit of time and the defense could be really good. And yes, I know it cost you guys Kampman and most feel that the change would be unneccesary since you have good players for a 4-3 scheme, but who knows that Nolan does (if he's hired). Anyway, here's what I think the defensive depth chart would end up being:

DE - Cullen Jenkins -> Shaun Cody -> Alfred Malone
NT - Ryan Pickett -> Ron Brace -> Johnny Jolly
DE - Justin Harrell -> Steven Bowen -> Alfred Malone
OLB - Brady Poppinga -> Brian Orakpo
ILB - Nick Barnett -> Danny Lansanah -> Desmond Bishop
ILB - Brandon Chillar -> Jasper Brinkley
OLB - A.J. Hawk -> Clint Sintim
CB - Al Harris -> Tramon Williams -> Will Blackmon
CB - Charles Woodson -> Pat Lee
FS - Nick Collins -> Sherrod Martin -> Charlie Peprah
SS - Atari Bigby -> Aaron Rouse -> Charlie Peprah

And that's 27 players, meaning about half your team.

The LB's are full of talent, so the depth chart would be altered constantly. I think the rookies would start off as situational pass-rushers as they pick up the defense, while Hawk and Poppinga have their abilities tested. The same situation applies for basically all rookies, since it can take them a while to fully grasp their tasks in a 3-4 scheme.

I switched Harrell to DE, where I think he could actually be a pretty good player. That would be what I think are three good run-stopping defensive linemen, which is crucial for the 3-4.

Anyhow, that's a pretty good defense. A few more FA and rookies after next season should clean up any holes.

I know most of you guys prefer to stick with the 4-3, but if you were to switch to the 3-4, what do you think of this?

Mr. Goosemahn
01-07-2009, 10:36 PM
And I forgot to say that Harris and Woodson would probably be smart enough to switch to Zone coverage.

EvilMonkey
01-07-2009, 10:50 PM
I know most of you guys prefer to stick with the 4-3, but if you were to switch to the 3-4, what do you think of this?

it's promising. Going all-out 3-4 next year is iffy, but i like the hybrid idea and Orakpo fits both schemes so I want him no matter what. I hope we get some more personnel in place and use the 3-4 on passing downs next year. Kampman and Cullen aren't 3-4 ends but having them at ends in a 3-4 on passing downs with Orakpo and Poppinga rushing from the outside should help get some pressure on the QB for once.

GB12
01-07-2009, 11:02 PM
Very nicely done especially from someone that doesn't follow the team. It still doesn't make sense to change to a 3-4, but I appreciate the effort you put in those two posts. You really know your stuff.And I forgot to say that Harris and Woodson would probably be smart enough to switch to Zone coverage.Harris would not be good in a zone defense. We added more zone than usual this year and that's when he had most of his struggles. Woodson on the other hand would be great in zone. I think Tramon Williams would also fit well.

bigboiajhawk
01-07-2009, 11:29 PM
"McCarthy also has been interviewing coaches this week for the vacancies on his staff. His most important hire will be at defensive coordinator, where former San Francisco 49ers coach Mike Nolan is the front-runner. However, an NFL source said McCarthy is considering one other unidentified candidate as well." From Packersnews.com

Here is a link to the JSonline article that covers the topic of who is going to be the new Defensive Coordinator. I guess McCarthy will be taking his time in deciding.

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/37250404.html

johbur
01-10-2009, 10:18 PM
I appreciate MM looking over the available guys. There are some rock solid choices out there. If he went with Williams, the draft looks more like a "typical" TT draft, versus the year Ted needed to address the OG situation and did so in such a poor manner.

For the 3-4, you only keep 6 DLs, so my keepers (pre-draft) would be AK (Please quit saying he has no value in a 3-4. He is relentless, goes non-stop and is very solid against the run. Maybe he only gets 3 or 4 sacks, but his tackles go up 40%.), Jenkins, Pickett, Cole, Thompson and Montgomery. Turn Hunter into an OLB, maybe he'd actually see the field as more than a special teams tackler, and it'd reduce the number of LBs you needed to acquire.

Seeing as how there WILL be a transition to a new system, I don't see any system being any worse than any other system. The 3-4 would change some personnnel, but hopefully you'd have guys that would be productive (doing their job, whatever it entails) on the DL instead of carrying a dozen D-Linemen, half of which never seemed to get on the field.

I'm fine sticking with a 4-3. I'd prefer the Eagles blitzing system. The current system is too fragile. If your system is predicated on there being a DE who can rush the passer and move inside on passing downs (Jenkins) and becomes ineffective when ONE guy gets hurt, that's a bad system.

AJ Hawk was a solid blitzer in college, but he hasn't had the opportunity to be fully released in this defense. When Bigby was helthy I would have liked to have seen Barnett blitz more. Chillar seemed like a very good blitzer.

I'd like to see TT take the BPA on defense. For me, that's ordered by Orakpo, Jenkins, Mays and Malealuga. MM has made several statements the scheme should fit the players. If you have more playmakers on the DL (especially if we get an impact DE and/or DT), then keep a variation of the 4-3. If you pick up Rey or Aaron Curry, then maybe you start thinking about how to get that guy, plus Hawk, Barnett and Chillar on the field at the same time by going 3-4.

GB12
01-10-2009, 11:00 PM
For the 3-4, you only keep 6 DLs, so my keepers (pre-draft) would be AK (Please quit saying he has no value in a 3-4. He is relentless, goes non-stop and is very solid against the run. Maybe he only gets 3 or 4 sacks, but his tackles go up 40%.), Jenkins, Pickett, Cole, Thompson and Montgomery. Turn Hunter into an OLB, maybe he'd actually see the field as more than a special teams tackler, and it'd reduce the number of LBs you needed to acquire.
You are poorly informed of the 3-4 system then. Kampman does have no value in a 3-4. Well maybe not no value, but very little. I think if forced to play it he could play 3-4 DE, but he'd be below average at best, when he's a top level 4-3 DE. His tackles would not increase by 40%. He had 62 this season, by that math he'd have 87 which is 10 more than any defensive lineman this season. His tackles would actually drop. The average tackles of the top 10 3-4 DEs was 52. Kampman is too small to play in a 3-4 DE and is not athletic enough for OLB. 3-4 DEs are bigger guys that have to follow assignment and take up blockers first and foremost. Probably over 95% of them would be DTs if placed into a 4-3. 3-4 DEs are all nearing 300 pounds or over. Aaron Smith 298, Luis Castillo 290, Igor Olshansky 309, Chris Canty 304, Marcus Spears 315, Corey Williams 320, etc. Shaun Ellis is one of the smallest 3-4 DEs and he is even 285, 20 pounds more than Kampman. It just wouldn't work and I'm sure he wouldn't want to do it. If we were going to do it for just a couple plays a game he could be alright, but a base 3-4 would be a terrible fit for him.

johbur
01-11-2009, 01:05 AM
Ravens DEs are 290-ish, Ray McDonald is 290, and Keisel is 285 and so is Justin Smith.

Kampman was 286 when he came out of college and has had to shave weight to fit the Bates scheme. Him adding weight instead of keeping his weight surpressed wouldn't seem to be a major issue, seeing as how he'd be going back to his college weight.

Even if he were kept at 265, do you think he couldn't do what Tully Banta-Cain is doing for Frisco and NE before that? Why do you think he couldn't go OLB considering the pleothora of DEs that have?

Maybe Jolly, Pickett and Jenkins would better suit the 3-4 scheme as starters, but I still think Kampman would be highly effective in whatever scheme he worked out of and that he has the work ethic to be effective either as a 3-4 DE or OLB.

GB12
01-11-2009, 01:17 AM
Even if he were kept at 265, do you think he couldn't do what Tully Banta-Cain is doing for Frisco and NE before that? If you mean be a crappy 3-4 OLB that doesn't even start anymore, then yes.

Why do you think he couldn't go OLB considering the pleothora of DEs that have? The type of DEs that move to OLB aren't like Kampman. They are super athletic guys that are more pass rush specialists than complete DEs like Kampman. 3-4 DE would be a more realistic possibility than 3-4 OLB, but neither fits him well.

johbur
01-11-2009, 01:24 AM
From Kampman's draft bio: "Has a frame that can add at least fifteen pounds with no loss in speed." That phrase was put in there when the Packers had a scheme that coveted 300 pound DEs.

I think Kampman is undervalued as an athlete. I'm not saying I'd want him to drop another 10 pounds and try to be an OLB, but there's precedent for him to be able to move. Given that he, Pickett and the class of 2006 (Jennings, Collins, Spitz, Colledge) is all coming up to be FA after this upcoming season, it might not be an issue that the team has to sweat bullets over.

GB12
01-11-2009, 02:02 AM
From Kampman's draft bio: "Has a frame that can add at least fifteen pounds with no loss in speed." That phrase was put in there when the Packers had a scheme that coveted 300 pound DEs.

I think Kampman is undervalued as an athlete. I'm not saying I'd want him to drop another 10 pounds and try to be an OLB, but there's precedent for him to be able to move. Given that he, Pickett and the class of 2006 (Jennings, Collins, Spitz, Colledge) is all coming up to be FA after this upcoming season, it might not be an issue that the team has to sweat bullets over.

Kampman is actually a very good athlete. He ran a 4.65 40 at his pro day which is great for a DE (although keep in mind it was a pro day and not the combine). Also this was in the bio you're looking at it he moved from linebacker to defensive end prior to 2000 spring practice. Despite all that I really don't see him as an OLB.

We also have to consider how he'd feel about changing positions. He's one of the best 4-3 DEs in the game, I doubt he'd be thrilled about changing positions especially in contract year. We'd have to give him a fat extention before the switch for sure and that's if he'd even go a long with it. He could either refuse to play in a 3-4 and demand a trade as hard as it is to believe Kampman would do something like that, or play out the year but refuse to sign an extention. I really wouldn't blame him at all if he did one of those. And if he does accept the change and we give him a nice contract, what happens if he doesn't turn out well which has a good chance of happening. Then we're stuck with a player that's being incorrectly utilized with an untradable contract.

PACKmanN
01-11-2009, 03:23 AM
The Ravens defense, coaching wise, is one of the most overrated. They have the top 5 defense not because of their coaching but because of their defense talent. I would never take any former Ravens DC.

btw, Adam Schefter had a blog up about how McDermott is in the lead for the DC spot and the blog has been taken down, strange if you ask me.

AtariBigby
01-11-2009, 08:11 AM
The Ravens defense, coaching wise, is one of the most overrated. They have the top 5 defense not because of their coaching but because of their defense talent. I would never take any former Ravens DC.

btw, Adam Schefter had a blog up about how McDermott is in the lead for the DC spot and the blog has been taken down, strange if you ask me.
That blog was about him as OUR candidate or what team?
I thought blogs stay... just get updated. Not erased?

johbur
01-12-2009, 12:32 AM
There was mention in the Broncos HC thread about McDermott being on Denver's radar.

I'm more in favor of picking up a solid DT and a DE and sticking with a 4-3. TT has made some bad decisions (cutting Tracy White and Jon Ryan) and hasn't addressed the defense in the draft (5 of 20 picks the last two years, though he's brought in Chillar, Woodson, Pickett on the plus and Manuel and Roman on the negative) but overall TT has brought a team ruined by age and incompetent GMing under Sherman back to competitiveness. GB could have been 13-3 with a change of 30 total points this past year. It's not like GB is the Lions or Rams.

bigboiajhawk
01-12-2009, 10:18 AM
Adam Schefter is reporting that Mike Nolan will take the DC job with the Broncos, which means no 3-4 for Packers, great news if you ask me. Now get a blitzing 4-3 coach like Williams or maybe get the young gun like McDermott.

johbur
01-15-2009, 09:58 PM
That's a 2-4-1 gain for the Packer sin that the 3-4 far less likely and one less competitor for McDermott. With those attacking DTs the Eagles have been trying to fill up, a shame we cut Williams. Would BJ Raji fit the Eagles pressure scheme?

narf029
01-16-2009, 12:43 AM
That's a 2-4-1 gain for the Packer sin that the 3-4 far less likely and one less competitor for McDermott. With those attacking DTs the Eagles have been trying to fill up, a shame we cut Williams. Would BJ Raji fit the Eagles pressure scheme?

Well the Eagles DTs are Brodrick Bunkley and Mike Patterson, and both of them are around 300 pounds. The Giants use Fred Robbins though, and he's closer to 320. I feel like Raji might be a little bit big, but he is athletic and quick for his size. I'm not sure at all what the personnel has to be for that system, but Raji seems big enough and athletic enough to fit most systems. So my money would be on Raji being good for this scheme.

GB12
01-16-2009, 12:44 AM
If we were to got to that scheme and take a DT Peria Jerry would be the best option.

johbur
01-16-2009, 01:48 AM
I just read his profile and he has that attack dog, 28- pound290 pound DT Eagles feel about him. I'd just assume all our guys we acquire have comments about a non-stop or fantastic motor! Jerry in R1 after a trade down and Connor Barwin in R3 (maybe R2 after the combine) would be a nice way to solve some of our DL issues.

Burger
01-17-2009, 06:20 PM
I like the guy from San Jose State. We should keep the same basic 4-3. We should send AJ Hawk more often on the blitz.

AtariBigby
01-19-2009, 11:52 AM
(Let's close this thread now, we get to it already in 3 other threads, and we should only need 1 or 2 anyway)

Mr. Stiller
01-20-2009, 06:44 PM
Because A) many people think like you guys. Few think like 3-4 guys.
B) there are fewer coaches who have run it successfully. Nolan is one of them.

Would the NFC North be ready to face it?

Since 1982(Invention of the 3-4):

7 teams running a 3-4 have won the superbowl.

For those "mental" midgets thats exactly 26 superbowls. 19 were won by teams that feature a 4-3.

Now an argument can be made that since 2000... 5 of the 8 teams to win were 3-4 teams.

But at which point I'd argue that those 3 teams have some of the best draft evaluators in the league.

And to say that the Steelers are only good because of "Scheme" means you're obviously ignorant in watching the games.

Woodley isn't good solely because of "Scheme" he's good because he can cover, he can stuff the run amazingly and he wins one on one matchups.

James Harrison was a UDFA and is the same way.

They are a way superior defense because:

1) Pittsburgh has an excellent eye for talent.
2) Pittsburgh has excellent defensive positional coaches who have a track record of great development as well as a great Coordinator.
3) They have a superior team attitude.

High draft picks don't mean great players. Do I have to bring up Ahmad Carroll?


You want to see a terrible defense? Switch Green Bay to a 3-4 and regardless if you bring in Nolan and Suggs.

You don't have the players with the mindset or the intangibles.

No team can seamlessly switch to a 3-4 over one season and expect knock out success.

Mr. Stiller
01-20-2009, 06:45 PM
Adam Schefter is reporting that Mike Nolan will take the DC job with the Broncos, which means no 3-4 for Packers, great news if you ask me. Now get a blitzing 4-3 coach like Williams or maybe get the young gun like McDermott.

Nolan coached a 3-4/4-3 hybrid in Baltimore. It's not crazy to think that 3-4 Coordinators can coach a 4-3..

Heck, Jim Haslett was a 3-4 coach and he coached a 4-3 the entire time in St. Louis.

Menardo75
01-20-2009, 06:47 PM
I think this makes you guys' first pick either Everette Brown, or Brian Orakpo.

AtariBigby
01-20-2009, 06:58 PM
James Harrison was a UDFA and is the same way.
They are a way superior defense because:

1) Pittsburgh has an excellent eye for talent.
2) Pittsburgh has excellent defensive positional coaches who have a track record of great development as well as a great Coordinator.
3) They have a superior team attitude.

1) So does Ted Thompson, in fact, some say he's one of the best draft evaluators around.
2) Capers is a good start at the top, he knows what he's doing. Let's see who else fills his staff, but Winston Moss is a good one, a future DC one day for sure.
3) That attitude is huge, no question. That's why I wonder how much of it has to do with it being BLITZBURGH in general, the steel city, former Steel Curtain, etc. I hope with the former head coach and former successful DC Capers, our attitude can get tough too. We'll see.

johbur
01-20-2009, 08:11 PM
I think this makes you guys' first pick either Everette Brown, or Brian Orakpo.

Brown might be there, but I see Orakpo not being available. Rey Malaleuga and Aaron Brooks are going to be a consideration, possibly doing the TT trade down if his guy isn't there.

BJ Raji also would be solid at the nose, but I am thinking LB more an issue. Orakpo would be, and has been, my favorite pick. If Jenkins falls, I'd pick him up quickly as well.

AtariBigby
01-20-2009, 08:32 PM
Brown might be there, but I see Orakpo not being available. Rey Malaleuga and Aaron Brooks are going to be a consideration, possibly doing the TT trade down if his guy isn't there.

BJ Raji also would be solid at the nose, but I am thinking LB more an issue. Orakpo would be, and has been, my favorite pick. If Jenkins falls, I'd pick him up quickly as well.

Who do you mean there?

jackalope
01-20-2009, 08:43 PM
1) So does Ted Thompson, in fact, some say he's one of the best draft evaluators around.
2) Capers is a good start at the top, he knows what he's doing. Let's see who else fills his staff, but Winston Moss is a good one, a future DC one day for sure.
3) That attitude is huge, no question. That's why I wonder how much of it has to do with it being BLITZBURGH in general, the steel city, former Steel Curtain, etc. I hope with the former head coach and former successful DC Capers, our attitude can get tough too. We'll see.

You've made it very clear that you are not one of those people.

Burger
01-20-2009, 10:54 PM
Ted Thompson is a very successful drafter.

AtariBigby
01-21-2009, 08:04 AM
You've made it very clear that you are not one of those people.
I think he's been slighty better than average, and a scan of the complete Packers roster of 4-year or less players pretty much is irrefutable evidence of this.
And a scan back at the drafts of the players he's taken high that have made absolutely zero contribution to this team makes it overall about a B-. Better than average. But certainly not great, so far. It can improve and I hope it does.

Harrell can salvage things if the marshmallow miraculously magically learns to stay healthy for the first time since he was in high school. Harrell said that himself, that he hasn't been fully healthy since high school. Alarming?

marshfield
01-21-2009, 09:46 AM
I think he's been slighty better than average, and a scan of the complete Packers roster of 4-year or less players pretty much is irrefutable evidence of this.
And a scan back at the drafts of the players he's taken high that have made absolutely zero contribution to this team makes it overall about a B-. Better than average. But certainly not great, so far. It can improve and I hope it does.


All teams have plenty of picks in the last 4 years of drafts that didn't do squat for them. It's unfair to compare Thompson's drafts to drafts that have nothing but all-pros and starters. Here's a clue, those drafts don't exist. You have to compare him to the rest of the GMs during that time. If you do, he's among the best.

AtariBigby
01-21-2009, 02:12 PM
All teams have plenty of picks in the last 4 years of drafts that didn't do squat for them. It's unfair to compare Thompson's drafts to drafts that have nothing but all-pros and starters. Here's a clue, those drafts don't exist. You have to compare him to the rest of the GMs during that time. If you do, he's among the best.
Let me ask you this:
He's had 4 drafts for us; Look at the Pro Bowl teams, and of the 60 or so players each year, Ted's had 1 guy that he drafted make a team, right? I'm just saying, he's done nothing much better than average. A little better than average maybe. But not great. You can't come away with no impact 3 straight years with your 1st round pick as he has, and be called doing great. You just can't.

Burger
01-21-2009, 06:34 PM
I am pretty sure AJ Hawk is a impact.

GB12
01-21-2009, 07:08 PM
Let me ask you this:
He's had 4 drafts for us; Look at the Pro Bowl teams, and of the 60 or so players each year, Ted's had 1 guy that he drafted make a team, right? I'm just saying, he's done nothing much better than average. A little better than average maybe. But not great. You can't come away with no impact 3 straight years with your 1st round pick as he has, and be called doing great. You just can't.Alright, first of all that's not the best way to judge it. The best players don't always get in the pro bowl. Greg Jennings should have made it last year and Aaron Rodgers easily deserved it more than Eli Manning this year. That would have been two more to add to the list. But let's take a deeper look into it using that way.

Of the players drafted from 2005-2008, the four drafts when Thompson was our GM, these are the ones that made the pro bowl for the NFC

Adrian Peterson
Marion Barber
Trent Cole
DeMarcus Ware
Lofa Tatupu
Patrick Willis
Roddy White
Jammal Brown
Davin Joseph
Justin Tuck
Jay Ratliff
Jon Beason
Nick Collins
Frank Gore

That's 14 players and there are 16 teams in the NFC. That's less than 1 per team and we had one of them.

johbur
01-21-2009, 07:47 PM
There's a number of guys that will be on the cusp of Pro Bowl if the Packers have the 13-3 type season versus the 6-10 type season.

Legitimate chances of being or are Pro Bowl that TT drafted as of right now: Collins (he's in), Jennings, Hawk and Rodgers.

He also brought in Woodson and Grant.

The guys on the line are under-rated IMO (and always have been in GB), but if Grant gets 1500 yards next season and A-Rod cuts his sacks, there miight be someone from the group recognized.

The defense might get a little more recognition due to Capers being a name coach and we'll see how he utilizes the players we have right now.

Burger
01-21-2009, 07:59 PM
Rodgers was Sherman's smart pick.
Players Thompson drafted that are well known
-AJ Hawk
-Greg Jennings
-Nick Collins
-Jason Spitz
-Daryn Colledge
-Korey Hall
-john Kuhn
-Johnny Jolly
-Mason Crosby
-Brandon Jackson
-4 of the 5 current packers WRs
-Patrick Lee

He signed
- Cullen Jenkins
- Atari Bigby
- Charles Woodson
- Ryan Pickett

I think he has a great track record so far.

GB12
01-21-2009, 08:00 PM
A-Rod cuts his sacks
That wasn't even the problem. His numbers and performance should have gotten him in easily, but the record and Eli being a bigger name gave Manning the nod over Rodgers.

narf029
01-21-2009, 08:20 PM
That wasn't even the problem. His numbers and performance should have gotten him in easily, but the record and Eli being a bigger name gave Manning the nod over Rodgers.

I think he was talking about someone from the O-Line going. But yeah Rodgers should have made it. Not a big deal though, he'll get his eventually.

GB12
01-21-2009, 08:24 PM
Wow, yeah clearly he was. Clifton did make it last year though.

Burger
01-21-2009, 08:27 PM
We need to search for the next Clifton =[. Tennesse Olinemen boom here.

johbur
01-21-2009, 08:27 PM
Just an FYI, TT became the Packers GM on 1-14, 2005. Aaron Rodgers was his first pick and really laid the foundation for what TT is all about, as he didn't give a flip about upsetting Favre and went with the guy that was at the top of his board.

Also, you can check out how the team was made.

(http://www.packers.com/team/players/)Kuhn a waiver pickup (from Steelers, I believe) and there's now only six players on the active roster that TT didn't bring in: Clifton, Harris, Driver, Wells, Kampman and Cole. This isn't including the guys on IR, of which Tausher, Jenkins and Barnett are non-TT players.

Burger
01-21-2009, 08:29 PM
I didnt know that. TT knew Brett wont be around much longer, but would knew he make a great mentor.

AtariBigby
01-21-2009, 08:45 PM
Alright, first of all that's not the best way to judge it. The best players don't always get in the pro bowl. Greg Jennings should have made it last year and Aaron Rodgers easily deserved it more than Eli Manning this year. That would have been two more to add to the list. But let's take a deeper look into it using that way.

Of the players drafted from 2005-2008, the four drafts when Thompson was our GM, these are the ones that made the pro bowl for the NFC

Adrian Peterson
Marion Barber
Trent Cole
DeMarcus Ware
Lofa Tatupu
Patrick Willis
Roddy White
Jammal Brown
Davin Joseph
Justin Tuck
Jay Ratliff
Jon Beason
Nick Collins
Frank Gore

That's 14 players and there are 16 teams in the NFC. That's less than 1 per team and we had one of them.
Alright thanks. So basically par for the course then, as I said. I'd judge TT so far as a B-/C= for his 4-years drafting.

Again, like Rodgers made the 05 draft great by his 08 season, Harrell can salvage things in his 3rd year.

Burger
01-21-2009, 08:46 PM
I'd give him an A-

AtariBigby
01-21-2009, 08:52 PM
True, STATS-wise, Rodgers deserves to be the #3 QB in the Pro Bowl for the NFC.
http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?tabSeq=0&statisticCategory=PASSING&conference=0015&season=2008&seasonType=REG

It just sucks that our defense and special teams cost us so many games, and that Rodgers didn't come thru in the end. I know he did some good things in 4th quarters, but he had about 3 games where late in the 4th, he failed. Still, his stats should have had him #3, edging out Romo and McNabb IMO. Eli should have been way behind.

Hey, DYU that Seneca Wallace had 11 TDs to 3 Ints? What? Can that be right?

Umphr3akCheeshead
01-21-2009, 08:59 PM
True, STATS-wise, Rodgers deserves to be the #3 QB in the Pro Bowl for the NFC.
http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?tabSeq=0&statisticCategory=PASSING&conference=0015&season=2008&seasonType=REG

It just sucks that our defense and special teams cost us so many games, and that Rodgers didn't come thru in the end. I know he did some good things in 4th quarters, but he had about 3 games where late in the 4th, he failed. Still, his stats should have had him #3, edging out Romo and McNabb IMO. Eli should have been way behind.

Hey, DYU that Seneca Wallace had 11 TDs to 3 Ints? What? Can that be right?

Rodgers should have made the pro-bowl for sure. The only other thing I have to say is that he did lead us to some potential game winning drives only to have the defense cough it up. Sure he threw a couple interceptions with a minute left, but the defense put him in a couple of those situations as well.

Another thing could be said about MM's playcalling abilities. I was suspect of them all year and he did nothing to change that. We would move the ball with our west coast offense passes and as soon as we were close to the goal line, it was 3 runs and a FG. I do not think he should be calling the plays in our offense, but I don't know if Philbin can either.

AtariBigby
01-21-2009, 10:33 PM
I think McCarthy gets a bad rap, and I think Ryan Grant does too.
I like both guys.

I give Ryan Grant a solid B for his 2008 season.
McCarthy, well, hard to judge him because he basically runs the offense and it was pretty damn good. The defense was Sanders and it was horrible. I don't know how to grade MM, but I liked when he fired his headset to the ground after one of the game-losing FGs. I like a coach that shows he cares 100% instead of one who just accepts it calmly. And I was 100% against hiring the guy in the first place so I've done a 180 on him.

Burger
01-21-2009, 10:41 PM
Mike has a lot of intelligence. I am pretty sure he was working with Ted for who to draft in a lot of these rounds. I think McCarthy knew what he had to work with, he also was the one who let Thompson pull the trigger on Favre, and we got a better passer.

PACKmanN
01-21-2009, 10:43 PM
Rodgers was Sherman's smart pick.
Players Thompson drafted that are well known
-AJ Hawk
-Greg Jennings
-Nick Collins
-Jason Spitz
-Daryn Colledge
-Korey Hall
-john Kuhn
-Johnny Jolly
-Mason Crosby
-Brandon Jackson
-4 of the 5 current packers WRs
-Patrick Lee

He signed
- Cullen Jenkins
- Atari Bigby
- Charles Woodson
- Ryan Pickett

I think he has a great track record so far.
how does Sherman get any credit for us drafting Rodgers?

Burger
01-21-2009, 10:44 PM
I thought Ted's first draft was 2006, that was my mistake.

narf029
01-21-2009, 10:46 PM
During most of the year I hated McCarthy, but a few weeks after the season I've changed my mind. He does run the offense, and on paper it looks great. However, he seemed to choke late in the games. ESPN analysts and writers like to blame Rodgers for this, but McCarthy simply took the ball out of Rodgers' hands in some games we ended up losing. I got a little bit tired of seeing us run it 3 times when we get inside the 10, and settling for a field goal. However, he is young, he is passionate, the team showed up to play every game but the Saints game, so I changed my mind and am happy he's our coach. His best years are ahead of him.

GB12
01-21-2009, 10:51 PM
I don't think McCarthy did a bad job this season. The one exception that really pissed me off was the Carolina game. There should have been no question about going for it on 4th and goal at the one at the end of the game. The decission to not go for it lost us that game. Even if we didn't make it we'd still have been better off than having the field goal. Carolina would have had to go at least 70 yards to bring it into field goal range with 2 minutes left and they were backed up so much that the play book would have been extremely limited. If we went for it and got it, we win. If we went for it and didn't get in, overtime.

tjsunstein
01-21-2009, 10:51 PM
I feel the only two games we were out of from Jump Street were the Cowboys game and Saints game. We were in the Dallas game for a while until Harris got hurt then Bigby and they beat us a couple times on a pass to convert or score. We all know how we lost the Saints game. If we give Brees 6 seconds to decide who he wants to throw to then of course we're gonna get torched. Other than those games I feel we were in position to win the rest going into the fourth.

narf029
01-21-2009, 11:01 PM
I don't think McCarthy did a bad job this season. The one exception that really pissed me off was the Carolina game. There should have been no question about going for it on 4th and goal at the one at the end of the game. The decission to not go for it lost us that game. Even if we didn't make it we'd still have been better off than having the field goal. Carolina would have had to go at least 70 yards to bring it into field goal range with 2 minutes left and they were backed up so much that the play book would have been extremely limited. If we went for it and got it, we win. If we went for it and didn't get in, overtime.

That's the game that sticks out in my mind for McCarthy's failing. Also the Vikings game. We got in position to kick a 54 yard field goal, and he elects to run the ball and settle for a 50+yard field goal to win or lose the game. That seemed dumb to me at the time, but like I said I've moved on and I'll just trust that he's learning from the mistakes he makes on the job.

Mr. Stiller
01-21-2009, 11:21 PM
1) So does Ted Thompson, in fact, some say he's one of the best draft evaluators around.
2) Capers is a good start at the top, he knows what he's doing. Let's see who else fills his staff, but Winston Moss is a good one, a future DC one day for sure.
3) That attitude is huge, no question. That's why I wonder how much of it has to do with it being BLITZBURGH in general, the steel city, former Steel Curtain, etc. I hope with the former head coach and former successful DC Capers, our attitude can get tough too. We'll see.

Was that Dom Capers in Houston? With that AWFUL 3-4?

narf029
01-21-2009, 11:33 PM
Was that Dom Capers in Houston? With that AWFUL 3-4?

Yes, but with respect to him, Kailee Wong was his best rush linebacker.

TitleTown088
01-21-2009, 11:49 PM
I thought Ted's first draft was 2006, that was my mistake.

Which is significant. Ted picked him when no one wanted, and now the appears to be a franchise QB. He did this with a HOF QB on the roster, then had the Balls to pick him over Favre too.

Mr. Stiller
01-21-2009, 11:50 PM
Yes, but with respect to him, Kailee Wong was his best rush linebacker.

He never developed Jason Babin who, started to really take off until he got fired and got buried.

johbur
01-22-2009, 01:50 AM
Which is significant. Ted picked him when no one wanted, and now the appears to be a franchise QB. He did this with a HOF QB on the roster, then had the Balls to pick him over Favre too.

TT had the very unenviable task of inheriting a declining Favre. He had the foresight to jump all over Rodgers. Think of all the fools that let him slide, but that's the joy of hindsight. Look at what happened with the Dolphins, Broncos and Cowboys in the years after their HOF QBs moved on. Terrible results. A-Rod didn't have the record, but the offense wasn't the primary culprit. Also, a difference of 30 points in those tight games and GB could have been 13-3 again, even if half those were won it would have been 10-6 and in the playoffs as the NFC North champs.

With TT, sometimes his cojones and gravitas are annoying, see Harrell, Justin. That being said, his early round success is in stark contrast to Sherman's ineptitude. He's hit on Rodgers, Hawk, he bailed out of R1 last year and he's been solid in the R2 every year, with only T-Murph's neck keeping him from being solid. Jury out on Brohm, but still really good value.

I'm looking forward to seeing how he retools the defense.

marshfield
01-22-2009, 11:44 AM
I was completely owned in the posts above and I don't even realize it

fixed it for you

stealthbomber
01-23-2009, 05:21 PM
Anyone know: Do any of our guys on defense have any experience playing a 3-4, either in the NFL or college?

middlelinebacker54
01-23-2009, 05:49 PM
LE Johnny Jolly
NT Ryan Pickett
RE Cullen Jenkins
LOLB Aaron Kampman
LILB A.J. Hawk
RILB Nick Barnett
ROLB Julius Peppers
CB Charles Woodson
CB Al Harris
FS Nick Collins
SS Atari Bigby

GB12
01-23-2009, 06:04 PM
Anyone know: Do any of our guys on defense have any experience playing a 3-4, either in the NFL or college?
I'm pretty sure no. Poppinga played in a 3-3-5 his senior year; I think that's the closest we have.

NickCollins36
01-23-2009, 08:22 PM
I'm not even getting my hopes up for Peppers

johbur
01-23-2009, 11:46 PM
I won't get my hopes up for Peppers, as TT not a block-buster type of FA seeker. He likes mid-level guys and guys without a lot of better options so they tear all the pennies from the death-clutch he grips them with. Is Ted a Scotsman?

That being said, Peppers teamed with the current guys and the potential defender at #9 (Orakpo, Raji, Malaleuga, Jenkins) would mean some solid depth occurring and the GB defense being a whole lot better off, personnel wise. Think of the training camp battles for roster spots if Peppers came in, Jolly didn't take a crash course in prison showers and then the draft.

Also, Kenny Pettway coming back from injury along with Jenkens, and he looked really athletic in the short time he had with the team. He's another guy that'll be fighting to the death for a roster spot. His frame is that 3-4 OLB and with how solid he was on teams and had started working into the rotation as a designated 3rd down pass-rusher prior to injury, I am hoping he gets a solid look.

stealthbomber
01-24-2009, 12:15 AM
Getting some love nationally from b2:

Link provided for full article, here are some snippets:
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/bucky_brooks/01/23/scouts.buzz/index.html

Capers was instrumental in the development of the Steelers' "Blitz-burgh" defense from 1992 to '94. He has used some variation of the 3-4 to orchestrate four top 10 defenses during his tenure as a defensive coordinator or head coach. In fact, his defenses with the Steelers (1994) and Jaguars (1999) led the league in sacks, while also finishing in the top five in total defense and points allowed.
Cullen Jenkins could emerge as the biggest star. He has flashed big-time potential as a defensive tackle/end throughout his five-year career, and though his size (6-foot-2, 305 pounds) and strength make him an effective run stopper, his underrated pass rush skills (17.5 career sacks) should shine in the 3-4. Keep in mind that Capers spent last season observing former Pro Bowl pick Richard Seymour thriving in a similar role with the Patriots. Jenkins has the skills to excel in a comparable role.
Although some will question whether Kampman can make the transition to outside linebacker in a 3-4, the two-time Pro Bowl pick shouldn't have any trouble developing into a potent outside rusher. He already has 50.5 career sacks, including 37 in the past three seasons, and is a high motor player with the skills to be an impact player off the edge. Besides, Capers successfully transformed other defensive ends into productive outside linebackers in his scheme. He used a similar tactic at Jacksonville in 1999 with Tony Brackens, who finished with 12 sacks that season.
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/si/2009/writers/bucky_brooks/01/23/scouts.buzz/aaron-kampmann.jpg
Poppinga, on the other hand, may achieve stardom in the Packers' new scheme, but his ability to thrive as a pass rusher will be pivotal. The 3-4 is most effective when both outside linebackers are pass rushing threats
Much has been made of the Packers' surprising change to the 3-4, but the team has the personnel in place to make a smooth transition.

PACKmanN
01-24-2009, 12:21 AM
LE Johnny Jolly
NT Ryan Pickett
RE Cullen Jenkins
LOLB Aaron Kampman
LILB A.J. Hawk
RILB Nick Barnett
ROLB Julius Peppers
CB Charles Woodson
CB Al Harris
FS Nick Collins
SS Atari Bigby

Harrell will easily win the DE spot over Jolly if someone like Canty isn't brought in.

johbur
01-24-2009, 12:26 AM
Will that be before or after his 27.44th back surgery? ;D

On a side note, anybody follow Kraig Urbik of UW this year? Scott has him down as pretty solid at the Senior Bowl and I'm wondering if he'd be worth a late round pick?

narf029
01-24-2009, 12:33 AM
On a side note, anybody follow Kraig Urbik of UW this year? Scott has him down as pretty solid at the Senior Bowl and I'm wondering if he'd be worth a late round pick?

He doesn't really fit with us... but I'd love to see him. I think our short-distance run game has been missing something ever since Kevin Barry went down with that injury, and I'd like to see McCarthy utilize a big run-blocking guard/tackle in the tight end spot in short yardage situations again. It was always so predictable, but it seemed to work like clockwork. Other than that pipe dream of mine though, I don't see us adding Urbik. I also don't see him getting out of the 5th, and probably going late-3rd or early 4th, which is too early for us IMO.

PACKmanN
01-24-2009, 12:43 AM
Will that be before or after his 27.44th back surgery? ;D

On a side note, anybody follow Kraig Urbik of UW this year? Scott has him down as pretty solid at the Senior Bowl and I'm wondering if he'd be worth a late round pick?

I too thought early in the season we should take him but when I read about how is isn't athletic then I backed off. He won't fit the ZBS.

Pokeys
01-25-2009, 04:09 AM
Anybody know much about Johnny Williams of Kentucky? Too me he looks like he could be a good sleeper pick. Has a bit of past, but plays physical and aggressive and has the size to play outside or inside 6'3 244. Please share some more info if you've watched him play.

bah! wrong thread lol.

soccerericl
01-25-2009, 07:51 PM
Aaron Rouse could be an intriguing fit for one of the outside linebackers. He played in the "Rover" position at VT and this could give him the experience to flourish. He is a physical freak being 6'4" 223lbs if he put on some weight in the off season he could be in the run to start or at least get mixed playing time between safety and linebacker. Personally I think the packers should find a way to get him onto the field, he is a play maker. Sometimes he is inconsistent but with playing time this should improve. Also he would be our best covering linebacker. What do you guys think about having him as one of our starting olb's in the 3-4

GB12
01-25-2009, 07:53 PM
Absolutely not. Rouse isn't even physical even to play strong safety. He's got size, but he's so soft.

Smokey
01-26-2009, 09:56 AM
Reports from the Senior Bowl say that the Packers are talking with and getting a long look at DT BJ Raji, OLBs Brian Cushing and Clay Matthews (who's father Clay played in Cleveland's 3-4 and who's uncle is Bruce Matthews), and DE Lawrence Sidbury who projects to a 3-4 OLB.

Matthews in particular is intiguing. I like the kid and he could be a potential second round pick. The article slots Matthews on the weak side and Cushing on the strong.

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/38257189.html

PACKmanN
01-26-2009, 11:21 AM
I read this on another site but did Matthews' father, Bruce, play with TT? If so could TT draft him?

badgerbacker
01-26-2009, 11:29 AM
I read this on another site but did Matthews' father, Bruce, play with TT? If so could TT draft him?We could draft him, but it would have nothing to do with Teddy playing with his father. I liken TT to a robot; I don't believe he has "feelings" and if he does they certainly don't have an impact on his decisions.

PACKmanN
01-26-2009, 11:33 AM
We could draft him, but it would have nothing to do with Teddy playing with his father. I liken TT to a robot; I don't believe he has "feelings" and if he does they certainly don't have an impact on his decisions.

He drafted Jason Thompson, who was his first successful trade up, who is bothers with that OT we had.

cuzifelt1ikeit
01-26-2009, 11:39 AM
He drafted Jason Thompson, who was his first successful trade up, who is bothers with that OT we had.

i think you mean jeremy, but didnt he also cut his brother later on in camp?