Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

What's up with all the ILB's in mock drafts?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Green Bay Packers
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Kampman74


Joined: 30 Apr 2007
Posts: 6885
PostPosted: Sun Feb 17, 2013 10:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

incognito_man wrote:
Kal-El wrote:


Don't get me wrong. I think we could certainly use some depth at the spot.

However, this is 34 ILB depth we're talking about. It's basically the ZBS RB on defense -- a disposable position. If we're not drafting a starter or some truly special talent, going ILB higher than 4th is a waste.


No, it's not. Just ask San Fran.



What round was Bowman drafted in? It wasn't like they were going out of their way to get stud ILBs. Our OLBs are going to be better than what they have. You cannot have everything.
How often are the ILBs on the field for San Fran? It presented some mismatches in the Superbowl when Bowman was on Boldin for one TD. The way the Ravens played VD was to put a corner on him. Against a lot of passing teams you don't have 4 linebackers on every play. So it does present the problem of what is a player worth if he cannot play every play and when should you try to draft him. If you are not going to get a game-changer/breaker in round one, I say don't get one.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Scuba St3ve


Joined: 19 Mar 2012
Posts: 201
Location: Ashwaubenon
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 12:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

spilltray wrote:
CentralFC wrote:
spilltray wrote:
CentralFC wrote:
That's awful logic. That defense was the worst in league history. The only reason we won 15 games was because our offense played at an equally historical level.

To stand pat and say, 'hey, we're good, we've won games with who we got,' is asinine. We need to get better. We have youth at literally every position on this team as well as potential (DBs, DL, OL, WR, TE, QB) but not linebacker. Bishop is great, yes. But you draft to improve your football team. Being content with Hawk and his play is foolish. I'm not calling for his release, because he's dependable as hell, but would you be fine if we kept Newhouse at LT and didn't address that issue because "we won 15 games" and "went to the playoffs with him"?

You build to improve the team. As it stands, ILB is a weakness. We got gashed in the middle of the field these past two years. Bishop has his weaknesses. Why not upgrade?


Worst in league history by YARDAGE. An overall useless stat. They were middling in points. The offense was so good, teams went into big play hurry up for entire games from the opening stat trying to keep up. Was it a great defense? Obviously not. Was it one of the all time worst defenses? Absolutely not there as well. It was the same group of LBs that was a top D the year before, and pretty decent this year. The changes were on the front and back end, not the LB level.


It was one of the worst defenses in league history, yes.


In YARDS, sure... who gives a damn? In points, they were 19th. 22.4 points per game. That is not historically bad at all.


That defense was [inappropriate/removed] do not try to defend it
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
spilltray


Joined: 09 Jan 2006
Posts: 10337
Location: Green Bay, WI
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 12:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Scuba St3ve wrote:
That defense was [inappropriate/removed] do not try to defend it


Was it a great defense? No
Was it a good defense? No
Was it a mediocre to poor defense? Yes
Was it a historically bad defense? No

It's all about perspective. The defense wasn't a strength, sure, but it was not one of the worst defenses in NFL history. The only statistic it was awful in was yards which is largely worthless. In every efficiency number, yards/play, turnovers, points, scoring efficiency, you name it, it was a middling to slightly poor defense. Anyone claiming it was historically bad is looking at a bulk yardage stat that is largely irrelevant because it's inflated by teams trying to keep up with a historic offense, and facing an offense that scored very quickly giving them more offensive opportunities.

I'm not saying it was anything other than a slightly below average defense. Show me something other than bulk yards that would point to it being that bad. If you want to use yards as your marker, then Drew Brees, Tom Brady, Matt Stafford, and Eli Manning all had better seasons in 2011 than Aaron Rodgers, and in 2012, Brees, Stafford, Romo, Brady, Ryan, P. Manning, and Luck all were better QBs. I think we know the list of QBs who even MIGHT have been better than Rodgers these past 2 seasons isn't nearly that large.
_________________
Wilfred wrote:
Memory is like the Packers when they are behind by two touchdowns in the 4th quarter... It comes back.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
incognito_man


Joined: 11 Jan 2007
Posts: 30810
Location: Madison
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 1:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Kampman74 wrote:
incognito_man wrote:
Kal-El wrote:


Don't get me wrong. I think we could certainly use some depth at the spot.

However, this is 34 ILB depth we're talking about. It's basically the ZBS RB on defense -- a disposable position. If we're not drafting a starter or some truly special talent, going ILB higher than 4th is a waste.


No, it's not. Just ask San Fran.



What round was Bowman drafted in? It wasn't like they were going out of their way to get stud ILBs. Our OLBs are going to be better than what they have. You cannot have everything.
How often are the ILBs on the field for San Fran? It presented some mismatches in the Superbowl when Bowman was on Boldin for one TD. The way the Ravens played VD was to put a corner on him. Against a lot of passing teams you don't have 4 linebackers on every play. So it does present the problem of what is a player worth if he cannot play every play and when should you try to draft him. If you are not going to get a game-changer/breaker in round one, I say don't get one.


3rd round.

I didn't see that this discussion was limited to 1st round ILB. Many people are including ILBs in rounds 2-7 as well.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Pugger


Joined: 01 May 2010
Posts: 8125
Location: N. Fort Myers, FL
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 9:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

CentralFC wrote:
Common folly of what we want now?

How about replacing Hawk in a year or two and not being sold on an undersized DJ Smith?

Even more, what was the point of drafting Perry then? Isn't he what we technically wanted now?


I'm not either. This and safety are 2 areas of need for us. The others could be center if EDS isn't the answer and RB.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Pugger


Joined: 01 May 2010
Posts: 8125
Location: N. Fort Myers, FL
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 9:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

justo wrote:
You didn't hear? Bishop is going to get hurt again and we are cutting Hawk, to save a couple million. We need two new ILBs. Toughness. Also our DBs suck at tackling. We need to look at tackle first DBs. Maybe draft four SSs. Toughness. All in the box type guys. Also Raji sucks. Trade him. Pickett is old. We need three new DL too. New defense. Fire Capers. Toughness.


I don't think Hawk is going anywhere anytime soon. He is held in higher regard by his peers and coaches than he is by fans.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CentralFC


Joined: 03 Feb 2011
Posts: 3884
Location: Evanston, IL
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 12:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pugger wrote:
justo wrote:
You didn't hear? Bishop is going to get hurt again and we are cutting Hawk, to save a couple million. We need two new ILBs. Toughness. Also our DBs suck at tackling. We need to look at tackle first DBs. Maybe draft four SSs. Toughness. All in the box type guys. Also Raji sucks. Trade him. Pickett is old. We need three new DL too. New defense. Fire Capers. Toughness.


I don't think Hawk is going anywhere anytime soon. He is held in higher regard by his peers and coaches than he is by fans.


And that's fine.

But upgrading is not out of the question. We shouldn't be content with his play, which is incredibly underwhelming despite him being held in high regard by his peers (which I'll assume is for his availability and experience moreso than raw ability).

I just feel like the logic that says we're fine at ILB is crazy talk. You draft and develop, and what happens post Hawk (in two years or so)? What happens if Bishop goes down? It doesn't hurt to groom another young ILB that is capable of being a starter in a few years. Yes, we have DJ Smith, but he has clear limitations. As does Jones, and as does Manning.
_________________
Simian07:
Quote:
I'd argue Jordy is probably around the 30th-40th best receiver in the NFL, maybe 50th.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Pugger


Joined: 01 May 2010
Posts: 8125
Location: N. Fort Myers, FL
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 1:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

CentralFC wrote:
Pugger wrote:
justo wrote:
You didn't hear? Bishop is going to get hurt again and we are cutting Hawk, to save a couple million. We need two new ILBs. Toughness. Also our DBs suck at tackling. We need to look at tackle first DBs. Maybe draft four SSs. Toughness. All in the box type guys. Also Raji sucks. Trade him. Pickett is old. We need three new DL too. New defense. Fire Capers. Toughness.


I don't think Hawk is going anywhere anytime soon. He is held in higher regard by his peers and coaches than he is by fans.


And that's fine.

But upgrading is not out of the question. We shouldn't be content with his play, which is incredibly underwhelming despite him being held in high regard by his peers (which I'll assume is for his availability and experience moreso than raw ability).

I just feel like the logic that says we're fine at ILB is crazy talk. You draft and develop, and what happens post Hawk (in two years or so)? What happens if Bishop goes down? It doesn't hurt to groom another young ILB that is capable of being a starter in a few years. Yes, we have DJ Smith, but he has clear limitations. As does Jones, and as does Manning.


I would love to upgrade Hawk too. He's Steady Eddy but not much else. I'm just saying to folks hoping we get rid of Hawk I don't see that happening unless we get a real stud in the upcoming draft. Confused
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
NCPackFan


Joined: 12 Jan 2013
Posts: 2071
Location: Kinston, NC
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 3:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think a lot of people get hung up on the fact that Hawk was drafted 5th and never really stood out the way a Ray Lewis has. As someone else put it, Hawk is "steady Eddy."

With that said, the only way I really see the need for an upgrade or yet another ILB is if Hawk is gone. The fact is that we have a lot of young guys that have all had their moments. The problem is that the injury bug has gotten in the way of a lot of them. Personally, I say we resign Brad Jones because he can cover; Hawk, not so much but then again, when we drafted him we were looking for a run stuffer which he is. If he's really THAT bad at coverage and doesn't seem to be improving, I honestly think we should trade him for something.

Another poster mentioned Manning being a wild card which he certainly is. So with that said, I think we should wait a year. I honestly, do. We had a ton of different guys step into Bishop's role who were borderline rookies. If ANY of them really stepped up and played as if they could be starter material, we'd be talking about a big contract for one of them instead of having another Erik Walden type around. This is the player development argument.

There are ILB prospects in this draft that I really like, mainly Nico Johnson and AJ Klein, however, if we're going to be wasting a pick on them(IMO) we have to address the need at FS first as well as our other needs. I just don't see the need of ILB being of more importance than FS, DL(NT in particular), WR(at this point), C, and CB.

I think the biggest wild card of the debate in general is that we once again have a LOAD of players coming back from injury; tons of question marks that will make grading the aftermath of our draft much tougher.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
PossibleCabbage


Joined: 25 Apr 2011
Posts: 3297
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 4:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm honestly more interested in acquiring OLB depth than ILB depth (since Perry's an unknown, Walden isn't good, and you can find guys better than Zombo and Moses.)

But if you want to spend a fourth round pick on a guy like Klein, that's fine. It's a good solid depth pick at a player who could improve.

But guys like Minter, T'eo, and Brown in the first round? Yuck. If guys are disappointed with our ILBs now, how will they feel about spending a first on one of those guys and they end up worse than Hawk and Bishop?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
NCPackFan


Joined: 12 Jan 2013
Posts: 2071
Location: Kinston, NC
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 4:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

PossibleCabbage wrote:
I'm honestly more interested in acquiring OLB depth than ILB depth (since Perry's an unknown, Walden isn't good, and you can find guys better than Zombo and Moses.)

But if you want to spend a fourth round pick on a guy like Klein, that's fine. It's a good solid depth pick at a player who could improve.

But guys like Minter, T'eo, and Brown in the first round? Yuck. If guys are disappointed with our ILBs now, how will they feel about spending a first on one of those guys and they end up worse than Hawk and Bishop?


I couldn't agree more. We need to be stocking up at OLB, not ILB...

Again, injuries were a result of poor play at ILB last year. Poor players at the DB position were a result of poor play last year as well; especially at Safety if you bar Slowpoke Williams' insultingly bad year...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ayt


Joined: 27 Apr 2009
Posts: 912
PostPosted: Thu Feb 21, 2013 12:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

We badly need an ILB who can cover.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
boratt


Joined: 04 Sep 2007
Posts: 970
PostPosted: Thu Feb 21, 2013 1:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

ayt wrote:
We badly need an ILB who can cover.


Fast and a star tackler in open space wouldn't hurt either.
_________________

sig courtesy of BrettFavre004. THANKS!!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ugLymayNe


Joined: 31 Oct 2006
Posts: 12447
Location: Wisconsin
PostPosted: Thu Feb 21, 2013 3:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

boratt wrote:
ayt wrote:
We badly need an ILB who can cover.


Fast and a star tackler in open space wouldn't hurt either.



We basically want to take Bishop and give him Brad Jones' coverage abilities. Laughing
_________________
@PJHotel_

Sig brought to you by Justo
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Green Bay Packers All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
Page 4 of 4

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group