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

Our Defensive Line Woes
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Green Bay Packers
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Pugger


Joined: 01 May 2010
Posts: 7918
Location: Titletown for the summer!
PostPosted: Sun Jan 26, 2014 1:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

DavidatMIZZOU wrote:
Looking at our FAs, anyone else think we might keep Wilson? I see almost universally in mock off-seasons that we let him walk. But he should be pretty easy to sign. He is a solid role player that I think got lost in the shuffle this season. He will be significantly cheaper to retain than Raji or Pickett and probably Jolly.


I have my doubts about Wilson. Wasn't there more than one occasion when he was a healthy scratch?
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AlexGreen#20


Joined: 13 Jun 2012
Posts: 5467
PostPosted: Sun Jan 26, 2014 1:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Kampman74 wrote:
AlexGreen#20 wrote:

You've got a huge chunk of chips sitting on Jones developing, and not just developing but developing in a certain way. I'm not sure I'd be comfortable with that.


But how would that be any different than any other first round pick in any year? How can we say that Datone is a bust at this point in time? Our rookies similar to the Pats and a few other teams rookies don't even play that much their first year. I mean I am no expert by any means, but how can one tell what this team wanted out of Datone his first season and that he cannot improve on some things his second season?


I don't think anybody is saying that Jones is going to be a bust. I think that most people expect Jones to be a very good player.

The reason I express concern is that if you want to play that 2 gapping 34 look as your base, at least one of the DEs has to be able to absorb that double team, and I'm not sure that either Daniels or Jones has it in them. Jones was a liability in that look as a rookie to the point they put Boyd in over him, and while Daniels is stout to scale, a lot of times want a bigger dude in there.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DavidatMIZZOU


Joined: 09 Apr 2009
Posts: 9056
Location: The ZOU
PostPosted: Sun Jan 26, 2014 1:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pugger wrote:
DavidatMIZZOU wrote:
Looking at our FAs, anyone else think we might keep Wilson? I see almost universally in mock off-seasons that we let him walk. But he should be pretty easy to sign. He is a solid role player that I think got lost in the shuffle this season. He will be significantly cheaper to retain than Raji or Pickett and probably Jolly.


I have my doubts about Wilson. Wasn't there more than one occasion when he was a healthy scratch?


I do too. But it wasn't too long ago he was playing a lot of snaps for us. I don't know if he was practicing poorly or he just got lost in the shuffle. His game was similar (obviously not as good) to Pickett and Jolly. Mike Daniels played well enough that you had to play him. And we added Datone Jones, who as a first round selection was going to see the field unless he was horrible. The puzzler to me is that toward the end of the season, Boyd started getting snaps one would have thought Wilson would see. Was it because the coaches wanted to see what Boyd could do and he did well? Or was Wilson just no good?

But anyway, I'm just saying Wilson might be an easy, cheap re-sign for our DL that could lose a lot of pieces.
_________________
GO PACK GO!

mistakebytehlak wrote:

My god it must be so terrible to have three teams that consistently make the playoffs
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
NCPackFan


Joined: 12 Jan 2013
Posts: 2000
Location: Kinston, NC
PostPosted: Sun Jan 26, 2014 8:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

spilltray wrote:
SDN40 wrote:
incognito_man wrote:
SDN40 wrote:
If by a fine player, you mean a tweener who won't excel at the position he was drafted for, or the position he was moved to, then yes - he is a fine player who at best is a lifelong backup and is part of the 25th ranked defense. I guess I have the bar set a bit higher when it comes to second round draft picks. I can only hope our future second round picks don't have the same "success". Neal is no different than Brohm in my eyes.


yeah, then there's no reasoning with you...


The reasoning is simple. Neal isnt any better at DL than Brohm was at QB.
Again, we are talking second round picks here - not 6th rounders


That's just not true. Neal has shown ability, both at DE and OLB, but has mostly been limited by injury. Brohm didn't even belong on an NFL roster. That is not even close to comparable in terms of "busting" on a 2nd round pick.


Applause

That IS the correct answer. You know, I seem to remember people talking about how the DL in a 3-4 was supposed to push the pocket and eat up blocks while stuffing the run, as opposed to a 4-3 front where everyone along the D-line is essentially a pass-rusher to some degree. The issues I'm seeing with our DL is that we too often run that 2-4 scheme. That said, we basically run a 4-3, but with an extra DB rather than a LB.

This goes back to Dom and the argument I made last week about Dom not playing to his players' strengths. That and injuries is really all that needs to be said here. Sure you have a logical argument in terms of drafting, but you can't expect every single player to be a stud. We need to get back to a simpler, more physical, basic 3-4 like we had in 2010 which was successful and find some good players in this draft. They're there, we just need to go get them and focus solely on the defense sparing a pass-catching TE and MAYBE a WR in the late rounds.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
NCPackFan


Joined: 12 Jan 2013
Posts: 2000
Location: Kinston, NC
PostPosted: Sun Jan 26, 2014 8:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

gizmo2012 wrote:

BJ Raji - rated 3rd worst starting DE in the NFL, too slow to play 5 technique DE and too unmotivated to be consistent. Raji believes he is worth more than he is.


The knock on Raji on draft day was that it was very easy to overplay him and take away his effectiveness. Remember Ron Brace? Remember how a lot of people wanted Ron Brace when he got cut?

That said, it's pretty easy to over play a guy that's 6-2 337 lbs. He was best when he was rotating in and out with Pickett. We've abandoned that, hence his horrible numbers, and the fact he's playing out of position the majority of the time. He's a NT, not a DE.

gizmo2012 wrote:

Mike Neal - head scratcher on why he was moved to OLB but the guy is a good football player and is worth keeping if the money is right.


I couldn't agree with you more here. I think the reason he moved to OLB is that he could "set the edge" as they say, and he did get 5 sacks this year. That said, I think he's out of position too and was MUCH better and MUCH more effective as a 5-tech.


gizmo2012 wrote:

Conclusion - with Raji and Pickett in the game team speed issues were painfully obvious, add to that slow ILB's, average to poor safeties, and starting OLB's hurt a chunk of the year and you have the Packers 2013 defense. What was painfully obvious watching the Seahawks and 49ers go at it was team speed on defense compared to Green Bay, that must be addressed and you don't do that by doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.


I have to disagree with the emboldened part. Both Hawk and Jones were among the fastest LB's coming out of college. The real issue with the ILB's is that Jones was a cover LB and offered little to nothing in the run game. As a result, opposing teams then turned their attention to Hawk which is the exact opposite. We also didn't really have much depth.[/b]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AlexGreen#20


Joined: 13 Jun 2012
Posts: 5467
PostPosted: Sun Jan 26, 2014 11:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

NCPackFan wrote:
spilltray wrote:
SDN40 wrote:
incognito_man wrote:
SDN40 wrote:
If by a fine player, you mean a tweener who won't excel at the position he was drafted for, or the position he was moved to, then yes - he is a fine player who at best is a lifelong backup and is part of the 25th ranked defense. I guess I have the bar set a bit higher when it comes to second round draft picks. I can only hope our future second round picks don't have the same "success". Neal is no different than Brohm in my eyes.


yeah, then there's no reasoning with you...


The reasoning is simple. Neal isnt any better at DL than Brohm was at QB.
Again, we are talking second round picks here - not 6th rounders


That's just not true. Neal has shown ability, both at DE and OLB, but has mostly been limited by injury. Brohm didn't even belong on an NFL roster. That is not even close to comparable in terms of "busting" on a 2nd round pick.


Applause

That IS the correct answer. You know, I seem to remember people talking about how the DL in a 3-4 was supposed to push the pocket and eat up blocks while stuffing the run, as opposed to a 4-3 front where everyone along the D-line is essentially a pass-rusher to some degree. The issues I'm seeing with our DL is that we too often run that 2-4 scheme. That said, we basically run a 4-3, but with an extra DB rather than a LB.

This goes back to Dom and the argument I made last week about Dom not playing to his players' strengths. That and injuries is really all that needs to be said here. Sure you have a logical argument in terms of drafting, but you can't expect every single player to be a stud. We need to get back to a simpler, more physical, basic 3-4 like we had in 2010 which was successful and find some good players in this draft. They're there, we just need to go get them and focus solely on the defense sparing a pass-catching TE and MAYBE a WR in the late rounds.


Not sure if the 6 man box thing is the issue.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ugLymayNe


Joined: 31 Oct 2006
Posts: 12366
Location: Wisconsin
PostPosted: Sun Jan 26, 2014 11:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

AlexGreen#20 wrote:
Not sure if the 6 man box thing is the issue.


It's not. It's the incompetent play at Mike and the fact MD Jennings, Davon House and a rookie 6th round pick Micah Hyde played so many snaps. Hopefully Brad Jones either reverts back to his 2012 play or is replaced, Jennings' is replaced and Hayward comes back and plays like he did his rookie year after missing 2013. I mean, all three of those DB's had over a 100 QB rating when thrown at and Brad Jones is seemingly two seconds slow to react.
_________________
@PJHotel_

Sig brought to you by Justo
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CWood21


Moderator
Joined: 27 Jun 2008
Posts: 34996
Location: 'Merica
PostPosted: Sun Jan 26, 2014 11:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

SDN40 wrote:
The reasoning is simple. Neal isnt any better at DL than Brohm was at QB.
Again, we are talking second round picks here - not 6th rounders


No...not even close. The game was too fast for Brohm, and as a result he washed out of the league. He was out of the Packers locker room after one year despite being a second round pick. Mike Neal didn't. For that simple fact, Neal >>> Brohm and isn't even close.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
packattack86


Joined: 20 Sep 2009
Posts: 2902
Location: Springfield, IL
PostPosted: Sun Jan 26, 2014 11:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I do take issue w/ the fact that some of the d-lineman TT has selected seem like better fits in a 4-3. Guys like Jones, Worthy, Daniels, etc... Now if Jones can add a little bulk he could be a solid 3-4 end, and Daniels has certainly blossomed into a nice inside rusher, but Worthy screams 4-3. In that draft I would have preferred Devon Still due to his build (6'5" 315) being better suited for the 5 tech.

The fact is TT needs to add taller, bigger guys w/ good length. In this draft there are a few such as Tuitt, Hageman, Quarles, etc...
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AlexGreen#20


Joined: 13 Jun 2012
Posts: 5467
PostPosted: Sun Jan 26, 2014 11:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

packattack86 wrote:
I do take issue w/ the fact that some of the d-lineman TT has selected seem like better fits in a 4-3. Guys like Jones, Worthy, Daniels, etc... Now if Jones can add a little bulk he could be a solid 3-4 end, and Daniels has certainly blossomed into a nice inside rusher, but Worthy screams 4-3. In that draft I would have preferred Devon Still due to his build (6'5" 315) being better suited for the 5 tech.

The fact is TT needs to add taller, bigger guys w/ good length. In this draft there are a few such as Tuitt, Hageman, Quarles, etc...


We hardly run a 3-4, we averaged 4.93 DBs per play. You need the one gap guys just as much as you do those bigger guys. We've had run plugs and had for a long time with Raji and Pickett. We haven't had the smaller guys, hence the drafting.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
palmy50


Joined: 26 Nov 2006
Posts: 13855
PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2014 12:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

deathstar wrote:
CentralFC wrote:
palmy50 wrote:
The DL is tough guys. By far the highest bust rate on a skills group after QB. The jump to the NFL is HUGE there. NFL OL are very well coached and will hold the hell out of ya. Also why I will never be a fan of small school DL.

Anyway, every team in the league has a few that did not pan out for them on the DL. You need to keep swinging at the position though. History would say the odds of finding a real stud on the DL late in the draft is next to impossible. How many HOF DL in NFL history were very high draft picks? Damn near all of them! How many late round/UDFA DL have even been starters in the history of the league. Sadly, very few!


So value in round one skyrockets partially because of bust rate. That's very interesting. I never thought of it in that perspective.

So when we "rank players," are the defensive linemen actually as talented (example of Clowney being top three in this class overall) as their ranking indicates, or is it their ranking relative to the rest of position that is composed intoto the bigger picture? Because someone like Bridgewater might be "better" than Clowney, but Clowney will be much better than an average defensive linemen. I don't know if that makes sense...probably doesn't.


Probably take a look at Shariff Floyd from this past draft. Much better than a lot of UTs but compared to the rest of the players, NFL GMs didn't value him much.


Floyd is a very good football player. Fell because he needed the right home more than anything. Can't two gap and a less than special pass rusher as well. Just a very active run plug in a league that is not holding a real high draft premium there right now.

If you want to go high draft weekend on the DL, ya better be able to either two gap or get after the QB. It's that simple really.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AmishMafia


Joined: 07 Apr 2011
Posts: 274
Location: Las Vegas
PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2014 11:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

AlexGreen#20 wrote:
packattack86 wrote:
I do take issue w/ the fact that some of the d-lineman TT has selected seem like better fits in a 4-3. Guys like Jones, Worthy, Daniels, etc... Now if Jones can add a little bulk he could be a solid 3-4 end, and Daniels has certainly blossomed into a nice inside rusher, but Worthy screams 4-3. In that draft I would have preferred Devon Still due to his build (6'5" 315) being better suited for the 5 tech.

The fact is TT needs to add taller, bigger guys w/ good length. In this draft there are a few such as Tuitt, Hageman, Quarles, etc...


We hardly run a 3-4, we averaged 4.93 DBs per play. You need the one gap guys just as much as you do those bigger guys. We've had run plugs and had for a long time with Raji and Pickett. We haven't had the smaller guys, hence the drafting.


Maybe we run the 2-4 so much because we don't have enough reliable 5Ts.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AlexGreen#20


Joined: 13 Jun 2012
Posts: 5467
PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2014 11:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

AmishMafia wrote:
AlexGreen#20 wrote:
packattack86 wrote:
I do take issue w/ the fact that some of the d-lineman TT has selected seem like better fits in a 4-3. Guys like Jones, Worthy, Daniels, etc... Now if Jones can add a little bulk he could be a solid 3-4 end, and Daniels has certainly blossomed into a nice inside rusher, but Worthy screams 4-3. In that draft I would have preferred Devon Still due to his build (6'5" 315) being better suited for the 5 tech.

The fact is TT needs to add taller, bigger guys w/ good length. In this draft there are a few such as Tuitt, Hageman, Quarles, etc...


We hardly run a 3-4, we averaged 4.93 DBs per play. You need the one gap guys just as much as you do those bigger guys. We've had run plugs and had for a long time with Raji and Pickett. We haven't had the smaller guys, hence the drafting.


Maybe we run the 2-4 so much because we don't have enough reliable 5Ts.


Doubt it, Capers has always liked his nickel.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ugLymayNe


Joined: 31 Oct 2006
Posts: 12366
Location: Wisconsin
PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2014 11:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think that if the Packers had a real 5-tech, Capers would use the base D more often.
_________________
@PJHotel_

Sig brought to you by Justo
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tongue-Splitter


Joined: 30 Aug 2013
Posts: 2029
PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2014 9:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've always thought that height / size was the biggest drawback to our defensive line. That's kinda a bad point when considering that our best defensive lineman this year was Mike Daniels, who is probably one of the shortest defensive linemen in the league at only six feet tall, but still... Our defensive line is pretty short. In comparison to the Ravens and Texans, our defensive line is over an inch shorter on average.
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, 5  Next
Page 4 of 5

 
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