all_about_da_packers
15 years ago

mainly the reason is that our defense not only has been getting killed by the other team's run but also the other team's TE's, Moss hasn't done that great of a job, secondly if Moss we're to be the D/C people don't realize that we would be keeping the same scheme which please don't let that happen or we're doomed again. We need a D/C that will change the scheme and get some effective blitzing and make our superstar linebackers play pro bowl level

"krazygangsta" wrote:



Actually, the other teams TE hasn't hurt us as much this year compared to last year. There have been occasions, like Owen Daniels of the Texans making big catches in the final drive to set up the game winning FG, but all in all we've improved considerably in TE coverage. We aren't getting killed by big plays from TEs any more.


Also, the scheme isn't a problem. It's the same scheme used by the successful Dolphins and Jim Bates in the late 90s when the Dolphins were great Defensively. It's the scheme that was brought into prominence by Jimmy Johnson during his successful stint as the Dallas Cowboys HC in early 90s.


There aren't many other 4-3 schemes this team can run, and we don't have the personnel to switch to a 3-4. I think the only other scheme that might be considered is a Tampa-2, but that's not a clearly more efficient and productive scheme.
The NFL: Where Greg Jennings Happens.
ILikeThePackers39
15 years ago


There aren't many other 4-3 schemes this team can run, and we don't have the personnel to switch to a 3-4. I think the only other scheme that might be considered is a Tampa-2, but that's not a clearly more efficient and productive scheme.

"all_about_da_packers" wrote:




Well, while I'll admit up front that I don't know how all the schemes inter-relate, I think we've got good personnel (assuming Jenkins comes back and we can find a new guy to fill KGB's role) to run a scheme like the Eagles and Giants run. For one, we've got the personnel in the secondary to man-up on the WRs and free the LB corps and a safety to attack the ball. For another, we've got very good team speed.

I'm no defensive guru, and I don't claim to be. But I do think we've got the people to run that kind of defense. Not the 3-4, though, I totally agree about that.
blank
go.pack.go.
15 years ago


There aren't many other 4-3 schemes this team can run, and we don't have the personnel to switch to a 3-4. I think the only other scheme that might be considered is a Tampa-2, but that's not a clearly more efficient and productive scheme.

"ILikeThePackers39" wrote:




Well, while I'll admit up front that I don't know how all the schemes inter-relate, I think we've got good personnel (assuming Jenkins comes back and we can find a new guy to fill KGB's role) to run a scheme like the Eagles and Giants run. For one, we've got the personnel in the secondary to man-up on the WRs and free the LB corps and a safety to attack the ball. For another, we've got very good team speed.

I'm no defensive guru, and I don't claim to be. But I do think we've got the people to run that kind of defense. Not the 3-4, though, I totally agree about that.

"all_about_da_packers" wrote:



Sorry, off topic. But your avatar creeps the shit out of me.

Anyway, I don't have any desire to keep him around. I also think we can run a scheme similar to the Eagles and Giants.
UserPostedImage
all_about_da_packers
15 years ago

Well, while I'll admit up front that I don't know how all the schemes inter-relate, I think we've got good personnel (assuming Jenkins comes back and we can find a new guy to fill KGB's role) to run a scheme like the Eagles and Giants run. For one, we've got the personnel in the secondary to man-up on the WRs and free the LB corps and a safety to attack the ball. For another, we've got very good team speed.

"ILikeThePackers39" wrote:




The Packers employ a 4-3 cover 1 (man-to-man press), and other 4-3 variants include cover 2 (Tampa 2), Cover 3, and quarters.

The Eagles and Giants employ a much more diverse style of 4-3, meaning they mix up their coverages from cover 1, quarters, cover 3, etc. The Packers differ mainly because they employ almost exclusively cover 1, and some quarters coverage.


The premise of the 4-3 D, whether it's cover 1/2/3/quarters is that you have a d-line that gets pressure on the QB. The coverage in turn is supposed to give you the extra time to get to the QB, giving the QB no immediate check downs in the face of coming pressure.

Regardless of us changing from Cover 1 to any other 4-3 scheme, we're going to struggle because we lack the fundamental necessity; we don't have a decent pass rush. Our d-line is a weakness, and that's a major no-no 4-3 scheme.
The NFL: Where Greg Jennings Happens.
go.pack.go.
15 years ago

Well, while I'll admit up front that I don't know how all the schemes inter-relate, I think we've got good personnel (assuming Jenkins comes back and we can find a new guy to fill KGB's role) to run a scheme like the Eagles and Giants run. For one, we've got the personnel in the secondary to man-up on the WRs and free the LB corps and a safety to attack the ball. For another, we've got very good team speed.

"all_about_da_packers" wrote:




The Packers employ a 4-3 cover 1 (man-to-man press), and other 4-3 variants include cover 2 (Tampa 2), Cover 3, and quarters.

The Eagles and Giants employ a much more diverse style of 4-3, meaning they mix up their coverages from cover 1, quarters, cover 3, etc. The Packers differ mainly because they employ almost exclusively cover 1, and some quarters coverage.


The premise of the 4-3 D, whether it's cover 1/2/3/quarters is that you have a d-line that gets pressure on the QB. The coverage in turn is supposed to give you the extra time to get to the QB, giving the QB no immediate check downs in the face of coming pressure.

Regardless of us changing from Cover 1 to any other 4-3 scheme, we're going to struggle because we lack the fundamental necessity; we don't have a decent pass rush. Our d-line is a weakness, and that's a major no-no 4-3 scheme.

"ILikeThePackers39" wrote:



I wonder how good we are in zone, at that. I like the bump and run coverage as it is.
UserPostedImage
all_about_da_packers
15 years ago

I wonder how good we are in zone, at that. I like the bump and run coverage as it is.

"go.pack.go." wrote:



Zone is basically quarters coverage.

Think of the field as being divided into 4 parts, the 2 CBs and 2 Safties are responsible 1/4 of the field. CBs cover the side lines, Safties cover the the deep. The LBs cover the intermediate middle of the field.

The problem with Zone is that the coverage leaves gaps, so if there is enough time than a WR/TE can run a route and settle in the gaps between coverage, basically giving the QB an easy target to hit with time, if no pressure exists.

That's just a basic idea of 4-3 Quarters though, technically you have a chess match, can blitz / overload one side based on the formation. It's all the variances that a DC can add.

Quarters is designed to limit the big play though. If I'm not mistaken, on the infamous 4th and 26, MS over ruled Ed Donatell, and made the Packers play quarters coverage.
The NFL: Where Greg Jennings Happens.
Pack93z
15 years ago


I wonder how good we are in zone, at that. I like the bump and run coverage as it is.

"go.pack.go." wrote:



Other than Woodson.. we don't have corners that play well in space at this time.. they have been groomed to play bump and run with a cover two safety coverage over the top.. Williams might be okay in zone.. but Harris and Bush are awful.

One of the main flaws in this scheme, IMO, is that we don't drop the backers into shorts zones and minimize the drag routes that seem kill us underneath.. especially with stack formations. Additionally it would help on the flare routes allowing the backers to keep everything in front of them.. playing them strict man with a bad pass rush, allows the backers to trail in coverage and play in a chase position.. allowing for more explosive plays.

Brass nuts boys.. almost every base 4-3 package needs an effective front four to generate pass rush.. the exceptions are the zone blitz packages that try to throw off the QB and line.. zone blitz packages have inherent holes in them due to its primal nature.. if you don't get home on the blitz.. you are toast more often than not with a poised QB.

Our Dline, was awful at pass rush, but not as terrible in run defense as undisciplined in their responsibilities.. guys jumping out of contain.. add to it a tentative backing corps (dfost.. 😉 ) and you have a porous run defense.

We are running a 4-3 unless we do a major overhaul on the roster.. we just need better penetration and discipline along the dline and more aggression from the backers in run defense and better play recognition.
"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"
go.pack.go.
15 years ago
Well then, I don't like Quarters coverage.
UserPostedImage
Pack93z
15 years ago

Well then, I don't like Quarters coverage.

"go.pack.go." wrote:



Zone is primarily used to keep everything in front of you.. make a play downhill.. it also is used to trick a QB by moving the "soft" points of the zone.. trying to make them throw into the "teeth: of the zone..
"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"
all_about_da_packers
15 years ago

Other than Woodson.. we don't have corners that play well in space at this time.. they have been groomed to play bump and run with a cover two safety coverage over the top.. Williams might be okay in zone.. but Harris and Bush are awful.

"pack93z" wrote:



I wonder 93z, which type of player do you think is best suited for zone?

Personally, I think the best type of DBs for zone are the beastly athletic players, who have a good knowledge of offensive formations and motions.

Woodson fits the bill completely, he is super athletic but also extremely smart (in a football sense).

Other athletic DBs include Blackmon, Bush, and Collins. All three are great athletes, but the problem is they can't recognize and diagnose offensive sets. Basically they have the talent physically to excel in zone, but when it comes to pre-snap recognition, they are totally clueless.

Hence why we struggle so much at zone coverage, our DBs react too late, because they struggle to diagnose the pre-snap formations of the Offense.

Harris as you said doesn't have the style to pull off playing zone effectively, but I'm wondering if Tramon might fit the bill. Might be something to look at with a new DC, if he can help our DBs get better at pre-snap recognition.
The NFL: Where Greg Jennings Happens.
Fan Shout
Zero2Cool (5h) : Season officially ending tonight for Bucks ... sad face
Zero2Cool (5h) : Giannis Antetokounmpo is listed as out for tonight's game.
dfosterf (10h) : Surprisingly low initially is my guess cap wise, but gonna pay the piper after that
dfosterf (10h) : The number on Love is going to be brutal.
Zero2Cool (10h) : May 3rd. Extension day for Jordan Love. (soonest)
Zero2Cool (1-May) : USFL MVP QB Alex McGough moved to WR. So that's why no WR drafted!
earthquake (1-May) : Packers draft starters at safety ever few years. Collins, Clinton-Dix, Savage
beast (1-May) : Why can't the rookies be a day 1 starter? Especially when we grabbed 3 of them at the position
dfosterf (1-May) : Not going to be shocked if Gilmore goes to the Lions.
dfosterf (1-May) : I hear you dhazer, but my guess would be Gilmore Colts and Howard Vikings from what little has been reported.
Mucky Tundra (30-Apr) : S learn from McKinney who learns from Hafley who learns from the fans. Guaranteed Super Bowl
Zero2Cool (30-Apr) : could*
Zero2Cool (29-Apr) : Safeties should learn from Xavier.
dhazer (29-Apr) : And what about grabbing a Gilmore or Howard at CB ? Those are all Free Agents left
dhazer (29-Apr) : out of curiosity do they try and sign Simmons or Hyde to let these young safeties learn from, they can't be day 1 starters.
Zero2Cool (29-Apr) : I miss having Sam Shields.
Zero2Cool (29-Apr) : Not that he's making excuses, just pointing it out
Zero2Cool (29-Apr) : That's for dang sure. Make our erratic kicker have no excuse!
packerfanoutwest (28-Apr) : having a great long snapper is gold
Zero2Cool (28-Apr) : LaFleur looking like he had some weight. Coachin will do that lol
Zero2Cool (28-Apr) : Thanks Mucky and whomever created topcos for each pick!
Zero2Cool (28-Apr) : Insane about Kingsley
dfosterf (28-Apr) : Putring it here so Mucky sees it. He was our guy!
dfosterf (28-Apr) : Bowden long snapper Wisconsin. Consensus best LS in college.
dfosterf (28-Apr) : We got Peter Bowde
dfosterf (28-Apr) : I personally interpret that as a partial tear that can be recovered from with rehab
dfosterf (28-Apr) : MLF said Kingsley Enagbare did NOT tear his ACL and did NOT require surgery, and that he is "looking good" for the 2024 season!
beast (28-Apr) : T.O. son signs with the 49ers
Mucky Tundra (28-Apr) : damn those vikings
beast (27-Apr) : UDFA Vikings sign TE – Trey Knox, South Carolina
beast (27-Apr) : Kitchen was all high from Miami, he was more lucky than talented in 2022 and it showed in 2023
beast (27-Apr) : Reportedly Packers have UDFAs Jennings and Jones
beast (27-Apr) : OL – Donovan Jennings, USF OT – Trente Jones, Michigan
TheKanataThrilla (27-Apr) : Interesting draft. A bit shocked that we didn't select an early CB. Definitely have Safety help. Pretty happy overall.
dhazer (27-Apr) : wow the last 2 picks are really stupid and probably will be special teams players Top 10 draft pick next year book it
TheKanataThrilla (27-Apr) : I think he ended up with a terrible RAS score
dhazer (27-Apr) : Anyone know what went on with Kitchens from Florida? At 1 point he was to be the Packers 1st round and he is way down the board now
Martha Careful (27-Apr) : Z, could you please combine my thread with yours please. I obviously did not see it when I Created it
Martha Careful (26-Apr) : Re: 'Kool-Aid' McKinstry. Other than Icky Woods, has there ever been a good NFLer with a childish nickname?
Martha Careful (26-Apr) : Packers looking to trade up
Martha Careful (26-Apr) : Flag?
Martha Careful (26-Apr) : Sag?
Nonstopdrivel (26-Apr) : It rhymes with "bag."
beast (26-Apr) : Family? That's Deadpool's F word
Nonstopdrivel (26-Apr) : Not THAT f-word.
Zero2Cool (26-Apr) : fuck
beast (25-Apr) : 49ers are Cap Tight
beast (25-Apr) : Fuck
Mucky Tundra (25-Apr) : Kanata, I will be when I'm on my lunch later
TheKanataThrilla (25-Apr) : Love you NSD
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2023 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 10 @ 3:25 PM
Bears
Sunday, Sep 17 @ 12:00 PM
Falcons
Sunday, Sep 24 @ 12:00 PM
SAINTS
Thursday, Sep 28 @ 7:15 PM
LIONS
Monday, Oct 9 @ 7:15 PM
Raiders
Sunday, Oct 22 @ 3:25 PM
Broncos
Sunday, Oct 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Nov 5 @ 12:00 PM
RAMS
Sunday, Nov 12 @ 12:00 PM
Steelers
Sunday, Nov 19 @ 12:00 PM
CHARGERS
Thursday, Nov 23 @ 11:30 AM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 3 @ 7:20 PM
CHIEFS
Monday, Dec 11 @ 7:15 PM
Giants
Sunday, Dec 17 @ 12:00 PM
BUCCANEERS
Sunday, Dec 24 @ 12:00 PM
Panthers
Sunday, Dec 31 @ 7:20 PM
Vikings
Sunday, Jan 7 @ 3:25 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Jan 14 @ 3:30 PM
Cowboys
Saturday, Jan 20 @ 7:15 PM
49ers
Recent Topics
5h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

8h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

2-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

2-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

1-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / greengold

1-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

1-May / Packers Draft Threads / dfosterf

30-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

29-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

29-Apr / Packers Draft Threads / Zero2Cool

29-Apr / Packers Draft Threads / Mucky Tundra

29-Apr / Packers Draft Threads / Mucky Tundra

29-Apr / Packers Draft Threads / Mucky Tundra

28-Apr / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Zero2Cool

28-Apr / Packers Draft Threads / Mucky Tundra

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.