beast
11 years ago

I really only seem to hear about this change of scheme for the LB's from your posts. Is there some other discussion regarding this that I can read about? I suppose I don't feel as confident about the statements are you do.

Originally Posted by: doddpower 



The closest thing I have is this... from the 2012 offseason. In which Mike McCarthy talks about playing more traditional 3-4 defense in the 2012-13 season and that helping them get to the QB more often. But Capers also played cover 2 more last season than he normally has in the past which also changed up what the LB were doing in coverage because if both Safeties are staying deep someone needs to step it up for the Bigby / Burnett (when Collins was healthy) SS role no longer roaming underneath, which is where the ILB come in.

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/defensive-energy-boost-lo4ps3j-145254405.html 

In assessing last season, McCarthy said he thought the defense got too far away from running the traditional 3-4 defense. The year before, when the Packers won the Super Bowl, Capers played about 70% nickel defense because his cornerbacks were playing so well and his pass rush had linebacker Clay Matthews and end Cullen Jenkins leading the charge.

After losing Jenkins in free agency, the Packers never found anyone to take pressure off Matthews and the performance of the secondary dropped dramatically. McCarthy said he found the defense did not react well to the risk-taking opponents who came in and tried to match points with the Packers' prolific offense.

"I've never been this explosive on offense and it's a good lesson for all of us," McCarthy said. "The opposing offense plays with a lot more confidence against your defense just because the fact that your offense is explosive. (They're) like, 'We have to go in there and score 30. It's the only chance we've got.'

"So teams played us extremely aggressive. We need to do a better job of stopping that on defense. We got into a year that we can never get into again on defense."

Part of the solution, McCarthy said, might be getting back to a more traditional 3-4 defense and doing what the scheme was intended to do, which is put pressure on the quarterback.

"Frankly, we were so explosive on offense, maybe we weren't ready, maybe we went to too much sub (nickel)," he said. "We played so much sub defense the last couple of years, we'd like to get back to playing more base and doing some of the things this defense was built on.

article  wrote:




UserPostedImage
Dexter_Sinister
11 years ago

Maybe they just don't think he's very good.

Originally Posted by: nerdmann 



Huh.

I don't either.
I want to go out like my Grandpa did. Peacefully in his sleep.
Not screaming in terror like his passengers.
Dulak
11 years ago
ok all you brad jones lovers - you can have your brad jones for big money ... lets see how good our inside is without bishop

... steaming at the news ...

play2win
11 years ago
While I understand the sentiment regarding Bishop, I'm coming around to the idea that the staff may see him as too high a risk coming off such a severe injury with a big contract. He may never again be the same player we once knew him to be. Maybe he gets cut or restructured. His salary is such that those numbers could go a very long way with so many contracts up at the end of the year. Whatever they decide will probably be more about cap dollars than the player he was prior to injury. I can see the reasoning in this. It is a bummer, as he was one of my favorite Packer defenders.

As for Jones, I am not a fan of his new contract, but, I was impressed that he made some plays last year. Missed a bunch too, and that didn't sit too well with me. I don't see him as having that same kind of nose for the ball like Bishop had, and that is disconcerting. Either Jones shows improvement in his 2nd season inside or another player wins the position battle. For now, it looks like they have him pegged as the #1 ILB along with Hawk. AJ is pretty solid and assignment sure, just lacks a bit in coverage. Jones looks like he might have the tools to succeed inside. The staff certainly thinks so. He ought to be great in coverage with his size and speed, and he's got pass rush ability... I just question the recognition stuff. Maybe year 2 helps him, having a year's experience and a better comfort zone at ILB.

I'm not going to get too bent over this. The rest of the D looks improved from a personnel standpoint, and that should help both players inside, especially with the added talent on the DL. Won't be long and we'll be able to tell more...
DoddPower
11 years ago
It's certainly not the end of the world if Bishop gets cut. Besides, the Packers possibly have Bishop 2.0 in Terrell Manning, who is another slower thumper type player (or was in college anyway). I would like to see Bishop back for another season at a cheaper salary, but I doubt he'd stick around longer than that, anyway.

A year too early is better than a year too late.
Zero2Cool
11 years ago
Terrell Manning hype machine baffles me. The hasn't shown anything positive. No one wins games because of potential.
UserPostedImage
play2win
11 years ago

Terrell Manning hype machine baffles me. The hasn't shown anything positive. No one wins games because of potential.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



Yeah, there is a lot of hope. Just like with Nick Perry. I think there was some with Jerel Worthy, but at least he got a bunch of games in. Malumba and Boddington could contend easily for Manning's spot on the roster, if he has one.

Last year we kept 9 LBs on the final 53 man roster. Locks are:

OLB
Matthews, Perry

ILB
Hawk, Jones

That leaves 5 spots between Moses, Manning, Palmer, Barrington, Malumba, Bishop, Francois, Lattimore, Reed and Savage. I would guess the first 5 guys listed stick, Moses and Palmer at OLB, Manning, Barrington and Malumba at ILB. But, I count 5 other players on that list who definitely feel differently, and they will be fighting hard for their shot on the 53.

Manning has shown us nothing. Yet.
DoddPower
11 years ago

Terrell Manning hype machine baffles me. The hasn't shown anything positive. No one wins games because of potential.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



True, he hasn't accomplished much in the NFL, but I base my opinions off what he showed in college, which was pretty good. What else would one have to go by unless they watch the practices. He was a thumper in college, but as I mentioned, he always seemed kind of slow. Even if he made a good run defender, I think he'd struggle in coverage.

EDIT: And besides, the Packers continually put lots of faith in players that haven't showed much on game day. It's how they operate, so assuming they will do so again with a relatively unproven player to fill Bishops spot isn't much of a stretch. Based on the player Manning was in college and his draft position, I think his roster spot is safe unless he totally bombs out, or gets sick again.
Dexter_Sinister
11 years ago
http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/get-to-know-terrell-manning-ho6usrl-170792686.html 

There is a reason we didn't see much out of Manning.

He had a parasite that caused colitis, diarrhea, pain, nausea, loss of appetite and loss of sleep.

He could practice too hard because he would fill his pants. He also lost 15 lbs.
I want to go out like my Grandpa did. Peacefully in his sleep.
Not screaming in terror like his passengers.
play2win
11 years ago

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/get-to-know-terrell-manning-ho6usrl-170792686.html

There is a reason we didn't see much out of Manning.

He had a parasite that caused colitis, diarrhea, pain, nausea, loss of appetite and loss of sleep.

He could practice too hard because he would fill his pants. He also lost 15 lbs.

Originally Posted by: Dexter_Sinister 



No disparaging him for having suffered through that. He really tried to be on the field. It's just that we won't know what the man can bring to this team till TC and the preseason. I'm hoping for the best for Manning.
Fan Shout
beast (now) : I agree that it's BS for fans planning on going to the game. But how does it bring in more money? I'm guessing indirectly?
packerfanoutwest (12m) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans
Zero2Cool (58m) : I see what you did there Mucky
Zero2Cool (58m) : dammit. 3:25pm
Zero2Cool (58m) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm
Mucky Tundra (1h) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground
Mucky Tundra (1h) : Yeah baby!
Zero2Cool (1h) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah
Zero2Cool (2h) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.
beast (2h) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue
Zero2Cool (3h) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's
Zero2Cool (3h) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.
packerfanoutwest (3h) : ok I stand corrected
Zero2Cool (3h) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th
Zero2Cool (3h) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?
beast (3h) : Saying no to the 6th lock.
beast (3h) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out
Zero2Cool (3h) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.
beast (3h) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games
beast (3h) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality
beast (3h) : We already have told you... if Packers lose all their games (they won't, but if they did), and Buccaneers and Falcons win all theirs
Zero2Cool (3h) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread
Zero2Cool (3h) : I literally just said it.
packerfanoutwest (4h) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't
Zero2Cool (4h) : Falcons, Buccaneers would need to win final two games.
Zero2Cool (4h) : Yes, if they win one of three, they are lock. If they lose out, they can be eliminated.
packerfanoutwest (4h) : as I just said,,gtheyh are in no matter what
Zero2Cool (4h) : Packers should get in. I just hope it's not 7th seed. Feels dirty.
packerfanoutwest (4h) : If packers lose out, no matter what, they are in
packerfanoutwest (4h) : both teams can not male the playoffs....falcon hold the tie breaker
packerfanoutwest (4h) : if bucs win out they win their division
beast (4h) : Fine, Buccaneers and Falcons can get ahead of us
packerfanoutwest (4h) : falcons are already ahead of us
beast (4h) : Packers will get in
beast (4h) : If Packers lose the rest of their games and Falcons win the rest of theirs, they could pass us... but not gonna happen
packerfanoutwest (4h) : they still are in the playoffs
packerfanoutwest (4h) : If Packers lose the remaining games,,,,at 10-7
Zero2Cool (6h) : We can say it. We don't play.
Mucky Tundra (7h) : But to say they are in is looking past the Saints
Mucky Tundra (7h) : That said, their odds are very favorable with a >99% chance of making the playoffs entering this week's games
Mucky Tundra (7h) : Packers are not in and have not clinched a playoff spot.
buckeyepackfan (8h) : Packers are in, they need to keep winning to improve their seed#.
Mucky Tundra (17h) : Getting help would have been nice, but helping ourselves should always be the plan
beast (17h) : Too bad Seahawks couldn't beat Vikings
bboystyle (18h) : We just need to win Monday night and were in
Mucky Tundra (21h) : Or ties, but let's be real here
Mucky Tundra (21h) : Other scenario was Falcons+Rams losses
Mucky Tundra (21h) : Needed a Falcons loss for a Seahawk loss to clinch
buckeyepackfan (21h) : Am I wring in saying if Tge Vikings beat The Seahawks, The Packers clinch?
Mucky Tundra (21-Dec) : Agreed; you stinks
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2024 Packers Schedule
Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
Eagles
Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
Titans
Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
Rams
Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
CARDINALS
Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
Jaguars
Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
Bears
Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
49ERS
Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
DOLPHINS
Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
Seahawks
Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
Vikings
Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM
BEARS
Recent Topics
2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

2h / Random Babble / Martha Careful

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

22-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / packerfanoutwest

19-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

19-Dec / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

18-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

17-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

17-Dec / Featured Content / Zero2Cool

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

16-Dec / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Mucky Tundra

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

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