Upcoming Draft Indicator· Page 2

beast
Select Member

3 years ago

Btw, Josh Jackson might get another shot here, this D is a zone heavy scheme.

Originally Posted by: nerdmann

The last defense was heavy zone scheme too... still don't trust him with deep coverage responsibilities. He might be good in a cover 2... this defenses supposively runs a lot of cover 2 and cover 3.

Zero2Cool
Elite Member Topic Starter

3 years ago

#12

Btw, Josh Jackson might get another shot here, this D is a zone heavy scheme.

Originally Posted by: nerdmann

I'm guessing this means Ian Rapoport saying Casey Hayward being released due to not being a scheme fit was complete BS? I thought that was something Casey excelled at ... zone.

beast
Select Member

3 years ago

#13

I'm guessing this means Ian Rapoport saying Casey Hayward being released due to not being a scheme fit was complete BS? I thought that was something Casey excelled at ... zone.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool

Not all zone schemes are the same... there is cover 1, cover 2, cover 3 and a lot more different types, those are just some basics and it gets a lot more specific.

It depends on what they plan on running... as I said, I think Jackson would be his best in cover 2, where CBs are asked to physically play the shorter stuff more often, as I don't trust him deep.

Where Hayward was at his best in coverage 3 zone, where the CBs basically have the sidelines deeper.

Neither is a pure man coverage guy (and the NFL has been getting away from pure man coverage), but doesn't mean both excel best at the same type of zone scheme either.

Zero2Cool
Elite Member Topic Starter

3 years ago

#14

Originally Posted by: beast

I think one of the mistakes I make is considering zone as to playing off. I don't know if I prefer Man or Zone, but I know I prefer smashing a guy at the line of scrimmage.

beast
Select Member

3 years ago

#15

I think one of the mistakes I make is considering zone as to playing off. I don't know if I prefer Man or Zone, but I know I prefer smashing a guy at the line of scrimmage.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool

I know I prefer playing man, as if you get the elite CBs for it, you can shut teams down...

But of course the NFL experts say I'm wrong, as they're going in the opposite direction. Probably just too many man beater routes and schemes right now. So I'd go with the expects as almost the entire NFL has gone more zone coverage. (of course, that might mean the man coverage CBs are more available... but really, they have largely seemed to disappear).

But yeah, you can play zone in many different ways, Richard Sherman has made a great career by playing cover 3 zone and smashing guys at the line.

Even when Kevin King was in man coverage, at times he'd be no where near the line.

I don't think Hayward smashes at the line, even though he's also into cover 3.

Zero2Cool
Elite Member Topic Starter

3 years ago

#16

Focusing on the WR's there. I think Adams, Lazard and Valdes-Scantling get new deals.

beast
Select Member

3 years ago

#17

Focusing on the WR's there. I think Adams, Lazard and Valdes-Scantling get new deals.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool

Adams was supposed to get an extension already, Lazard will be an RFA, so he'll probably get the 2nd round tender.

MVS is the big question, and honestly that probably depends on his market value, as he's a 3rd WR with great speed.... will someone pay him #2 starting money? Would or maybe should say could the Packers? They are pretty tight against the cap unless they get rid of some contracts (Rodgers, Adams... trade or not resign them).

I think the Packers will be looking to grab CB, WR and IOL because they do draft for future needs to a degree and those are the current future needs as CB and WR has so many guys in contract years, and IOL has Patrick in a contract year and just lost Linsley and so they got nothing proven there except Jenkins for three spots.

I'm thinking the Packers grab a CB or WR with the first selection, probably CB but depends on how the board falls.

Then CB, WR or IOL in round two.

CB from Virginia Tech, North Western, Florida State or Georgia.

WR Nico Collins seems like a Gute type to me. Also LSU's WR Marshall which could go early.

Could they draft the Center from Wisconsin White Water?

KRK
Veteran Member

3 years ago

#18

Just curious, this article seems to imply 'the thinking' is to move Jenkins to tackle...since when? I had thought the thinking was, perhaps to move Turner to RT.

Regardless, they need help on the OL.

Lombardi Avenue said

Packers 2021 pre-draft preview: Uncertainty at center
by Freddie Boston
https://lombardiave.com/2021/04/19/packers-2021-draft-preview-center/

The Green Bay Packers will be making changes to the interior of the offensive line following the departure of Corey Linsley in free agency.

Whether they replace Linsley with another center not in the starting five last season, or whether one of Lucas Patrick or Elgton Jenkins moves inside remains to be seen.

Should the Packers address the interior offensive line positions in the draft next week?

Free agency recap

All-Pro Linsley signed a deal with the Los Angeles Chargers, joining Bryan Bulaga, his former teammate in Green Bay. Last week, veteran guard Lane Taylor signed with the Houston Texans. He was a starter in Week 1 before tearing his ACL.

Need in the draft?

It depends.

In short, the Packers do need to add an offensive lineman in the draft, but the actual position is less clear. If the plan isn’t to move Elgton Jenkins to tackle and either Jenkins or Lucas Patrick will play center, the interior spots become less important to address.

Second-year Jon Runyan Jr. can step into a starting role, and the Packers drafted three interior linemen a year ago.

Draft outlook
Again, it all comes down to the Packers’ plan for the starting five. If Jenkins is a tackle long term, guard and center moves higher on the list of draft priorities. If either Jenkins or Patrick will play center with the other staying at guard, tackle is a bigger need.

It wouldn’t be all that surprising if Green Bay drafted both a guard or tackle, or a lineman with the versatility to play multiple positions like Billy Turner.

The fact the Packers have a few players who can play multiple spots is good, but it also makes it harder to determine where they need the most help along the offensive line.

The Packers should add more depth to the offensive line this month. Rather than determining a position to target, a better idea would be to just draft the best lineman on the board.

In Luce tua Videmus Lucem KRK

Zero2Cool
Elite Member Topic Starter

3 years ago

#19

Originally Posted by: KRK

I think we fall onto "articles" a bit too much. I can create a website, put a pretty design that looks professional and write articles everyday. It means nothing as I am merely an uninformed man who reads too much. The closest to inside information I've ever obtained is that from NFL agents or second-hand from direct communication with writers.

What I'm saying is Brian Gutenkunst won't return my mother trucking calls!!!!

Regarding Elgton Jenkins, I am going to just let the coaches decide that because I am absolutely clueless. I personally feel he's too tall to be inside and would be better outside. I'm of the foolish belief that if you have solid Tackles and a solid Center, that your Guards can be mediocre and you can still have a dominate OL.

LT - A
LG - C+
C - B
RG - C+
RT - A

I would build my team from DL and OL. And I would build my OL from outside to inside.

And ladies and gentlemen, this is why I do not have a career as a NFL General Manager, but I kick some ass in Madden though!

Important Information:

The PACKERSHOME uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More Details Close

Fan Shout

beast (8m) : Not nessarily, he might of been injured either way. He's playing about 50% of the games the last 4 years

Zero2Cool (6h) : If they'd been more patient with him, he'd be back already. Putting him out there vs Bears caused him to tweak it and here we are.

packerfanoutwest (6h) : well this is his last season with the PAck, book it

beast (7h) : Sounds like no Alexander (again), I'm wondering if his time with the Packers is done

Zero2Cool (14h) : Could ban beast and I still don't think anyone catches him.

Mucky Tundra (26-Dec) : Houston getting dog walked by Baltimore

packerfanoutwest (25-Dec) : Feliz Navidad!

Zero2Cool (25-Dec) : Merry Christmas!

beast (25-Dec) : Merry Christmas 🎄🎁

beast (24-Dec) : Sounds like no serious injuries from the Saints game and Jacobs and Watson should play in the Vikings game

packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : both games Watson missed, Packers won

Martha Careful (24-Dec) : I hope all of you have a Merry Christmas!

Mucky Tundra (24-Dec) : Oh I know about Jacobs, I just couldn't pass up an opportunity to mimic Zero lol

buckeyepackfan (24-Dec) : Jacobs was just sat down, Watson re-injured that knee that kept him out 1 game earlier

buckeyepackfan (24-Dec) : I needed .14 that's. .14 points for the whole 4th quarter to win and go to the SB. Lol

Mucky Tundra (24-Dec) : Jacobs gonna be OK???

Zero2Cool (24-Dec) : Watson gonna be OK???

packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : Inactives tonight for the Pack: Alexander- knee Bullard - ankle Williams - quad Walker -ankle Monk Heath

packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : No Jaire, but hopefully the front 7 destroys the line of scrimmage & forces Rattler into a few passes to McKinney.

packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : minny could be #1 seed and the Lions #5 seed

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : We'd have same Division and Conference records. Strength of schedule we edge them

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I just checked. What tie breaker?

bboystyle (23-Dec) : yes its possible but unlikely. If we do get the 5th, we face the NFCS winner

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Ahh, ok.

bboystyle (23-Dec) : yes due to tie breaker

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I mean, unlikely, yes, but mathematically, 5th is possible by what I'm reading.

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : If Vikings lose out, Packers win out, Packers get 5th, right?

bboystyle (23-Dec) : Minny isnt going to lose out so 5th seed is out of the equation. We are playing for the 6th or 7th seed which makes no difference

Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : beast, the ad revenue goes to the broadcast company but they gotta pay to air the game on their channel/network

beast (23-Dec) : If we win tonight the game is still relative in terms of 5th, 6th or 7th seed... win and it's 5th or 6th, lose and it's 6th or 7th

beast (23-Dec) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.

bboystyle (23-Dec) : i mean game becomes irrelevant if we win tonight. Just a game where we are trying to play spoilers to Vikings chance at the #1 seed

Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno

beast (23-Dec) : 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 (23-Dec) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I see what you did there Mucky

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : dammit. 3:25pm

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm

Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground

Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : Yeah baby!

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.

beast (23-Dec) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.

packerfanoutwest (23-Dec) : ok I stand corrected

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?

Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2024 Packers Schedule

Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM

Eagles

29 - 34

Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM

COLTS

16 - 10

Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM

Titans

30 - 14

Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM

VIKINGS

29 - 31

Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM

Rams

24 - 19

Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM

CARDINALS

34 - 13

Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM

TEXANS

24 - 22

Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM

Jaguars

30 - 27

Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM

LIONS

14 - 24

Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM

Bears

20 - 19

Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM

49ERS

38 - 10

Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM

DOLPHINS

30 - 17

Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM

Lions

31 - 34

Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM

Seahawks

30 - 13

Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM

SAINTS

34 - 0

Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM

Vikings

Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM

BEARS