bozz_2006
15 years ago
well, we just read that the packers are committed to switching to a 3-4 scheme, so.....
UserPostedImage
yooperfan
15 years ago

Well Lombardi is now hopping on the Nolan train of a story as well...

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/2009/01/national-football-post-tavern-talk-91/ 

I hear the Packers are committed to becoming a 3-4 defense. This must mean Mike Nolan is coming on board very soon.

"wils0646" wrote:

"pack93z" wrote:



I don't like this....

I don't see our personnel even fitting this scheme.



I don't like it either.
I have a feeling that this defensive quandry that the Packers are in could get ugly before it gets better.
I wouldn't want to be in McCarthys shoes having to make these decisions.
I bet he isn't getting much sleep and it ain't the baby keeping him awake at night.
I just hope this all works out.
gakko
15 years ago
There goes Jenkins and Kampman, both will be traded. AJ Hawk does not fit either and should be traded.
blank
gakko
15 years ago
if we switch to a 3-4, but I do not believe we will. I do however believe Nolan will be DC.
blank
Rios39
15 years ago

There goes Jenkins and Kampman, both will be traded. AJ Hawk does not fit either and should be traded.

"gakko" wrote:



You really seem sure that Kampman and Jenkins couldn't be impact in a 3-4.
blank
DanJustDan29
15 years ago
Desmond Bishop gets an increased role...
Teamwork is what the Green Bay Packers were all about. They didn't do it for individual glory. They did it because they loved one another. -Vince Lombardi
longtimefan
15 years ago
lets hope that MM, Ted and Nolan have discussed the issues of personal that is there now, and that it would be VERY hard to replace those guys right away..

Maybe Nolan is understanding of that and will be willing to adjust his scheme to suit what we have
wils0646
15 years ago

There goes Jenkins and Kampman, both will be traded. AJ Hawk does not fit either and should be traded.

"Rios39" wrote:



You really seem sure that Kampman and Jenkins couldn't be impact in a 3-4.

"gakko" wrote:



I think Jenkins would be a perfect 3-4 DE. He is the DT-DE tweener that plays perfectly in that position. Typically 3-4 DE are around 300 lbs. Kampman would be useless as a 3-4 DE. This page explains what type of personnel your team needs to run a 3-4:

http://www.geocities.com/epark/raiders/football-101-3-4-defense.html 

What are the personnel requirements for the 3-4 defense

The front 7 players in the 3-4 D are significantly different from their counterparts in the 4-3. In a nutshell, the DL in the 3-4 are bigger than the DL in the 4-3. The 3-4 OLBs are bigger than 4-3 OLBs because they have to match up against OTs.

* 3-4 NT is the toughest position to fill. The NT is head-up on the OC and is responsible for defending both A gaps in the running game. He faces constant double-teams and takes a pounding. He must have size, mental and physical toughness, stamina, durability, lateral quickness, and good technique in terms of playing with leverage. If the NT can not hold his ground, the defense is very vulnerable to runs between the tackles. The prototypical 3-4 NT is the Raiders' Ted Washington, who is a massive 6-5 365. Washington was the key to the Patriots win over the Panthers in the 2004 Super Bowl. Stephen Davis ran for a meager 19 yards on his first 9 carries, because Washington effectively stuffed the middle of the line. Other quality NTs include the Steelers' Casey Hampton (6-1 320) and the Chargers' Jamal Williams (6-2 348)
* 3-4 OLBs are the playmakers of the D. They get the glory of picking up sacks on the QB. They must have strong pass rush skills and be able to drop into coverage. If the 3-4 OLBs are unable to consistently apply pressure on the QB, the D is very vulnerable in the passing game. They tend to weigh around 245-270, and many are former 4-3 DE/OLB "tweeners". Many 4-3 DEs are not suited to playing 3-4 OLB because they lack the ability to play in space. The more agile 4-3 RDEs, such as the Jets' John Abraham (6-4 256), are able to play both 4-3 DE and 3-4 OLB. Many 4-3 OLBs are not suited to playing 3-4 OLB because they lack the pass rush skills and the ability to go toe-to-toe with an OT. Examples of solid 3-4 OLBs are the Patriots' Willie McGinest (6-5 270) and the Steelers' Joey Porter (6-2 248)
* 3-4 DEs tend to weigh around 290-310, and many are former 4-3 DT/DE "tweeners". They must be able to play the run well. The 3-4 DE is responsible for the B and C gaps in the running game and lines up in the 5-technique position, so he is head-up on the OT. It's tough for a 3-4 DE to pick up as many sacks as a 4-3 DE, because a 3-4 DE doesn't have the freedom to go willy nilly upfield. He has to protect the LBs in order for the 3-4 to work. Panthers' 4-3 DE Julius Peppers said that he didn't like playing 3-4 DE, because he felt like he was essentially a DT. Unlike Peppers (6-6 290), most 4-3 DEs are not suited to playing 3-4 DE, because they lack the size and ability to hold up against the run. Examples of solid 3-4 DEs are the Patriots' Richard Seymour (6-6 310), the Steelers' Aaron Smith (6-5 300), and the Raiders' Bobby Hamilton (6-5 285)
* 3-4 ILBs must be stout in run support. Because there are only 3 DL to match up against 5 OL, they must be able to stack and shed an unblocked offensive lineman in the running game. How hard is it to play 3-4 ILB? Check out this telling quote by All-Pro Ray Lewis, who is glad to be finished playing 3-4 ILB (the Ravens are switching from the 3-4 to the 4-3 and 46 for the 2005 season):

"We're in the 46 defense now, and finally, finally again, I get to play football," said Lewis. "My job is not to take on offensive linemen, but to make running backs not want to play against me"

Examples of solid 3-4 ILBs are the former Ravens' Ed Hartwell (6-1 250) and the Raiders' Danny Clark (6-2 245)


The Pack Will Be Back.
Cheesey
15 years ago
They just announced on channel 58 out of Milwaukee that 2 sources said it's a done deal that Nolan is the guy.
UserPostedImage
go.pack.go.
15 years ago
Wow, Wils, in that article, it seems like every position there is an example of a Raider in every position...

Also, I don't know if Aaron Kampman can't be a 3-4 DE. He doesn't get run over in the running game...I say let him have a shot at it before we just trade him away.
UserPostedImage
Users browsing this topic
    Fan Shout
    Zero2Cool (3m) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno
    beast (12m) : 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 (24m) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans
    Zero2Cool (1h) : I see what you did there Mucky
    Zero2Cool (1h) : dammit. 3:25pm
    Zero2Cool (1h) : 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 (4h) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th
    Zero2Cool (4h) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?
    beast (4h) : Saying no to the 6th lock.
    beast (4h) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out
    Zero2Cool (4h) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.
    beast (4h) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games
    beast (4h) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality
    beast (4h) : 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 (4h) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread
    Zero2Cool (4h) : 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 (5h) : they still are in the playoffs
    packerfanoutwest (5h) : If Packers lose the remaining games,,,,at 10-7
    Zero2Cool (6h) : We can say it. We don't play.
    Mucky Tundra (8h) : But to say they are in is looking past the Saints
    Mucky Tundra (8h) : That said, their odds are very favorable with a >99% chance of making the playoffs entering this week's games
    Mucky Tundra (8h) : 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 (18h) : 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?
    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
    now / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    2h / Random Babble / 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.