A look at realistic ILB options-- link provided

[TJV]

So what you're saying is, for Clinton Dix to be beat out, Burnett would have to still be playing out of position at FS, and Richardson at strong? Burnett is a horrible FS. He's proved that many, many times. I understand what you're saying but saying "Richardson to give Clinton Dix a run for his money"

That's not possible. It's more like of Clinton Dix fails, Burnett is the back up plan with Richardson taking his place. All I'm saying is there is no competition between Richardson and Clinton Dix.

Someone posted they didn't expect Clinton-Dix to start at safety. The main thrust of my post was to say I expect him to.

Beyond that assume the Packers consider 4 players as having a legit shot at safety, Burnett, Clinton-Dix, Richardson and Hyde (forgetting about Banjo and others for the moment). Now assume that Richardson plays so well he “has” to be in the starting lineup. That could force Clinton-Dix to the bench as they may prefer Burnett’s – or even Hyde’s - experience over Clinton-Dix's inexperience.

Again, I expect Clinton-Dix and Burnett to be the starting safeties and I don’t think Richardson has much of a chance to start. But to say Richardson’s ascension up the depth chart as it affects Clinton-Dix’s is analogous to Hawks vis a vis Perry’s is IMO incorrect. I wish the staff wouldn’t say their safeties are interchangeable, but they do. But they have never said OLBs and ILBs are.

 

[BMatt]

There is no scenario in which Clinton-Dix doesn't begin the season as the Week 1 starter at FS. The fact that people are even entertaining such an idea is absolutely mind-blowing. Clinton Dix could be playing on a broken ankle and he'd still be better than Richardson.

The Packers had zero interceptions from the safety position last season, which is pathetic. The Packers drafted Clinton Dix in the first round for a reason, he will be the Week 1 starter.

 

[Dylan Hoppe]

Someone posted they didn't expect Clinton-Dix to start at safety. The main thrust of my post was to say I expect him to.

Beyond that assume the Packers consider 4 players as having a legit shot at safety, Burnett, Clinton-Dix, Richardson and Hyde (forgetting about Banjo and others for the moment). Now assume that Richardson plays so well he “has” to be in the starting lineup. That could force Clinton-Dix to the bench as they may prefer Burnett’s – or even Hyde’s - experience over Clinton-Dix's inexperience.

Again, I expect Clinton-Dix and Burnett to be the starting safeties and I don’t think Richardson has much of a chance to start. But to say Richardson’s ascension up the depth chart as it affects Clinton-Dix’s is analogous to Hawks vis a vis Perry’s is IMO incorrect. I wish the staff wouldn’t say their safeties are interchangeable, but they do. But they have never said OLBs and ILBs are.

Might have gotten our first interchangeable linebacker in Bradford. Just a side note. But in that situation you mentioned at safety, Burnett would still have to outplay Clinton Dix and that still doesn't leave any competition between Richardson and him. The only guy who could beat out CD is Burnett or an unheard of name like one of the UDFA guys. Those scenarios are very unlikely but I believe we have the same point of view and are just misunderstanding each other.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Dylan Hoppe]

There is no scenario in which Clinton-Dix doesn't begin the season as the Week 1 starter at FS. The fact that people are even entertaining such an idea is absolutely mind-blowing. Clinton Dix could be playing on a broken ankle and he'd still be better than Richardson.

The Packers had zero interceptions from the safety position last season, which is pathetic. The Packers drafted Clinton Dix in the first round for a reason, he will be the Week 1 starter.

At FS this is true. But without looking at any records, my memory and common knowledge tells me that Richardson lined up at FS for 0-3 snaps last season. I don't remember any but maybe as a quick breather I guess. Anyway, Richardson is not a FS so it's not very fair to say that Clinton Dix is so much better than him because they are both true to their positions.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TJV]

Might have gotten our first interchangeable linebacker in Bradford. Just a side note. But in that situation you mentioned at safety, Burnett would still have to outplay Clinton Dix and that still doesn't leave any competition between Richardson and him. The only guy who could beat out CD is Burnett or an unheard of name like one of the UDFA guys. Those scenarios are very unlikely but I believe we have the same point of view and are just misunderstanding each other.

See post 101: As I posted originally on this subject I expect Clinton-Dix and Burnett to start - stating that was was the main reason for the post in question. The unlikely scenario would be Richardson playing so well he'd bump Burnett at SS and Burnett would bump Clinton-Dix from starting at FS. In that unlikely scenario, Richardson's success would affect Clinton-Dix even though they don't play the same spot. And keep in mind they insist Burnett can play both spots.

 

[Dylan Hoppe]

See post 101: As I posted originally on this subject I expect Clinton-Dix and Burnett to start - stating that was was the main reason for the post in question. The unlikely scenario would be Richardson playing so well he'd bump Burnett at SS and Burnett would bump Clinton-Dix from starting at FS. In that unlikely scenario, Richardson's success would affect Clinton-Dix even though they don't play the same spot. And keep in mind they insist Burnett can play both spots.

So what you're arguing is that Burnett is an inevitable starter? I would hope that isn't true. If there's an upgrade, they better bench the guy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Dylan Hoppe]

I guess I'll agree to disagree with jack on this safety issue as were way off topic from "ILB options"


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Deleted member 6794]

So what you're arguing is that Burnett is an inevitable starter? I would hope that isn't true. If there's an upgrade, they better bench the guy.

I think there´s only a slim, if any chance that Burnett won´t start at Seattle.

 

[Dylan Hoppe]

I think there´s only a slim, if any chance that Burnett won´t start at Seattle.

But you're saying that if Richardson or even banjo jumps out in the offseason and has a stellar preseason at SS, Burnett will still start even if his play looks mediocre? I don't think his contract holds his starting role as much as some think. Though, as I have stated many times, I believe Burnett will start at SS with Clinton Dix at FS in week 1. But tell me, CaptainWimm, do you think Richardson could have any impact on if Clinton Dix starts or not? Interested in your opinion on this one even though I'm, again, straying from the original thread.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Deleted member 6794]

But you're saying that if Richardson or even banjo jumps out in the offseason and has a stellar preseason at SS, Burnett will still start even if his play looks mediocre? I don't think his contract holds his starting role as much as some think. Though, as I have stated many times, I believe Burnett will start at SS with Clinton Dix at FS in week 1. But tell me, CaptainWimm, do you think Richardson could have any impact on if Clinton Dix starts or not? Interested in your opinion on this one even though I'm, again, straying from the original thread.

I´ve followed your discussion with TJV, so I´m aware of why you ask me about it.

I don´t think Richardson will have any impact on Clinton-Dix being the starter at FS. For me, the main reasoning behind that thought is there´s no chance Burnett will be able to beat out Clinton-Dix.

 

[profile_removed]

I will say this about our linebacking corps. I'm only happy with one starter out of 4. I'm ok with AJ at ILB and Perry/Neal opposite Clay on the outside. I said it in another post, I'll say it there, IF Brad Jones is the starter opposite AJ my head will EXPLODE!

 

[Joe Nor Cal Packer]

I'm not sure if I say his play improve late, but it wouldn't entirely surprise me.

I seem to recall Jones got hurt early--sprained ankle? Hamstring? Whatever it was, it happened early in the season. He never looked the same after that. So it is possible that whatever was ailing him had a chance to heal and he played better.

I'm not saying he's All World or anything, just that he didn't look the same by his standards after the injury. He's pretty quick and normally able to run well enough in coverage. He couldn't do that last year.

Thanks. Yeah with all the injuries last year it's 1) hard to get a read on new guys like Jones and 2) hard to get a read on what Capers could do with mostly healthy players. That said, why install such a complex defense? Even for veterans, that has to get confusing at times. I prefer players over plans and am not a very big fan of Capers. One more year. I hope he is wildly successful.

 

[mradtke66]

That said, why install such a complex defense? Even for veterans, that has to get confusing at times. I prefer players over plans and am not a very big fan of Capers. One more year. I hope he is wildly successful.

I generally agree that players are more important that scheme. However, the modern NFL more or less requires heavy scheme.

The Jim Bates/Jimmy Johnson 4-3 was probably the last successful, pure-player scheme. It's simple and just lets players play. However, it kind of requires 7 pro-bowlers and 1 or 2 all-pros for consistent, year over year success. I don't think it has sustained success for anyone once the salary cap became a thing.

Which is the rub. It costs too much money to keep a superstar defense. So you scheme to cover up deficiencies. That's actually where the Pittsburg 3-4 zone blitz scheme comes from--Capers and Lebeau trying to manufacture a pass rush with subpar rushers.

Is the scheme complex? Probably, but other teams run similarly complex schemes without issue: Pittsburg, Jets, Ravens. The Pats are goofy, but you can believe the dark lord loves to tinker and his 3-4's were complex.

Even Seattle is fairly complex. It's a 4-3 and a 3-4 bolted together. They are able to keep it simpler on the backend because of a great pass rush and good safety play.

Good safety play....remember how good this defense looked in 2009 and 2010 with Collins roaming around back there?

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Thanks. Yeah with all the injuries last year it's 1) hard to get a read on new guys like Jones and 2) hard to get a read on what Capers could do with mostly healthy players. That said, why install such a complex defense? Even for veterans, that has to get confusing at times. I prefer players over plans and am not a very big fan of Capers. One more year. I hope he is wildly successful.

Capers scheme is complex, but it worked when we had enough talented players on defense. With all the injuries he had to simplify it last season though because some of the youngsters weren´t up to speed with the entire playbook.

 

[Joe Nor Cal Packer]

I generally agree that players are more important that scheme. However, the modern NFL more or less requires heavy scheme.

The Jim Bates/Jimmy Johnson 4-3 was probably the last successful, pure-player scheme. It's simple and just lets players play. However, it kind of requires 7 pro-bowlers and 1 or 2 all-pros for consistent, year over year success. I don't think it has sustained success for anyone once the salary cap became a thing.

Which is the rub. It costs too much money to keep a superstar defense. So you scheme to cover up deficiencies. That's actually where the Pittsburg 3-4 zone blitz scheme comes from--Capers and Lebeau trying to manufacture a pass rush with subpar rushers.

Is the scheme complex? Probably, but other teams run similarly complex schemes without issue: Pittsburg, Jets, Ravens. The Pats are goofy, but you can believe the dark lord loves to tinker and his 3-4's were complex.

Even Seattle is fairly complex. It's a 4-3 and a 3-4 bolted together. They are able to keep it simpler on the backend because of a great pass rush and good safety play.

Good safety play....remember how good this defense looked in 2009 and 2010 with Collins roaming around back there?

That's a great point on how salary cap has prevented teams from building almost exclusively pro bowl talent. I know Phil Jackson developed a scheme specifically designed for teams without a superstar. Yeah that's basketball but the principle applies.

Let's hope that some combination of Clinton-Dix, Burnett, and Hyde give us some semblance of that 2009-2010 safety scheme we had. And thanks for your thoughtful response. Now let's hope whoever GB puts on the field has the brains and brawn to execute. Gonna need a rock solid secondary this year given the receiving talent in Chicago and Detroit. Thank God Rodgers plays for us instead of Cutler or Stafford!

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Let's hope that some combination of Clinton-Dix, Burnett, and Hyde give us some semblance of that 2009-2010 safety scheme we had. And thanks for your thoughtful response. Now let's hope whoever GB puts on the field has the brains and brawn to execute. Gonna need a rock solid secondary this year given the receiving talent in Chicago and Detroit. Thank God Rodgers plays for us instead of Cutler or Stafford!

There´s no doubt in my mind that Clinton-Dix will significantly improve the FS position and I expect Burnett to play way better than last season playing alongside him. The ILB position is the weak link on the defense, I hope one of the undrafted guys on the roster is capable of stepping up.

 

[Joe Nor Cal Packer]

There´s no doubt in my mind that Clinton-Dix will significantly improve the FS position and I expect Burnett to play way better than last season playing alongside him. The ILB position is the weak link on the defense, I hope one of the undrafted guys on the roster is capable of stepping up.

Agreed. In the end I still believe SBs are won by defense and STs. Remember the GB SB MVP from 97!? I think someone is gonna step up at ILB. Hawk isn't going anywhere but maybe Jones or the new guy Bradford - who is willing to move inside. Thanks again for sharing your football knowledge. I learned a few things!

 

[GeeDogWarrior]

It'd rock if we had speed and power at ILB.
A guy that can cover/blitz/chase down plays sideline to sideline.
A guy that can lay some hard hits on Running backs every time he tackles.

At the end of the day thou, I think we'll be able to get by.

We need Perry/Neal/Datone/Daniels/Clay/Peppers to all step up and bring constant heat.
We need the DBs to lock it down.

When those two groups do their job, then all AJ and Brad have to do is just stand there in Zone and tackle every now and then. Like the Giants Linebackers when they won their Superbowls.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

It'd rock if we had speed and power at ILB.
A guy that can cover/blitz/chase down plays sideline to sideline.
A guy that can lay some hard hits on Running backs every time he tackles.

At the end of the day thou, I think we'll be able to get by.

We need Perry/Neal/Datone/Daniels/Clay/Peppers to all step up and bring constant heat.
We need the DBs to lock it down.

When those two groups do their job, then all AJ and Brad have to do is just stand there in Zone and tackle every now and then. Like the Giants Linebackers when they won their Superbowls.

I agree the Giants didn´t have a decent MLB in the regular season in 2011, but those guys stepped up their play during the playoffs, especially Chase Blackburn. In addition their scheme didn´t rely as much on having solid a MLB than the Packers does on have impact ILBs. An improved DL and secondary will help for sure, but there will be times our deficiencies at the position will be exposed.

 

[ExpatPacker]

We need Perry/Neal/Datone/Daniels/Clay/Peppers to all step up and bring constant heat.
We need the DBs to lock it down.

Expecting all three of Perry/Neal/Datone to step up? I will not hold my breath. Clay, Daniels and Peppers I expect will be themselves, barring injury. I just wish I had the same optimism about the other 3. If 1 of them does, I'll call that 50-50. If 2 of them do, I'll call that a victory.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Expecting all three of Perry/Neal/Datone to step up? I will not hold my breath. Clay, Daniels and Peppers I expect will be themselves, barring injury. I just wish I had the same optimism about the other 3. If 1 of them does, I'll call that 50-50. If 2 of them do, I'll call that a victory.

Neal did quite a goob job last season playing the position for the first time. I hope Datone can step up his game when being completely healthy. Don´t expect a huge step forward from Perry though.

 

[HyponGrey]

Barrington has probably the most instinctive ILB on the roster. Yeah, that's kinda sad.

 

[rodell330]

Ilb is by far the weakest position on the roster and olb isn't far behind it. Outside of Matthews that needs an upgrade. Neal nor Perry get me excited now or when either was drafted. We need a true olb there. I'm more excited about Bradford or Mulumba as prospects not those two.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Ilb is by far the weakest position on the roster and olb isn't far behind it. Outside of Matthews that needs an upgrade. Neal nor Perry get me excited now or when either was drafted. We need a true olb there. I'm more excited about Bradford or Mulumba as prospects not those two.

Neal led the team in QB pressures last season, think he will improve playing the position for another season. I´m not excited about Perry either, never was. I think the position will be improved though with Peppers lining up there as well and at least they tried to do something to improve it by drafting Bradford. In addition Hubbard was projected to be at least a mid-round pick and it seems they really like Elliott.

 

[rodell330]

Neal led the team in QB pressures last season, think he will improve playing the position for another season. I´m not excited about Perry either, never was. I think the position will be improved though with Peppers lining up there as well and at least they tried to do something to improve it by drafting Bradford. In addition Hubbard was projected to be at least a mid-round pick and it seems they really like Elliott.

No Neal or Perry then I'm good. They can come off the bench but as starters I don't wanna see either . Perry should be a pass rushing d-end only.