Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
About GMs philosophies...
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="DILLIGAFF" data-source="post: 274132" data-attributes="member: 1719"><p>I think I am still not explaining myself clearly, my point is not so much which is better, but which one gets us there faster and that TT did not make all the right moves in the transition. His lack of having the "balls" to deal with the Kampman and Hawk situation before the 2009 season will cost this defense a year.</p><p> </p><p>I am not sure why you even want to compare Mathews and Kampman, my point is that the two would already be book ends playing together going into the 2010 season if we kept the 4-3 system, given that TT would have drafted a DE = to Mathews. As it stands now we only have Mathews and are searching for his partner.</p><p> </p><p>I am making the point that the move to the 3-4 defense is not <strong>absolute</strong> in the improvement we saw in the 2009 season, the old system in theory could have done the same thing and going into the 2010 season we would have had more pieces in place than we do now. I am thinking for the short term as I am really a fan of the 3-4 defense, just that this switch will cost us 2 years to build seeing the true fruits of the switch in year 3.</p><p> </p><p>I am saying what if we kept the old defense, TT makes 2 big picks in the draft that had the same impact as Mathews and Raji, got a new def. coach, would we not have been farther along going into the 2010 season needing only secondary help? </p><p> </p><p>See I am of the opinion that this defense is not as far along as everyone thinks, it will take another year to develop the players to stop the likes of the BF, Warners, and the big Ben types. All teams have injuries, but over a 1000 yards against in 2 games is a warning sign. </p><p> </p><p>In theory if we kept the old defense we would only need secondary help going into 2010, the 2 big in theory pics by TT would have made the front 7 solid, looking to the draft for secondary help.</p><p> </p><p>As it stands now our front 7 has problems, needing another pass rusher and we have question marks at one inside LB position. Then we also need help in the secondary.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="DILLIGAFF, post: 274132, member: 1719"] I think I am still not explaining myself clearly, my point is not so much which is better, but which one gets us there faster and that TT did not make all the right moves in the transition. His lack of having the "balls" to deal with the Kampman and Hawk situation before the 2009 season will cost this defense a year. I am not sure why you even want to compare Mathews and Kampman, my point is that the two would already be book ends playing together going into the 2010 season if we kept the 4-3 system, given that TT would have drafted a DE = to Mathews. As it stands now we only have Mathews and are searching for his partner. I am making the point that the move to the 3-4 defense is not [B]absolute[/B] in the improvement we saw in the 2009 season, the old system in theory could have done the same thing and going into the 2010 season we would have had more pieces in place than we do now. I am thinking for the short term as I am really a fan of the 3-4 defense, just that this switch will cost us 2 years to build seeing the true fruits of the switch in year 3. I am saying what if we kept the old defense, TT makes 2 big picks in the draft that had the same impact as Mathews and Raji, got a new def. coach, would we not have been farther along going into the 2010 season needing only secondary help? See I am of the opinion that this defense is not as far along as everyone thinks, it will take another year to develop the players to stop the likes of the BF, Warners, and the big Ben types. All teams have injuries, but over a 1000 yards against in 2 games is a warning sign. In theory if we kept the old defense we would only need secondary help going into 2010, the 2 big in theory pics by TT would have made the front 7 solid, looking to the draft for secondary help. As it stands now our front 7 has problems, needing another pass rusher and we have question marks at one inside LB position. Then we also need help in the secondary. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Members online
Cornelius Weems
Schultz
gatorpack
edensmage
swhitset
DoURant
Sip
Latest posts
The 11th Annual Amish Draft Contest 2024
Latest: Pokerbrat2000
6 minutes ago
Draft Talk
2024 draft discussion thread
Latest: Pokerbrat2000
9 minutes ago
Draft Talk
2024 Packer UDFA Tracker....
Latest: Pokerbrat2000
12 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Green Bay to Host '25 Draft!
Latest: Pokerbrat2000
14 minutes ago
NFL Discussions
2024 Draft Prospect Discussions
Latest: Pokerbrat2000
20 minutes ago
Draft Talk
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
About GMs philosophies...
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top