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
Draft Talk
2014 Draft Archive
Carl Bradford Thread
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="wist43" data-source="post: 554777" data-attributes="member: 9839"><p>I say I want to get away from the 2-4 b/c 1) teams run like crazy against us when we're in it - b/c Capers runs it in run/pass situations, i.e. 1st and 10, 2nd and 6, and 3rd and 3.</p><p> </p><p>Those are either/or down/distances.</p><p> </p><p>Depending on the opponent, more often than not, regardless of what personnel the offense trots on the field, you can handle those down/distances out of base. 3WR's, 1 TE, 1 RB - yes, your base should be able to match up with that no problem.</p><p> </p><p>I went back and looked at the 2nd Detroit game the other day - they had 1st and goal at the 1, and had 3 WR's, 1 TE, and 1 RB on the field; we were in the 2-4!!! From the 1 stinking yd line, lol... Bush walked in untouched. The same thing happened against Chicago in the playoff game, Forte walked in untouched.</p><p> </p><p>I say I would only run the 2-4 in obvious passing situations, and give you an alignment, and the first comeback you all have is - "teams will run against us"?? That's my #1 complaint against the alignment to begin with - regardless of whether we're in the "fat-guy 2-4", or a "pass rush 2-4".</p><p> </p><p>Can't have it both ways guys... you're the ones advocated the 2-4.</p><p> </p><p>2) The fat-guy 2-4. To deal with the run/pass situations - if it's a pass, your 2 inside run stuffers aren't going to generate any pass rush... they're just going to do the 'dancing bear tango with the C and 2 G's - which is what we saw all of last year.</p><p> </p><p>If it is a run/pass situation, the 3-3 would be much more effective at dealing with the potential of either the run or the pass b/c you have more overall size on the field, and you have pass rushers.</p><p> </p><p>3) It is permissible to both blitz and play zone.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="wist43, post: 554777, member: 9839"] I say I want to get away from the 2-4 b/c 1) teams run like crazy against us when we're in it - b/c Capers runs it in run/pass situations, i.e. 1st and 10, 2nd and 6, and 3rd and 3. Those are either/or down/distances. Depending on the opponent, more often than not, regardless of what personnel the offense trots on the field, you can handle those down/distances out of base. 3WR's, 1 TE, 1 RB - yes, your base should be able to match up with that no problem. I went back and looked at the 2nd Detroit game the other day - they had 1st and goal at the 1, and had 3 WR's, 1 TE, and 1 RB on the field; we were in the 2-4!!! From the 1 stinking yd line, lol... Bush walked in untouched. The same thing happened against Chicago in the playoff game, Forte walked in untouched. I say I would only run the 2-4 in obvious passing situations, and give you an alignment, and the first comeback you all have is - "teams will run against us"?? That's my #1 complaint against the alignment to begin with - regardless of whether we're in the "fat-guy 2-4", or a "pass rush 2-4". Can't have it both ways guys... you're the ones advocated the 2-4. 2) The fat-guy 2-4. To deal with the run/pass situations - if it's a pass, your 2 inside run stuffers aren't going to generate any pass rush... they're just going to do the 'dancing bear tango with the C and 2 G's - which is what we saw all of last year. If it is a run/pass situation, the 3-3 would be much more effective at dealing with the potential of either the run or the pass b/c you have more overall size on the field, and you have pass rushers. 3) It is permissible to both blitz and play zone. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Staff online
Poppa San
* Team Owner *
Members online
rmontro
Poppa San
tynimiller
swhitset
scheeler
Latest posts
2024 1st Rd pick #25 Jorden Morgan OL
Latest: tynimiller
1 minute ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
2024 draft discussion thread
Latest: DoURant
32 minutes ago
Draft Talk
Most hated teams outside of the division
Latest: Wi. Mike now in Florida
46 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
2024 3rd round #88 MarShawn Lloyd RB
Latest: Poppa San
49 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
The 11th Annual Amish Draft Contest 2024
Latest: jetfixer
Today at 8:32 PM
Draft Talk
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Draft Talk
2014 Draft Archive
Carl Bradford Thread
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