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
Do the Packers have the 2nd best roster in the league?
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="TJV" data-source="post: 613599" data-attributes="member: 4300"><p>"Only" spending a 4th rounder would be more relevant if you knew where the Packers had Ryan rated. For example, "only" a 4th rounder from the 2012 draft – and a comp pick at that - looks pretty good at DL. And 5th rounders from the 2013 and 2014 drafts look pretty good too, etc. If your criteria is based upon draft position (and I know it’s not), you should feel good that Thompson spent more “draft points” on Ryan (the 129th player picked) than he did on the player they viewed as an upgrade, Barrington (the 232nd player picked). And there’s no need to make the point that even first rounders can be busts. Perhaps they viewed Ryan as the best value at ILB while not seeing the dire need at the position that you do.</p><p></p><p>I get that you have a hard time believing there weren’t any opportunities to upgrade the position during the last three seasons but without using hindsight, that very well could have been how they saw it. If not, what motivation do you ascribe to Thompson for "ignoring" the position?</p><p></p><p>As far as waiting for someone to address your concern about the possibility that facing bad rushing offenses <em>hugely </em>contributed to the Packers being that much better in run defense after the bye because there’s really nothing to address. No one can change the stats of either the Packers or their opponents. Another concern is how bad the Packers rush D was before the bye, so improving was a “low bar” to get over. But the improvement vs. the run certainly passed my eye test. And there’s reason to believe both Matthews and Barrington will show improvement at ILB after the experience they gained there last year and with a full off season at the position for Matthews and a lot of snaps with the 1s for Barrington. Beyond that there were signs of legitimate improvement against the Pats. After noting that big leads against a couple of opponents skewed the Packers' rush defense numbers (another concern) a jsonline article noted: <a href="http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/packers-run-defense-has-improved-since-clay-matthews-moved-inside-b99402971z1-284838661.html" target="_blank">http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/packers-run-defense-has-improved-since-clay-matthews-moved-inside-b99402971z1-284838661.html</a></p><p></p><p>And it showed against the Seahawks in the championship game. The Seahawks finished that game rushing 35 times for 194 yards for a 5.5 average – obviously not good. However, until the 3:52 mark of the fourth quarter, (by my math) they had 26 rushes for 121 yards. That’s a 4.65 ypc average for the best rushing team in the league last season and well below their 5.3 ypc average for the regular season. As we know too well, Matthews was out for the last three possessions of regulation. So, including the two rushes for 8 yards in OT, the Seahawks averaged 4.61 ypc when Matthews was on the field. IMO the problem with having Matthews at ILB isn’t that the run D isn’t obviously improved with him there – it’s that he’s not at his best position. But if they were willing to make that sacrifice, I doubt any UFA or rookie – even one picked in the first round – would take his snaps at ILB.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="TJV, post: 613599, member: 4300"] "Only" spending a 4th rounder would be more relevant if you knew where the Packers had Ryan rated. For example, "only" a 4th rounder from the 2012 draft – and a comp pick at that - looks pretty good at DL. And 5th rounders from the 2013 and 2014 drafts look pretty good too, etc. If your criteria is based upon draft position (and I know it’s not), you should feel good that Thompson spent more “draft points” on Ryan (the 129th player picked) than he did on the player they viewed as an upgrade, Barrington (the 232nd player picked). And there’s no need to make the point that even first rounders can be busts. Perhaps they viewed Ryan as the best value at ILB while not seeing the dire need at the position that you do. I get that you have a hard time believing there weren’t any opportunities to upgrade the position during the last three seasons but without using hindsight, that very well could have been how they saw it. If not, what motivation do you ascribe to Thompson for "ignoring" the position? As far as waiting for someone to address your concern about the possibility that facing bad rushing offenses [I]hugely [/I]contributed to the Packers being that much better in run defense after the bye because there’s really nothing to address. No one can change the stats of either the Packers or their opponents. Another concern is how bad the Packers rush D was before the bye, so improving was a “low bar” to get over. But the improvement vs. the run certainly passed my eye test. And there’s reason to believe both Matthews and Barrington will show improvement at ILB after the experience they gained there last year and with a full off season at the position for Matthews and a lot of snaps with the 1s for Barrington. Beyond that there were signs of legitimate improvement against the Pats. After noting that big leads against a couple of opponents skewed the Packers' rush defense numbers (another concern) a jsonline article noted: [URL]http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/packers-run-defense-has-improved-since-clay-matthews-moved-inside-b99402971z1-284838661.html[/URL] And it showed against the Seahawks in the championship game. The Seahawks finished that game rushing 35 times for 194 yards for a 5.5 average – obviously not good. However, until the 3:52 mark of the fourth quarter, (by my math) they had 26 rushes for 121 yards. That’s a 4.65 ypc average for the best rushing team in the league last season and well below their 5.3 ypc average for the regular season. As we know too well, Matthews was out for the last three possessions of regulation. So, including the two rushes for 8 yards in OT, the Seahawks averaged 4.61 ypc when Matthews was on the field. IMO the problem with having Matthews at ILB isn’t that the run D isn’t obviously improved with him there – it’s that he’s not at his best position. But if they were willing to make that sacrifice, I doubt any UFA or rookie – even one picked in the first round – would take his snaps at ILB. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Members online
No members online now.
Latest posts
Pick 124 Barryn Sorrell Edge Texas
Latest: tynimiller
Today at 7:33 PM
Draft Talk
Pick 87 Savion Williams WR TCU
Latest: OldSchool101
Today at 4:54 PM
Draft Talk
First Round Prospect Discussions Specifically
Latest: OldSchool101
Today at 1:12 PM
Draft Talk
Isaiah Simmons is COMING
Latest: OldSchool101
Today at 1:07 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
UDFA Signings 2025
Latest: tynimiller
Today at 12:26 PM
Draft Talk
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Do the Packers have the 2nd best roster in the league?
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
