Ha Ha's importance to the Packers D

D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
Just saying it's possible. Hyde was a very solid rookie so it would not surprise me if he begins the year ahead of Haha.

I would be extremely surprised by that. While I agree that Hyde had a pretty nice rookie season he hasn´t played safety in almost three years and his college experience consists of two games at the position. Playing in the slot requires a lot of the same talents as lining up as a strong safety, but I hope the Packers plan on starting Clinton-Dix at free safety, so Hyde would have to beat out Burnett to start in week 1 IMO.
 

TJV

Lifelong Packers Fanatic
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
5,389
Reaction score
954
If he's the main safety in certain situations, he's the guy, not a guy replacing someone else.

Or if he's a guy that comes in during nickel or dime.
Obviously if Hyde wins the starting safety job he won't be replacing anyone. If he doesn't win the starting job at safety, Burnett and Clinton-Dix will start there. The starting CBs will be Williams and Shields. The nickel back will most likely be Hayward. So if McCarthy wants Hyde on the field for all three downs, unless he starts at safety, he will have to replace one of the five listed. As I posted, that's a good problem to have. It would also be great if another DB mounted a real challenge - like House or Richardson.
 

Sunshinepacker

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 29, 2013
Messages
5,766
Reaction score
896
It will take Clinton-Dix time to adjust to the NFL game, no doubt about that. The same applies to Hyde though as he hasn´t played the position at this level either.

Hyde at least has had a year in the defense and knows the schemes. Again, I'm hoping HaHa can start but it's certainly not an indication of a poor pick if he takes some time to get comfortable in the scheme.
 

wist43

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 13, 2014
Messages
367
Reaction score
32
I think the biggest factor in improvement in the secondary will simply be experience.

TT refuses to bring vets in, so we have a constant turnover of youth pretty much everywhere on our roster - and that is nowhere more harmful than in the secondary where it takes a good deal of communication and recognition skills by the players for the unit to function effectively.

I think we have some good players in the secondary, I especially like our corners, but the breakdowns and blown coverages are glaring and alarming.

I was listening to sports radio in the car the other day, and Donovan McNabb tabbed the Central to be won by the Bears - citing our secondary as the primary reason for his skepticism. He said that in watching the Packers he was shocked at all the blown coverages, and the overall soft nature of the secondary.

I tend to agree with McNabb, but I think we can get it straightened out back there enough to at least keep us in contention within the division. I don't like the soft philosophy we employ, but improved communication should produce more picks - if we can get back to leading the league in interceptions, that mitigates the poor tackling and soft play to some extent.

I'm cautiously optimistic that the secondary will at least be marginally better this year.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
I think the biggest factor in improvement in the secondary will simply be experience.

TT refuses to bring vets in, so we have a constant turnover of youth pretty much everywhere on our roster - and that is nowhere more harmful than in the secondary where it takes a good deal of communication and recognition skills by the players for the unit to function effectively.

I think we have some good players in the secondary, I especially like our corners, but the breakdowns and blown coverages are glaring and alarming.

Lack of talent at safety was the biggest factor in the secondary´s problems last season, hopefully Clinton-Dix and/or Hyde will provide an upgrade at the position. Experience shouldn´t have been an issue with most guys having played in the NFL for several years.

I was listening to sports radio in the car the other day, and Donovan McNabb tabbed the Central to be won by the Bears - citing our secondary as the primary reason for his skepticism. He said that in watching the Packers he was shocked at all the blown coverages, and the overall soft nature of the secondary.

I tend to agree with McNabb, but I think we can get it straightened out back there enough to at least keep us in contention within the division. I don't like the soft philosophy we employ, but improved communication should produce more picks - if we can get back to leading the league in interceptions, that mitigates the poor tackling and soft play to some extent.

I'm cautiously optimistic that the secondary will at least be marginally better this year.

The Packers are the favourites to win the NFC North (the NFL got rid of the Central in 2002) because of having Rodgers playing QB. If the defense leads the league in interceptions there´s no way we´re not going to win the division.

BTW I never expected anyone to bring up McNabb as a source, does he know a lot of stuff about the 2-4 as well??? ;)
 

wist43

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 13, 2014
Messages
367
Reaction score
32
Lack of talent at safety was the biggest factor in the secondary´s problems last season, hopefully Clinton-Dix and/or Hyde will provide an upgrade at the position. Experience shouldn´t have been an issue with most guys having played in the NFL for several years.



The Packers are the favourites to win the NFC North (the NFL got rid of the Central in 2002) because of having Rodgers playing QB. If the defense leads the league in interceptions there´s no way we´re not going to win the division.

BTW I never expected anyone to bring up McNabb as a source, does he know a lot of stuff about the 2-4 as well??? ;)

North, Central, lol... hard to concentrate when you have 2 screaming kids buzzing around you - they're gonna be the death of me I'm sure :)

Burnett should have it figured out a bit, and Shields and Williams have been around long enough - everyone else was young, and in and out of the lineup...

Is Burnett making the calls back there?? It took Collins into his 4th season before he began to shore up his game - but he wasn't a very bright guy - one of the knocks on him coming out of college.

Any which way... I do think we'll be improved in the back end this year - especially with McCarthy getting personally involved with the defense, which I would have argued was necessary after the '11 season; better than never I guess.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
Burnett should have it figured out a bit, and Shields and Williams have been around long enough - everyone else was young, and in and out of the lineup...

Jennings and House were both in their third year last season, they should have been used to the NFL game. The only inexperienced guy who played more than 200 defensive snaps was Hyde.

Is Burnett making the calls back there?? It took Collins into his 4th season before he began to shore up his game - but he wasn't a very bright guy - one of the knocks on him coming out of college.

Burnett was a disappointment last season. Maybe not having another reliable safety playing next to him was a major factor in that, this season he has to step up his game though to retain his starting position.
 

Sanguine camper

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 14, 2014
Messages
1,891
Reaction score
558
Hyde played the run well last year as a rookie. I. Think his pass defense was ok but he seems to lack the ability to break on the ball like better corners such as Shields. I like the move over to safety. Hyde can bolster special teams if everyone ahead of him stays healthy. For the Packers that's a dream so have no fear Hyde will get plenty of action.
 

TJV

Lifelong Packers Fanatic
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
5,389
Reaction score
954
IMO MD Jennings and McMillian are exhibits A and B for the argument that Capers was handcuffed with a lack of talent at safety. Of course McMillian was only in his second season but Jennings didn’t have that excuse. IMO the problem of going into 2013 with the players they had at safety can be put at the feet of Thompson. It was a position crying out for a veteran UFA acquisition for insurance if they turned out to be right about Jennings or McMillian or to provide at least adequate snaps at safety if they turned out to be wrong. I’m not talking about a top tier UFA, just an experienced vet.

I’m optimistic about the defense being improved for two main reasons. The first is they are simplifying the scheme. That it took so long to do so IMO is Capers’ fault. It could not have been a surprise to him that the Packers are a “perpetually young” team for more than a season or two. Anyway, better late than never and it should mean rookies and second year players with talent can contribute earlier.

The second reason is talent and not just the addition of Peppers, Guion, the draftees and the UDFAs. From DL to LB to DBs we could – and I think will – see a significant jump from a player already on the roster at each level of the D.
 

Jordyruns

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 4, 2011
Messages
436
Reaction score
41
Location
Upstate NY
The only thing I'm worried about is that this time in 2015 we will be saying, "It is not Capers fault as he was handcuffed by the ILB TT put on the field." I do not think either Jones or Hawk are as bad as MCMillian or Jennings but it is still a glaring weakness even in preseason, just like safety opposite Burnett was in preseason last year.
 

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
13,776
Reaction score
4,802
I think best case scenario Ha-Ha is capable and starts week one opposite Burnett and Sean Richardson proves to develop into a decent/solid back up (do not crap your pants everyone I am saying decent/solid back up). I really like what I've read and seen on the kid and hope he stays healthy and capable of improving.

That allows Hyde to be for one season a flow between guy, and he seems to have shown signs the staff feel he can do so, whether that is playing CB in Dime or Nickel or switching to safety in some packages....the luxury of a player like that is awesome and helps to keep DB's rested....but this also allows us to absorb an injury at the Safety or CB position with ease. Unless Tramon lights it up he is in my opinion on his way out more than likely and Hyde will be needed at CB in the long run....

...I am just happy for once that the DBs aren't really a concern of mine heading into Training camp, however it is training camp and far too early to know what we will look like come pre-season and the opener.
 

armand34

Cheesehead
Joined
May 24, 2010
Messages
2,056
Reaction score
273
Location
The Beach, NJ
Not sure about that either. Who would he replace in that scenario???
People get subbed (not replaced) all the time...Woodson played the run extremely well as a Corner (lined up at LB in this play)..whom did he replace, don't really care I'm not the coach, but he was a great run defender...IMO we need more run stopping/tackling ability to be present...if you can do that with a corner, that gives you the option to still cover if there's an audible to a pass...corner covering TE or RB I like much better over any of our LB's
You must be logged in to see this image or video!

THSI IS AN EXAMPLE OF A CB playing LB, I'm not saying HYDE is WOODSON...FYI
 

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
13,776
Reaction score
4,802
I hear what armand is stating for sure....and while Hyde will probably never approach even the same area code as Woodson (please prove me wrong bud!)....having a similar style player would be something you know Capers would love.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
IMO MD Jennings and McMillian are exhibits A and B for the argument that Capers was handcuffed with a lack of talent at safety. Of course McMillian was only in his second season but Jennings didn’t have that excuse. IMO the problem of going into 2013 with the players they had at safety can be put at the feet of Thompson. It was a position crying out for a veteran UFA acquisition for insurance if they turned out to be right about Jennings or McMillian or to provide at least adequate snaps at safety if they turned out to be wrong. I’m not talking about a top tier UFA, just an experienced vet.

This offseason the ILB position was in need of an upgrade, but Thompson didn´t do anything about it. I just hope this situation doesn´t turn out the same way it did at safety last season.

I’m optimistic about the defense being improved for two main reasons. The first is they are simplifying the scheme. That it took so long to do so IMO is Capers’ fault. It could not have been a surprise to him that the Packers are a “perpetually young” team for more than a season or two. Anyway, better late than never and it should mean rookies and second year players with talent can contribute earlier.

I´m still baffled that it seems Thompson and Capers weren´t on the same page for that long.
 

mradtke66

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
1,618
Reaction score
522
Location
Madison, WI
The only thing I'm worried about is that this time in 2015 we will be saying, "It is not Capers fault as he was handcuffed by the ILB TT put on the field."

I won't say that. While a super-star ILB would make some things easier and other things possible, our ILBs are kind of like "defensive fullbacks," in that their job is relatively simple and more plug-and-play. The scheme doesn't require super-star play from them to succeed.

ILB is probably the easiest position on our team to upgrade. However, Jones and Hawk are adequate and good enough to win plenty of games.

I'm starting to suspect that maybe we had cascading failures based on our poor safety play. Was Capers playing simpler, straight up stuff because he knew his backend was weak? Was he required to "dumb" things because "smart things" would have left them more vulnerable?

Pure conjecture, but could Capers have been in situations where he has an ideal play call in his playbook that even in hindsight is PERFECT, but can't call it because he has do something else to cover up? Maybe something like leaving the ILBs in zone coverage against a superior route runner because he can't count on Jennings/McMillian to cover up the hole that would result from a crossfire blitz?

EDIT: TL, DR: If the only excuse Capers has for poor defensive play next year is ILB, he really has lost it. Our ILBs are good enough.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
I'm starting to suspect that maybe we had cascading failures based on our poor safety play. Was Capers playing simpler, straight up stuff because he knew his backend was weak? Was he required to "dumb" things because "smart things" would have left them more vulnerable?

Pure conjecture, but could Capers have been in situations where he has an ideal play call in his playbook that even in hindsight is PERFECT, but can't call it because he has do something else to cover up? Maybe something like leaving the ILBs in zone coverage against a superior route runner because he can't count on Jennings/McMillian to cover up the hole that would result from a crossfire blitz?

While it´s possible the poor play at safety had something to do with not being able to use the entire playbook I think injuries were mainly responsible for Capers simplifying the scheme.

EDIT: TL, DR: If the only excuse Capers has for poor defensive play next year is ILB, he really has lost it. Our ILBs are good enough.

I agree about the ILB shouldn´t turn out to be a valid excuse for Capers, there´s no way I´m convinced we have enough quality at the position though.
 

mradtke66

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
1,618
Reaction score
522
Location
Madison, WI
I agree about the ILB shouldn´t turn out to be a valid excuse for Capers, there´s no way I´m convinced we have enough quality at the position though.

I think we have "enough" just because ILB isn't an impact position. I'm not saying we're set for the next 5 years or anything like that, but we can get by IF (and it's a big IF) the other 9 (or 10 in dime) play up to expectations.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
I think we have "enough" just because ILB isn't an impact position. I'm not saying we're set for the next 5 years or anything like that, but we can get by IF (and it's a big IF) the other 9 (or 10 in dime) play up to expectations.

ILBs can make a difference as well, the Packers just don´t have any impact players at the position. While I expect the defense to improve from last season I would feel better if Thompson would have upgraded the position.
 

mradtke66

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
1,618
Reaction score
522
Location
Madison, WI
ILBs can make a difference as well, the Packers just don´t have any impact players at the position. While I expect the defense to improve from last season I would feel better if Thompson would have upgraded the position.

I'm not saying the can't make a difference, just that it isn't as critical to have a great ILB vs. a great CB or pass rusher. You can make do with less.

Similarly, I would like to see something more from the position. I was honestly hoping for Shazier in the draft. After the two top ILBs got drafted, I wasn't excited about other ILBs--draftee or FA. Can't fix everything at once.

I also wouldn't be surprised if we get more from Jones. Not that he set the world on fire in 2012, but he played much better in 2012 than 2013. I'd guess his ankle sprain was much worse than he/the team let on.
 

Oshkoshpackfan

YUT !!!
Joined
Aug 14, 2012
Messages
3,286
Reaction score
260
Location
Camp Lejeune NC
I won't say that. While a super-star ILB would make some things easier and other things possible, our ILBs are kind of like "defensive fullbacks," in that their job is relatively simple and more plug-and-play. The scheme doesn't require super-star play from them to succeed.

ILB is probably the easiest position on our team to upgrade. However, Jones and Hawk are adequate and good enough to win plenty of games.

I'm starting to suspect that maybe we had cascading failures based on our poor safety play. Was Capers playing simpler, straight up stuff because he knew his backend was weak? Was he required to "dumb" things because "smart things" would have left them more vulnerable?

Pure conjecture, but could Capers have been in situations where he has an ideal play call in his playbook that even in hindsight is PERFECT, but can't call it because he has do something else to cover up? Maybe something like leaving the ILBs in zone coverage against a superior route runner because he can't count on Jennings/McMillian to cover up the hole that would result from a crossfire blitz?

EDIT: TL, DR: If the only excuse Capers has for poor defensive play next year is ILB, he really has lost it. Our ILBs are good enough.

Hawk is good enough and the last couple seasons he has been getting better, but Jones???/ C'mon man.... Brad Jones is utterly terrible. He stands around on the field like he is lost and he moves like he has a load in his diaper. He is a waste of packer cash. Our ILB are not "good enough" by any means..... That issue should have been addressed in the draft or via free agency.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
Similarly, I would like to see something more from the position. I was honestly hoping for Shazier in the draft. After the two top ILBs got drafted, I wasn't excited about other ILBs--draftee or FA. Can't fix everything at once.

I don´t think Shazier would have been a great fit for our defense. I would have liked Thompson to take a gamble on Yawin Smallwood, who was considered the second best ILB by some before injuring his hamstring, especially as he dropped to the seventh round.

I also wouldn't be surprised if we get more from Jones. Not that he set the world on fire in 2012, but he played much better in 2012 than 2013. I'd guess his ankle sprain was much worse than he/the team let on.

It would be an improvement if Jones would be able to play at his 2012 level. Don´t expect a whole lot more out of him though.
 

mradtke66

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
1,618
Reaction score
522
Location
Madison, WI
Hawk is good enough and the last couple seasons he has been getting better, but Jones???/ C'mon man.... Brad Jones is utterly terrible. He stands around on the field like he is lost and he moves like he has a load in his diaper. He is a waste of packer cash. Our ILB are not "good enough" by any means..... That issue should have been addressed in the draft or via free agency.

They are certainly "good enough" because the baseline that is strictly required is relatively low for what we ask our ILBs to do. More would be nice, but not required.

Regarding Jones, you do realize that he hurt his ankle early in the season? And that he never really looked the same after that? If I recall correctly, it was a high-ankle sprain. That he was even able to play is speak volumes.

Now if he doesn't play well when healthy (presumably he stays healthy, different problem) sure, move on.

Regarding "should have been addressed," there aren't infinite resources. Limited draft picks, picks that don't line up with value, sub-optimal ILBs on the market, etc. Once the big two fell off the board before our pick, I didn't see an obvious, clear upgrade.
 

mradtke66

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
1,618
Reaction score
522
Location
Madison, WI
I don´t think Shazier would have been a great fit for our defense.

Well, the Steelers drafted him, so they must think he'll thrive in a 3-4. I will admit it's a little gamble, but all picks are.

It would be an improvement if Jones would be able to play at his 2012 level. Don´t expect a whole lot more out of him though.

I honestly don't know what his ceiling is. Maybe 2012 is it and he played out of his mind. Maybe he'll be better now that he has 2 years at his new position. I'm very wait and see here.
 

TJV

Lifelong Packers Fanatic
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
5,389
Reaction score
954
In his review of the players last season McGinn wrote this about Jones: “Brad Jones: After a pedestrian, injury-filled season, the Packers probably don't like the fact his base salary is to jump from $1 million to $2.5 million. Jones missed 3½ games early with a hamstring and another 1½ games late with an ankle injury. He was responsible for five 20-plus passes and 2½ 20-plus runs. He improved his pressure rate from last season. When healthy, Jones is faster than Hawk. He's also leggy, stiff-hipped and not overly instinctive. Grade: C-minus.” http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/defense12-b99180643z1-239782291.html

I think that’s a pretty fair evaluation of Jones with a grade that is slightly too high (Hawk got a “C”). I agree with mradtke66 that the situation at ILB going into this season is not comparably as bad as the safety situation going into last season. I wish they would have addressed the ILB position this off season – it would have been interesting if one of the top two ILBs would have been available along with Clinton-Dix. I’m not sure what was available in second tier or lower UFA so I too question whether an obvious upgrade was available.

I am hoping what we heard/read about Lattimore as the lone ILB in some alignments will work out, but for that to happen Lattimore will have to continue to improve. I believe he was switched to ILB in 2012 and didn’t get a lot of snaps there until last season so I don’t think it is unrealistic to think he could continue to get better there. And I’m holding out hope a player like Barrington could force his way into the starting lineup, although that’s unlikely.
 

Members online

No members online now.

Latest posts

Top