Carl
Cheesehead
The depth chart during OTAs doesn´t mean a whole lot once the season starts.
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.
The depth chart during OTAs doesn´t mean a whole lot once the season starts.
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.
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.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.
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.
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.
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???
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.
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'sNot sure about that either. Who would he replace in that scenario???
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 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'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.
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.
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 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.
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.
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.
I don´t think Shazier would have been a great fit for our defense.
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.