How about a "traditional" 3-4?

[longtimefan]

My contention is that the coaches are 101% responsible for their men. And if they take any other approach than to accept responsibility as a staff who sought them, interviewed them, Hired them, trained them and then told them exactly what was expected Make the calls, adjustments, etc. well, then They shouldn't be coaching.


No you got me. I'm blaming The staff. Not just Capers. Everyone who had a say on that players involvement.
Listen , every position has a support position. They do what they are told. Now sure. I agree.. They gotta play ball. But ultimately the grand scheme Is a reliance on the man next to you. Those individuals didn't ask to have certain players play beside them. It's a machine. All the parts work in unison, when 1 part fails. It can deem the whole machine defunct. If you recall this is the reason they chose AR over Favre. The coaches hired personnel suited to ARs strengths and weakness. The draft. FA had already happened. They already started practicing together. It wasn't about personal feelings like too many think. It was about the machine.

Jack made a good point.

Do you think if we had Suh and Fairley from the Lions, would this def line be better?

 

[TJV]

My contention is that the coaches are 101% responsible for their men.

This seems to contradict this and what you have been posting:

And if they take any other approach than to accept responsibility as a staff who sought them, interviewed them, Hired them, trained them and then told them exactly what was expected…

The staff members mostly responsible for “seeking” them, interviewing them and hiring them is Ted Thompson and his personnel staff. And when they fail at that, the reason is often a lack of talent. Worthy is an example. Yes he got injured but before that he showed very little and after being released he went to New England and was released. Now I believe he’s on the Chief’s practice squad. That’s a failed second round pick you appear to be blaming 101% on the Packers coaching staff (and perhaps the Patriots and Chiefs coaching staffs since they couldn’t get him to play NFL football at an acceptable level). Brian Brohm is another example. Is it 101% the fault of QB “guru” McCarthy and his staff that they couldn’t get him to play at an adequate level?

It's a machine. All the parts work in unison, when 1 part fails. It can deem the whole machine defunct. If you recall this is the reason they chose AR over Favre. The coaches hired personnel suited to ARs strengths and weakness. The draft. FA had already happened. They already started practicing together. It wasn't about personal feelings like too many think. It was about the machine.

IMO Rodgers was viewed as a better member of the "machine" because he takes care of the ball much better. But could you give us an example of players acquired which suited Rodgers strengths and weaknesses as opposed to Favre’s?

 

[OldSchool101]

This seems to contradict this and what you have been posting: The staff members mostly responsible for “seeking” them, interviewing them and hiring them is Ted Thompson and his personnel staff. And when they fail at that, the reason is often a lack of talent. Worthy is an example. Yes he got injured but before that he showed very little and after being released he went to New England and was released. Now I believe he’s on the Chief’s practice squad. That’s a failed second round pick you appear to be blaming 101% on the Packers coaching staff (and perhaps the Patriots and Chiefs coaching staffs since they couldn’t get him to play NFL football at an acceptable level). Brian Brohm is another example. Is it 101% the fault of QB “guru” McCarthy and his staff that they couldn’t get him to play at an adequate level? IMO Rodgers was viewed as a better member of the "machine" because he takes care of the ball much better. But could you give us an example of players acquired which suited Rodgers strengths and weaknesses as opposed to Favre’s?

Good try. But I don't need to. I hire and train people every week in my profession. I don't need to pretend I'm an expert at pro football. I stick to my strengths. But I know this and you will never convince me otherwise because my company has survived by this principle alone. " it starts with Me".
The second I blame my employees. That I hired. ( Other than some catastrophic example) is the second that I have failed to understand the process.
Those football players by the way, they are employees. When you call their house during the day. The wife sais " he's at work". And that ain't a guess because I've done it. literally.

 

[easyk83]

IMO Rodgers was viewed as a better member of the "machine" because he takes care of the ball much better. But could you give us an example of players acquired which suited Rodgers strengths and weaknesses as opposed to Favre’s?

True and it plays hell on an FO to not know who the Quarterback is going to be every single offseason. It's also worth noting that Aaron' shelf life at the time was about a decade and a half compared to maybe 2-3 more years from Brett Favre. No one reason there.

 

[OldSchool101]

Far

No problem - at least you responded to my post here instead of just quoting it. I am telling you so far this season Daniels, Datone, Boyd, Guion and AJ have not shown the talent to play the run consistently. And the DL at least occasionally (understated for effect) are supposed to hit people at the LOS. Do you think that's not happening because they're all double teamed?

Look at the first three teams the Packers played - their DL and/or front 7 have better talent than the Packers. The Lions frequently put 6 men in the box and stopped the Packers running game. Pick any six Packers on the roster - do you believe with the right strategy those six could duplicate that result? No, talent matters. The Packers went from having two fat guys and a run stopper (Wilson) on the DL (who weren't consistently stopping the run either) to having lighter, lengthier athletes. They all aren't two gapping on every play yet they aren't getting penetration. And if you sell out on the run, the middle of the Packers pass D will look even worse than it has on too many occasions. It is a team game and to be successful, the DL and quasi DL (LBs whose responsibilities are DL oriented) have to do their jobs as part of the team.

Capers looked pretty damn smart with Jenkins, a young(er) Pickett, a dynamic Raji, a healthy Matthews, Woodson, and Collins. Talent matters. BTW, the 100,000 warriors and 300 men was funny but obviously not applicable: You can't control the high ground or attack in narrow passages on a football field.

Lol. 2 fAT guys! Bahaha. Thanks for that laugh. Agree to disagree I guess. I'm not gonna try to change your whole belief system here. That's not my goal. Your entitled to your opinion. And maybe I learned something by your point today. Maybe it 1% players fault after all! Lol. J/K
I'm telling as a fellow Packer Backer I don't pretend to have all the answers. But I know business. I know human nature. laws and those rules apply even in football.
So it doesn't matter if your in a valley of parameters or a sideline of parameters. It's the concept of controlling your men, inspiring your men(and by the way, Capers is not inspiring his men in that cozy skybox) and getting perceived results. If you can't do that. Step down

 

[OldSchool101]

Are we increasing the squad sizes again ???

I think so. Instead of 12 men on the field penalty it'll be 301 men on the field penalty. Lol

 

[TJV]

Good try. But I don't need to. I hire and train people every week in my profession. I don't need to pretend I'm an expert at pro football. I stick to my strengths. But I know this and you will never convince me otherwise because my company has survived by this principle alone. " it starts with Me".

The second I blame my employees. That I hired. ( Other than some catastrophic example) is the second that I have failed to understand the process.

Those football players by the way, they are employees.

You don’t need to what – identify players acquired to suit Rodgers rather than Favre? You brought it up, I was just asking you an honest question about your statement.

And you hire employees? Great, you and millions of others (me included) do too. (I’m not sure what the point of bringing that up was but...) Here is IMO the crux of it: You are failing to distinguish between two aspects of running an NFL franchise. Unlike you, those mostly responsible for acquiring/hiring the employees are not also responsible for training them. So many of us here distinguish between the responsibilities of Ted Thompson and his staff in hiring the employees and Mike McCarthy and his staff in training the employees. If Thompson and his staff largely or significantly fail in acquiring talented employees, it makes the job of McCarthy and his staff impossible to compete in their chosen business. IOW, if you as the person hiring employees suck, you as the trainer of those employees will likely fail. And if you say it all starts with you, rather than analyzing your proficiency in doing each of those two separate jobs, you’ll fail to acknowledge the problem of you sucking as the person evaluating and hiring employees. You hire and train employees; the job of NFL coaching staffs is mostly just to train them.

Edit: I was typing this and was interrupted as you wrote another post.

 

[easyk83]

Well stated. To this point, the D is really struggling on winning individual match ups at the point of attack.

Hawk did have 1 or 2 stops inside 5 yards from line of scrimmage. Just hate to see him chasing all the time. Watch how many times he picks the wrong hole fill.

I thought he played very well yesterday under the circumstances. But it's tough to play that position when your defensive front allows jailbreak situations to occur with multiple open holes.

 

[I asked LT to delete my acct]

gentlemen please, its just opinions

 

[brandon2348]

Jack made a good point.

Do you think if we had Suh and Fairley from the Lions, would this def line be better?

I don't think we would need both Suh and Fairley. Suh would be enough especially if we kept Peppers who Suh could become under good tutelage and leadership with. Draft Denzel Perryman, ILB and a nose(I prefer Terry Willaims). Then continue to develop Jones and Thornton and you also got Daniels and Lattimore with a solid back ups in Barrington and Boyd along with Pennell. If Capers couldn't produce with talent like that then I would say he has to go but right now were slow and soft inside and we have been for quite some time.

Cut the fat in the inside and start over. I am tired of TT trying to plug holes in the middle of the defense trying to get lucky with "bargain basement free agents" and "UDFA's" that by the time they develop there becomes another hole.

 

[OldSchool101]

You don’t need to what – identify players acquired to suit Rodgers rather than Favre? You brought it up, I was just asking you an honest question about your statement.

And you hire employees? Great, you and millions of others (me included) do too. (I’m not sure what the point of bringing that up was but...) Here is IMO the crux of it: You are failing to distinguish between two aspects of running an NFL franchise. Unlike you, those mostly responsible for acquiring/hiring the employees are not also responsible for training them. So many of us here distinguish between the responsibilities of Ted Thompson and his staff in hiring the employees and Mike McCarthy and his staff in training the employees. If Thompson and his staff largely or significantly fail in acquiring talented employees, it makes the job of McCarthy and his staff impossible to compete in their chosen business. IOW, if you as the person hiring employees suck, you as the trainer of those employees will likely fail. And if you say it all starts with you, rather than analyzing your proficiency in doing each of those two separate jobs, you’ll fail to acknowledge the problem of you sucking as the person evaluating and hiring employees. You hire and train employees; the job of NFL coaching staffs is mostly just to train them.

Edit: I was typing this and was interrupted as you wrote another post.

I will credit you with saying it like you called it. I wish I could've had you as a ref for that game. Attention to detail is everything. It's why I got a secretary. Lol

 

[longtimefan]

I don't think we would need both Suh and Fairley. Suh would be enough especially if we kept Peppers who Suh could become under good tutelage and leadership with. Draft Denzel Perryman, ILB and a nose(I prefer Terry Willaims). Then continue to develop Jones and Thornton and you also got Daniels and Lattimore with a solid back ups in Barrington and Boyd along with Pennell. If Capers couldn't produce with talent like that then I would say he has to go but right now were slow and soft inside and we have been for quite some time.

Cut the fat in the inside and start over. I am tired of TT trying to plug holes in the middle of the defense trying to get lucky with "bargain basement free agents" and "UDFA's" that by the time they develop there becomes another hole.

my question..We have Suh and Fairley ( they replace whom ever you want replaced, just those moves, nothing else.

Is the defense better

 

[longtimefan]

I will credit you with saying it like you called it. I wish I could've had you as a ref for that game. Attention to detail is everything. It's why I got a secretary. Lol

my question..We have Suh and Fairley ( they replace whom ever you want replaced, just those moves, nothing else.

Is the defense better???

its either a yes or a no

 

[OldSchool101]

W

You don’t need to what – identify players acquired to suit Rodgers rather than Favre? You brought it up, I was just asking you an honest question about your statement.

And you hire employees? Great, you and millions of others (me included) do too. (I’m not sure what the point of bringing that up was but...) Here is IMO the crux of it: You are failing to distinguish between two aspects of running an NFL franchise. Unlike you, those mostly responsible for acquiring/hiring the employees are not also responsible for training them. So many of us here distinguish between the responsibilities of Ted Thompson and his staff in hiring the employees and Mike McCarthy and his staff in training the employees. If Thompson and his staff largely or significantly fail in acquiring talented employees, it makes the job of McCarthy and his staff impossible to compete in their chosen business. IOW, if you as the person hiring employees suck, you as the trainer of those employees will likely fail. And if you say it all starts with you, rather than analyzing your proficiency in doing each of those two separate jobs, you’ll fail to acknowledge the problem of you sucking as the person evaluating and hiring employees. You hire and train employees; the job of NFL coaching staffs is mostly just to train them.

Edit: I was typing this and was interrupted as you wrote another post.

holly crappola. Does your spouse have to

You don’t need to what – identify players acquired to suit Rodgers rather than Favre? You brought it up, I was just asking you an honest question about your statement.

And you hire employees? Great, you and millions of others (me included) do too. (I’m not sure what the point of bringing that up was but...) Here is IMO the crux of it: You are failing to distinguish between two aspects of running an NFL franchise. Unlike you, those mostly responsible for acquiring/hiring the employees are not also responsible for training them. So many of us here distinguish between the responsibilities of Ted Thompson and his staff in hiring the employees and Mike McCarthy and his staff in training the employees. If Thompson and his staff largely or significantly fail in acquiring talented employees, it makes the job of McCarthy and his staff impossible to compete in their chosen business. IOW, if you as the person hiring employees suck, you as the trainer of those employees will likely fail. And if you say it all starts with you, rather than analyzing your proficiency in doing each of those two separate jobs, you’ll fail to acknowledge the problem of you sucking as the person evaluating and hiring employees. You hire and train employees; the job of NFL coaching staffs is mostly just to train them.

Edit: I was typing this and was interrupted as you wrote another post.

man. I'm more worn out trying

This seems to contradict this and what you have been posting: The staff members mostly responsible for “seeking” them, interviewing them and hiring them is Ted Thompson and his personnel staff. And when they fail at that, the reason is often a lack of talent. Worthy is an example. Yes he got injured but before that he showed very little and after being released he went to New England and was released. Now I believe he’s on the Chief’s practice squad. That’s a failed second round pick you appear to be blaming 101% on the Packers coaching staff (and perhaps the Patriots and Chiefs coaching staffs since they couldn’t get him to play NFL football at an acceptable level). Brian Brohm is another example. Is it 101% the fault of QB “guru” McCarthy and his staff that they couldn’t get him to play at an adequate level? IMO Rodgers was viewed as a better member of the "machine" because he takes care of the ball much better. But could you give us an example of players acquired which suited Rodgers strengths and weaknesses as opposed to Favre’s?

It is 101% the failure of those in control to take the appropriate action when desired results are not realized. So to answer your question. yes. It's the coaches responsibility. In your example the Pats took responsibility and mitigated damages by immediately releasing him. So in fact, my statement is true. The players end performance is controlled by the coaches just like I said all along. By the way. They can also
Affect players performance by creating internal competition. E.G. Pull Lacy a game or 2. He's not performing. Watch what happens when Starks takes his role for a few weeks. They get hungry. Again control mechanisms are coach related

 

[longtimefan]

W

holly crappola. Does your spouse have to

man. I'm more worn out trying

It is 101% the failure of those in control to take the appropriate action when desired results are not realized. So to answer your question. yes. It's the coaches responsibility. In your example the Pats took responsibility and mitigated damages by immediately releasing him. So in fact, my statement is true. The players end performance is controlled by the coaches just like I said all along. By the way. They can also
Affect players performance by creating internal competition. E.G. Pull Lacy a game or 2. He's not performing. Watch what happens when Starks takes his role for a few weeks. They get hungry. Again control mechanisms are coach related

Can you double check your post?

your quotes are all over the place and make no sense

 

[brandon2348]

my question..We have Suh and Fairley ( they replace whom ever you want replaced, just those moves, nothing else.

Is the defense better

of course. yes

 

[TJV]

W... holly crappola. Does your spouse have to...

You responded to my post #32 with your post #36 talking about attention to detail etc., which I "liked". Then you wrote post #39 which is undecipherable as LTF notes and seems to have problems with my post #32 which you didn't address in #36. (BTW, no need to quote the same post more than once in your post.) There's only one person using Twiddlemylobes, right?

 

[longtimefan]

You responded to my post #32 with your post #36 talking about attention to detail etc., which I "liked". Then you wrote post #39 which is undecipherable as LTF notes and seems to have problems with my post #32 which you didn't address in #36. (BTW, no need to quote the same post more than once in your post.) There's only one person using Twiddlemylobes, right?

holy crap Jack, thats harder to follow then his quote

 

[OldSchool101]

You responded to my post #32 with your post #36 talking about attention to detail etc., which I "liked". Then you wrote post #39 which is undecipherable as LTF notes and seems to have problems with my post #32 which you didn't address in #36. (BTW, no need to quote the same post more than once in your post.) There's only one person using Twiddlemylobes, right?

I don't have problems with you Jack. I'm having fun in here debating this stuff With you. I'm merely backing my point if view cause I don't want you getting the last Word (just kidding, I think?) It's kinda growing on me you playing devils advocate and all. Hey listen if you didn't respect my opinion I'm sure you would've just ignored me or told me to buzz off it keeps me honest and I might even learn something. I consider it an opportunity to get stronger. I certainly can work on my detail (as seen in the double post with no comment.). Lol.
You're good Jack. You're a Packer fan not a Bears fan harassing me I hope?
Why, I'd even buy you a beer if we were sitting a bar or whatever. Gotta go. I havens salesperson that didn't perform or meet objective (sound familiar). So to get the results My team wants I'm changing his pay plan to achieve those results. I can guarantee you one thing. If I don't? It'll be status quo next month
Out here

 

[PackerFanLV]

lattimore is the only one playing up to par as far as the front 7, he is playing consistent every game. its our front seven thats y we keep getting gashed. if clay was healthy i think things would be better but the front seven are getting blown up. its like a miracle if we can stop someone on 3 down.

 

[gatorpack]

3rd and 1 is to easy. Its first and second down that needs to improve

 

[Poppa San]

3rd and 1 is to easy. Its first and second down that needs to improve

Without statistics it looks like 3&1 can be stopped before 3&8. The dump offs for 6-8 yards and a first are the killer.

 

[HardRightEdge]

As to the OP question...not even on a good day against a poor running team with this personnel.

Guion has been a disapointment. He was getting blown off the ball all day by that patchwork CHI offensive line. I'd like to think his problems stem from missing training camp and perhaps being brought back early from the hamstring. Based on his play alone, with no assumptions about conditioning or injuries, he's got no business playing NT, be it 0 or 1 gap.

Boyd has not been much better at NT; he looks better at DE when we do play a 3 man front.

Datone Jones looks like our next DL-to-OLB conversion project.

Pennel looks like he has the muscle and motor for traditional 3-4, but he's raw. But with the way Guion and Boyd are playing on the nose he might see more snaps.

Neal...he's a gamer and a decent pass rusher but he's just too small to be playing DE.

Peppers has no place in 3-4 DL...he's a 9 technique guy all the way...whether standing or down.

There was never a plan to play traditional 3-4 with a 0 tech NT...Raji was going to be playing the 1 tech...and there were a lot of eggs in that basket that of course never had a chance to materialize.

 

[brandon2348]

As to the OP question...not even on a good day against a poor running team with this personnel.

Guion has been a disapointment. He was getting blown off the ball all day by that patchwork CHI offensive line. I'd like to think his problems stem from missing training camp and perhaps being brought back early from the hamstring. Based on his play alone, with no assumptions about conditioning or injuries, he's got no business playing NT, be it 0 or 1 gap.

Boyd has not been much better at NT; he looks better at DE when when we do play a 3 man front.

Datone Jones looks like our next DL-to-OLB conversion project.

Pennel looks like he has the muscle and motor for traditional 3-4, but he's raw. But with the way Guion and Boyd are playing on the nose he might see more snaps.

Neal...he's a gamer and a decent pass rusher but he's just too small to be playing DE.

Peppers has no place in 3-4 DL...he's a 9 technique guy all the way...whether standing or down.

There was never a plan to play traditional 3-4 with a 0 tech NT...Raji was going to be playing the 1 tech...and there were a lot of eggs in that basket that of course never had a chance to materialize.

Well then time to re-load the basket with eggs and change the plan if we don't have the personnel to run it. After seeing this big new scheme that they got everyone so excited about it appears to me that for it to work you need a dominant player up front which we don't have. You need a guy like Suh.

Why not throw Pennell at "0" and line up Guion and Daniels at "3" and rotate Boyd in? Maybe Guion will play better at "3" alongside a "o".

They can still move linebackers around and drop an ILB on nickel and go to the 2-4 on passing downs with dime,

 

[HardRightEdge]

Well then time to re-load the basket with eggs and change the plan if we don't have the personnel to run it. After seeing this big new scheme that they got everyone so excited about it appears to me that for it to work you need a dominant player up front which we don't have. You need a guy like Suh.

Why not throw Pennell at "0" and line up Guion and Daniels at "3" and rotate Boyd in? Maybe Guion will play better at "3" alongside a "o".

They can still move linebackers around and drop an ILB on nickel and go to the 2-4 on passing downs with dime,

To steal a line from Moneyball, the front 7 is an island of misfit toys, but in this case the whole is less than the sum of the parts. It is an organizational failure several years in the making.

While your suggestion probably couldn't be worse than what we've seen against the run, we need to be reminded that the opponent does not provide their play in advance. The idea of having to rush the passer with P, G and D together is not a promising notion.

We did not bring back Pickett for this reason...his pass rushing ability, which was not bad in the early years, had degraded to zero. A team can get away with a player like that if he's surrounded by pass rushing talent...we're not that team.

The weakest link is Guion unless and until he gets over whatever ails him, if anything. In the meantime, Pennel has to play whether he's ready or not.