Josh Jones at ILB?

easyk83

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 20, 2013
Messages
2,783
Reaction score
280
OP
OP
brandon2348

brandon2348

GO PACK GO!
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
5,342
Reaction score
339
"Everything we know about the ILB position is about to change".

I really hope this is the case.
 

Poppa San

* Team Owner *
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Messages
12,867
Reaction score
2,766
Location
20 miles from Lambeau

Arthur Squires

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 14, 2016
Messages
950
Reaction score
63
Location
Chico California
From the limited tape I've seen he would need to bulk up and also need to be a consistent hitter. But he would bring some freakish athletic ability to the middle. Guess we have wait and see come training camp.
 

GreenBaySlacker

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 5, 2014
Messages
3,028
Reaction score
195
From the limited tape I've seen he would need to bulk up and also need to be a consistent hitter. But he would bring some freakish athletic ability to the middle. Guess we have wait and see come training camp.
Don't think this is your typical ilb... if GB keeps three down linemen, and a couple olbs in to keep pressure on the qb. Then a ilb would have to switch out with a secondary member to play nickel... who better than a 221 pound safety that runs a 4.41 40. You get the extra coverage skills, but at the same time he could switch back to ilb and still hold a front if they run at him.

I think the bigger more physical CBs in house /king combo will allow the other 9 players on the field to play their game, rather than change their game to compensate for the weak cb play.
Meaning there will be 3 dlineman in our 3-4. The olbs will rush and ilbs will cover everything. The safety's will be allowed to be the dynamic players that they are...
 

pizzle

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 29, 2017
Messages
216
Reaction score
50
Don't think this is your typical ilb... if GB keeps three down linemen, and a couple olbs in to keep pressure on the qb. Then a ilb would have to switch out with a secondary member to play nickel... who better than a 221 pound safety that runs a 4.41 40. You get the extra coverage skills, but at the same time he could switch back to ilb and still hold a front if they run at him.

I think the bigger more physical CBs in house /king combo will allow the other 9 players on the field to play their game, rather than change their game to compensate for the weak cb play.
Meaning there will be 3 dlineman in our 3-4. The olbs will rush and ilbs will cover everything. The safety's will be allowed to be the dynamic players that they are...

I think you may be on to something. In trying to figure out what the team is gonna do with the defense, I could definitely see us playing more "base" by lining up with 3 D-Lineman instead of just two, but with the nickel twist of a safety as 2nd ILB replacement instead of it being a CB/S hybrid being the nickel/replacing a DL. So we'd be running a big nickel variant, or 3-3-5, as the base instead of the 2-4-5 that we have for most of the last season-and-a-half. Arizona uses Deone Bucannon in a similar fashion within their scheme, but they flat out list him as a LB at 6'1'' 216. If Jones can bump out and be close to what Micah Hyde was in coverage on late passing downs, but often play in the box and give us what Morgan/Bucannon do on early downs-man-we'd have a nice piece to throw at teams.
 
Last edited:

Patriotplayer90

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 2, 2015
Messages
1,874
Reaction score
130
He's going to be a nickel LB in certain packages, as are almost all SS. I really don't see him being inside on early downs.
 

pizzle

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 29, 2017
Messages
216
Reaction score
50
He's going to be a nickel LB in certain packages, as are almost all SS. I really don't see him being inside on early downs.


I can possibly see it happening. The kid looks like he might be able to physically pull it off (has got some guns for arms) and does like to hit. If Ted keeps Morgan around after this season-which I think he should without question-it gives us some very nice versatility to combat teams with multiple RB formations utilizing them as receivers/all the different types of TEs/bigger slot wideouts being trotted out now by offenses. Think about it, we could have a "dime" package of Jones and Morgan as the two "backers", Randall inside where he could play a hybrid safety role (that would let him bait QBs/trail off to cover shallow, intermediate, and deep routes, being in position for INTs like the beautiful one he had against Seattle where he took away the flag route Baldwin was running-snatching a ball out of the air like a baseball outfielder) plus King and either House/Gunter outside, with Ha-Ha in his natural spot. Or a a "dollar" package of the aforementioned plus either Brice or Rollins, depending on the matchups. That sounds like turnover city to me...
 
Last edited:

Patriotplayer90

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 2, 2015
Messages
1,874
Reaction score
130
I can possibly see it happening. The kid looks like he might be able to physically pull it off (has got some guns for arms) and does like to hit. If Ted keeps Morgan around after this season-which I think he should without question-it gives us some very nice versatility to combat teams with multiple RB formations utilizing them as receivers/all the different types of TEs/bigger slot wideouts being trotted out now by offenses. Think about it, we could have a "dime" package of Jones and Morgan as the two "backers", Randall inside where he could play a hybrid safety role (that would let him bait QBs/trail off to cover shallow, intermediate, and deep routes and make INTs like the beautiful one he had against Seattle where he took away the flag route Baldwin was running-snatching a ball out of the air like a baseball outfielder) plus King and either House/Gunter outside, with Ha-Ha in his natural spot. Or a a "dollar" package of the aforementioned plus either Brice or Rollins, depending on the matchups. That sounds like turnover city to me...
Jones will have to be kept completely clean, as I see no desire from him to fight through the trash. But he can chase.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
Don't think this is your typical ilb... if GB keeps three down linemen, and a couple olbs in to keep pressure on the qb. Then a ilb would have to switch out with a secondary member to play nickel... who better than a 221 pound safety that runs a 4.41 40. You get the extra coverage skills, but at the same time he could switch back to ilb and still hold a front if they run at him.

I think the bigger more physical CBs in house /king combo will allow the other 9 players on the field to play their game, rather than change their game to compensate for the weak cb play.
Meaning there will be 3 dlineman in our 3-4. The olbs will rush and ilbs will cover everything. The safety's will be allowed to be the dynamic players that they are...

Just because you keep repeating your desire for having three defensive linemen on the field on an increased number of plays doesn't make it any more viable. I'm absolutely fine with a hydrid safety/inside linebacker replacing Ryan, Martinez or Thomas in specific situations but there's no reason to keep an additional DL on the field with opponents lining up in obvious passing formations.

I think you may be on to something. In trying to figure out what the team is gonna do with the defense, I could definitely see us playing more "base" by lining up with 3 D-Lineman instead of just two, but with the nickel twist of a safety as 2nd ILB replacement instead of it being a CB/S hybrid being the nickel/replacing a DL. So we'd be running a big nickel variant, or 3-3-5, as the base instead of the 2-4-5 that we have for most of the last season-and-a-half.

The Packers line up predominantly in nickel or dime packages to counter opponent's three and more receiver sets. The unit doesn't gain anything by keeping a third defensive lineman on the field in those situations as it doesn't improve the pass defense by any means and should be able to contain the rushing offense against receiver heavy formations with only two DL.

Think about it, we could have a "dime" package of Jones and Morgan as the two "backers", Randall inside where he could play a hybrid safety role (that would let him bait QBs/trail off to cover shallow, intermediate, and deep routes, being in position for INTs like the beautiful one he had against Seattle where he took away the flag route Baldwin was running-snatching a ball out of the air like a baseball outfielder) plus King and either House/Gunter outside, with Ha-Ha in his natural spot. Or a a "dollar" package of the aforementioned plus either Brice or Rollins, depending on the matchups. That sounds like turnover city to me...

That's a terrible idea as it would leave two safeties one-on-one with an opposing receiver. Once again, I'm absolutely fine with lining up a hybrid safety/inside linebacker in the traditional LB spot but it's essential to have four cornerbacks on the field in the dime package.
 

pizzle

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 29, 2017
Messages
216
Reaction score
50
Think about it, we could have a "dime" package of Jones and Morgan as the two "backers", Randall inside where he could play a hybrid safety role (that would let him bait QBs/trail off to cover shallow, intermediate, and deep routes, being in position for INTs like the beautiful one he had against Seattle where he took away the flag route Baldwin was running-snatching a ball out of the air like a baseball outfielder) plus King and either House/Gunter outside, with Ha-Ha in his natural spot. Or a a "dollar" package of the aforementioned plus either Brice or Rollins, depending on the matchups. That sounds like turnover city to me...

That's a terrible idea as it would leave two safeties one-on-one with an opposing receiver. Once again, I'm absolutely fine with lining up a hybrid safety/inside linebacker in the traditional LB spot but it's essential to have four cornerbacks on the field in the dime package.

I get that you believe traditionally the defense cannot risk attempting certain things. But just consider how our secondary has been constructed through acquisition and development. And when I say secondary, I'm focusing more on "cornerback" first, and then getting to your point about "safety".

Guys like Tramon Williams, Sam Shields, Davon House, and Ladarius Gunter would by most accounts be defined as true cornerbacks, regardless of their individual skill sets/playing traits. But think about some other guys in GB over the years that have filled the role of a "corner" in certain instances. Guys like Charles Woodson, Micah Hyde, and Damarious Randall. We all know C-Wood is the GOAT hybrid, Hyde was drafted as a hybrid, and Randall was essentially a safety that we made an outside corner when he came in as a rookie, even though ASU did somewhat of the opposite while he was in college. My point is, our defense has been designed (and coached/trained specifically to identify/accentuate specific players for probably a decade now or more) for certain guys to be able to act like safeties sometimes, while also at a flick of the wrist have the ability to act like a corner also.

With that being said, we look at positions like boundary/field corner and free safety as having primary assignments that require specific skills to be accomplished at a consistently competent level, besides blitzing. But I would venture to say that, when it comes to the positions of "strong safety/slot corner/nickelback/dimeback" the roles/responsibilities/objectives can be-at the minimum-binary based upon the formation of the offense and the defensive look/call. Therefore, certain multiple skill sets that can be added together within a single player (and sometimes even skill sets designed to compliment other players so they are working together as a unit/properly communicating with different positional groups within the defense as a whole) are required.

When you look at the four secondary positions I outlined, and then look at history and the players that have manned said positions, I think that the idea of a dime look for Green Bay with Dom Capers as DC and JW as a coach in the secondary having to have 4 Deion Sanders or Darrelle Revis or Richard Sherman or Davon House or Ladarius Gunter or Kevin King types on the field simoultaneously isn't necessarily what the staff/team wants. I would venture to say, though, that they wouldn't mind having 4 Charles Woodson types lined up together. Or 4 Micah Hyde types on their A-game with more athletic capabilities. Or 4 Damarious Randall/Quinten Rollins types when they looked great as rookies/Morgan Burnett on top of his craft with a little more speed + even better coverage skills, etc, etc...

Now, add in the reality that in our defensive scheme over recent years we have struggled at times with run defense up the middle, defending the deep ball, and communication lapses between the LBs and secondary that have led to big plays for the opposing offense, and you could see why having a Josh Jones (whom, by the way, was our second player drafted this year at pick #61-a high pick that means normally he's gonna play early and often/get every opportunity to by the team unless he can't) be a "super-hybrid" if you will-combining the skill sets of a Bucannon with AZ/Hyde with BUF now-may be part of what Ted/Mike/Dom/Joe have decided they need to attempt to embark on in order to improve. Which could possibly mean having a dime package that I previously described. The job of our coaches is to see what is going on in the league, along with what's going on with us, and provide solutions to give us the best chance to compete (especially on the defensive side of the ball, since we got AR as QB w/Mike running the O) for a chip. I can envision how having a dime look with Jones and Burnett inside could potentially not be good, or it could be exactly what we we need to do. I choose to think in terms of the latter, especially when you take into consideration Burnett looked great for the most part covering TEs man-2-man and in zone as a money backer last season/what Jones shows the potential of being coming from NC State.
 
Last edited:
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
I get that you believe traditionally the defense cannot risk attempting certain things. But just consider how our secondary has been constructed through acquisition and development. And when I say secondary, I'm focusing more on "cornerback" first, and then getting to your point about "safety".

Guys like Tramon Williams, Sam Shields, Davon House, and Ladarius Gunter would by most accounts be defined as true cornerbacks, regardless of their individual skill sets/playing traits. But think about some other guys in GB over the years that have filled the role of a "corner" in certain instances. Guys like Charles Woodson, Micah Hyde, and Damarious Randall. We all know C-Wood is the GOAT hybrid, Hyde was drafted as a hybrid, and Randall was essentially a safety that we made an outside corner when he came in as a rookie, even though ASU did somewhat of the opposite while he was in college. My point is, our defense has been designed (and coached/trained specifically to identify/accentuate specific players for probably a decade now or more) for certain guys to be able to act like safeties sometimes, while also at a flick of the wrist have the ability to act like a corner also.

With that being said, we look at positions like boundary/field corner and free safety as having primary assignments that require specific skills to be accomplished at a consistently competent level, besides blitzing. But I would venture to say that, when it comes to the positions of "strong safety/slot corner/nickelback/dimeback" the roles/responsibilities/objectives can be-at the minimum-binary based upon the formation of the offense and the defensive look/call. Therefore, certain multiple skill sets that can be added together within a single player (and sometimes even skill sets designed to compliment other players so they are working together as a unit/properly communicating with different positional groups within the defense as a whole) are required.

When you look at the four secondary positions I outlined, and then look at history and the players that have manned said positions, I think that the idea of a dime look for Green Bay with Dom Capers as DC and JW as a coach in the secondary having to have 4 Deion Sanders or Darrelle Revis or Richard Sherman or Davon House or Ladarius Gunter or Kevin King types on the field simoultaneously isn't necessarily what the staff/team wants. I would venture to say, though, that they wouldn't mind having 4 Charles Woodson types lined up together. Or 4 Micah Hyde types on their A-game with more athletic capabilities. Or 4 Damarious Randall/Quinten Rollins types when they looked great as rookies/Morgan Burnett on top of his craft with a little more speed + even better coverage skills, etc, etc...

Now, add in the reality that in our defensive scheme over recent years we have struggled at times with run defense up the middle, defending the deep ball, and communication lapses between the LBs and secondary that have led to big plays for the opposing offense, and you could see why having a Josh Jones (whom, by the way, was our second player drafted this year at pick #61-a high pick that means normally he's gonna play early and often/get every opportunity to by the team unless he can't) be a "super-hybrid" if you will-combining the skill sets of a Bucannon with AZ/Hyde with BUF now-may be part of what Ted/Mike/Dom/Joe have decided they need to attempt to embark on in order to improve. Which could possibly mean having a dime package that I previously described. The job of our coaches is to see what is going on in the league, along with what's going on with us, and provide solutions to give us the best chance to compete (especially on the defensive side of the ball, since we got AR as QB w/Mike running the O) for a chip. I can envision how having a dime look with Jones and Burnett inside could potentially not be good, or it could be exactly what we we need to do. I choose to think in terms of the latter, especially when you take into consideration Burnett looked great for the most part covering TEs man-2-man and in zone as a money backer last season/what Jones shows the potential of being coming from NC State.

The point being that I want cornerbacks covering opposing receivers as that requires a specific skill set. As I've mentioned above I'm fine with using a hybrid safety/linebacker in specific situations but there's no way I feel comfortable with four guys best suited to line up at safety defending an opponent having four primary pass catchers on the field.
 

GreenBaySlacker

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 5, 2014
Messages
3,028
Reaction score
195
Jones will have to be kept completely clean, as I see no desire from him to fight through the trash. But he can chase.
When we have 3 very good dlineman on the field such as Daniels, Guion, Clark, Francois, caliber. And two olbs such as perry, who is a beast. And Clay being the after thought... there won't be a blocker to take Jones out... they oline and te will already have their hands full blocking the 5 rushers...
 
Last edited:
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
When we have 3 very good dlineman on the field such as Daniels, Guion, Clark, Francois, caliber. And two olbs such as perry, who is a beast. And Clay being the after thought... there won't be a blocker to take Jones out... they dline and te will already have their hands full blocking the 5 rushers...

Do you honestly suggest to rush the passer with six guys consistently??? :rolleyes:

The Packers would set several records for futility by doing so.
 

GreenBaySlacker

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 5, 2014
Messages
3,028
Reaction score
195
You've been pounding the three down lineman for a long time and yet Dom seems to be no closer to it.
You must be logged in to see this image or video!
He isn't? He drafted Clark and a similar 3rd rounder this year. As well as adding Francois. And hasn't let Guion go yet..... he got rid of the elephant olb with peppers and datone gone.... started going bigger and faster at cb, and even got a safety to play ilb...

Seems to me like dom is finally listening to me.
 

RRyder

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 17, 2014
Messages
1,775
Reaction score
183
I know adding is hard for some people... but 3+2=5. Not 6...

Even at rushing 5 most of the time it's a bad idea. I can go on more into detail but rushing more then 4 the vast majority of the time is the quickest way for a D to get shredded. It shouldn't even need to be explained
 

Packer Fan in SD

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
826
Reaction score
167
When we have 3 very good dlineman on the field such as Daniels, Guion, Clark, Francois, caliber. And two olbs such as perry, who is a beast. And Clay being the after thought... there won't be a blocker to take Jones out... they dline and te will already have their hands full blocking the 5 rushers...
I know adding is hard for some people... but 3+2=5. Not 6...

Maybe I am reading it wrong but it looks to me like you are saying 3 dlinemen, 2 lbs and then Jones. I count 6.
 

easyk83

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 20, 2013
Messages
2,783
Reaction score
280
Even at rushing 5 most of the time it's a bad idea. I can go on more into detail but rushing more then 4 the vast majority of the time is the quickest way for a D to get shredded. It shouldn't even need to be explained

Well it depends, if you've got a bunch of pro bowlers and all pros on the backend of your defense you might be able to get away with it. Why this one time in Madden...
 

GreenBaySlacker

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 5, 2014
Messages
3,028
Reaction score
195
Even at rushing 5 most of the time it's a bad idea. I can go on more into detail but rushing more then 4 the vast majority of the time is the quickest way for a D to get shredded. It shouldn't even need to be explained
Shredded worse than what our defense has recently?

One of Lombardi's big things was to make the other team play our game...

Pulling a dlineman to put in a extra db is one thing when you start in the 4-3. But starting from the 3-4, you literally concede the trenches, and play a reactionary bend but don't break defense from the secondary...
Maybe I'd Lombardi was facing the pass attacks we are today, he might look at things differently. But I doubt that...

With the 3 dominant dlineman, and two stud speed olbs of Perry, and Mathews caliber. You bring our game to them. Now we got two stud safety's ,two physical CBs who can man up, and two ilbs who can cover well. One of which could be our rookie 221 pound 4.41 safety. Great secondary depth. That secondary will hold strong long enough for the front 5 to get to their qb... even with 6 blockers...

Now we have pressure.

Some offenses will just buckle.
Some offenses will put up a fight, and their qb will get smeared. They might win sometimes. But we have to remember they have to beat #12 on the other side of the ball...
Some of the elite offenses will test the defense as a whole. If the defense begins to fail at that point. We always have the option to fall back to a bend but don't break defense.

But we need to bring our game to them.

Now figure this! If we played a great offense with one weakness in blocking that's 6 blockers with their hands full. We already have taken a te or rb out of the play, being forced to stay back and block. If our guys continue to beat the one on ones. They will be forced to take another skill player out of their attack, to protect their qb..... that's called making them play our game....

I still believe the game is won and lost in the trenches. Even if the rest of the positions ate becoming continuously more valuable in a pass happy league. It all comes down to them protecting their qb, and making room for their rb. And it's our job to break through the line and stop them. You win that battle, and you win the game.
 
Last edited:

Members online

Latest posts

Top