Packers to be More Physical

El Guapo

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 7, 2011
Messages
6,111
Reaction score
1,590
Location
Land 'O Lakes
Collins then Bishop, two physical players in the middle of the field, were not adequately replaced. I think that about covers it.
I find your remark here curious. Why would Bishop be replaced? He's still our starter. Yes I'd love for all of our backups to be elite players too, but that's not reality.

Collins I agree it would be great to have Collins 2.0 playing back there, but your "adequate" statement leads me to believe that the staff somehow screwed up? While safety is a need, I think that most fans and media would agree that they've had bigger needs for our top draft picks. You can only do so much when looking for safety in the mid-to-late rounds and/or free agency.

As to my original post that Bozz got hammered on, I don't mind his response. His broader point was that when we play aggressive we more often play undisciplined. I can buy that argument. I disagree with the hail mary point mainly because I don't agree that it was an undisciplined play, but I recognize that wasn't the main thrust of his point.
 

TJV

Lifelong Packers Fanatic
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
5,389
Reaction score
954
I never understood why the Packers would draft a 6-0 defensive lineman..... Daniels. :confused:
That's an interesting comment because we can now contrast the 6-2, 304 lb. Worthy to the 6-0, 294 lb. Daniels after their rookie seasons. If I could turn back the clock and convince Thompson not to select one of these two players it would be Worthy I'd suggest he bypass and it's not even close. (According to McGinn) Daniels was second on the DL in pressures per snap at one every 22.4 snaps while Worthy was fourth in pressures with one every 73.8 Daniels was quick and displayed a non-stop motor and unfortunately Worthy didn't. [sarcasm]Maybe if Worthy weren't so tall…[/sarcasm]

BTW, McGinn says after finding out his quick first step wasn't enough in the NFL, Worthy dropped about 20 pounds to the mid-280s, "in hopes of shedding baby fat and rebuilding his body". So there's still hope for Worthy if he's dedicated. At this point I hope he's on IR all season, gets completely healthy and in the process adds good weight and returns quicker and stronger in 2014.
 
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
I find your remark here curious. Why would Bishop be replaced? He's still our starter. Yes I'd love for all of our backups to be elite players too, but that's not reality.

The point is somewhat obvious.

The 23 posts on the topic before Bishop got a mention indicates the backward looking character of the discussion.

Bishop returning to form is an open question; if he does, then we have a partial solution.
 
OP
OP
13 Times Champs

13 Times Champs

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 24, 2011
Messages
3,924
Reaction score
424
Location
Virginia
That's an interesting comment because we can now contrast the 6-2, 304 lb. Worthy to the 6-0, 294 lb. Daniels after their rookie seasons. If I could turn back the clock and convince Thompson not to select one of these two players it would be Worthy I'd suggest he bypass and it's not even close. (According to McGinn) Daniels was second on the DL in pressures per snap at one every 22.4 snaps while Worthy was fourth in pressures with one every 73.8 Daniels was quick and displayed a non-stop motor and unfortunately Worthy didn't. [sarcasm]Maybe if Worthy weren't so tall…[/sarcasm]

BTW, McGinn says after finding out his quick first step wasn't enough in the NFL, Worthy dropped about 20 pounds to the mid-280s, "in hopes of shedding baby fat and rebuilding his body". So there's still hope for Worthy if he's dedicated. At this point I hope he's on IR all season, gets completely healthy and in the process adds good weight and returns quicker and stronger in 2014.

Well I agree with Shawnsta that both he and Neal have limited roles to play. I guess we have to remember that Daniels was picked at the end of the 4th round so maybe that's what you get at that point. I just wonder if that is is the situation maybe you look at another position. And no I don't know who else was around at another position that may have been better.
 

TJV

Lifelong Packers Fanatic
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
5,389
Reaction score
954
[killing time before the draft] If Neal and Daniels have limited roles, what was Worthy's role? He was not stout enough vs. the run to play DE in the base well and Neal and Daniels were both better getting pressure on the QB.

Maybe I can simplify this:

Facts: Worthy was picked at #51 in the last draft. Thompson traded picks #59 and #123 to move up to pick him. Daniels was picked with a compensation pick at #132.

Opinion: Daniels was better than Worthy.

So it seems odd to me that someone would post they don't understand why the Packers would draft a 6' DL when an example exists from that very same draft of a taller DL who wasn't as good as the shorter DL. Not only that, but Daniels was selected 81 picks after Worthy. In fact, Thompson traded two picks above #132 to select a player not as good as Daniels. So with the benefit of hindsight wouldn't it make more sense to wonder if it wouldn't have made more sense to look at another position with pick #51, or better yet not trade picks #59 and #123 and look at two other positions? [/]
 

Oshkoshpackfan

YUT !!!
Joined
Aug 14, 2012
Messages
3,286
Reaction score
260
Location
Camp Lejeune NC
I think we just need to get plain mean, physical yes, but we need a few guys that are just down right p!ssed off all the time and want to kill anyone not in our uniform.......old school attitude is no longer alive. I'm not talking about head hunting illegal hits, just a plain out mean @ss individual who will strike fear into opposing players.
 
OP
OP
13 Times Champs

13 Times Champs

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 24, 2011
Messages
3,924
Reaction score
424
Location
Virginia
Someone is just trying to nitpick my post. Worthy has nothing to do with my point about Daniels lack of height and being selected despite it. They knew he was 6-0 when they drafted him. I think short smallish defensive linemen have limitations especially in the 3-4. You need big DL guys to play in that system. OPINION.

Worthy is a separate argument.
 
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
So taking a look at our 2013 draft class, did TT accomplish the goal of getting more physical players?

In a word, no. They went in the other direction, in fact...on balance more athleticism, more speed, more versatility.

The goal of getting more physical was promoted in the media. I recall no direct quote that said more physicality was a goal of the organization, though some reporters claimed that claimed that it was. Then some of us bought into the claim because we thought it had merit.

I believe the principals...TT, MM, Capers...are philosophically biased toward the aforementioned athleticism, speed and versatility.
 

Members online

No members online now.

Latest posts

Top