Who should start at DE opposite Daniels?

[TJV]

The problem is....... When you consistantly pick in the 30's. You never get the obvious difference makers. Im curious, if a player could be figured in??? We have a great 1st round pick in Perry, who would be very valuable to a 4-3 team. And could be replaced with Neal, Elliot, Mulumba if he recovers good from the knee. Without much of a drop off. Or could we trade Datone Jones, our starter, for a guy who would take his starting job? Basicly instead of morgaging next years 1st round pick. use last years 1st round pick..... Doesnt hurt as bad at least. and gets the job done.... I would prefer to let Perry go to a 4-3 than lose our pass rushing DE...

IMO your posts continue to be unrealistic and not just with regard to your expectations for DL in a 3-4. For example I wonder what percentage of serious Packers fans believe Nick Perry is a “great 1st round pick”? Is there another poster here who believes that? BTW, Jones started 3 games according to the Packers website, but he did average about 25 snaps/game. But not at DE: Most of his snaps were at DT in the 2-man DL. Also, the Packers consistently pick in the 20s, not 30s.

 

[adambr2]

You guys asked what draft pick I thought would do what I want.... He's ranked 16, on ESPN with 2 D-linemen ahead of him and Brown at 17......... Not saying its a good idea. But it is possible, should he slip a bit. Regardless. You are nit picking again, and Im done with the 8th grade activity.

He just asked you how you plan to get a guy in the draft with the #30 overall pick that is projected by most to go in the top 15. How is that "nit-picking?" Seems like a reasonable question to me. Are you giving up our 2nd round pick? If so, you'll go the first 2 rounds without addressing ILB or CB, keep in mind. Perry isn't going to get you into the top 15 or even top 20.

I also doubt that Shelton is going to get the 6 sacks a year you want at NT against NFL competition.

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

That makes no sense at all.

try to keep up... We were debating where the extra CB is suposed to come from. Taking the NT out to be a 2-4-5 (secretly a 3-3-5 for the illuminatti privy enough to know the OLB is secretly a DE in disguise) Or if the nickle back is suposed to take the place of a LB. Actually making it a 3-3-5... Still rushing a OLB if possible and getting pressure with 4. pressure being the key. Im not willing to abandon it just because we run a 3-4 and play 70% nickel package.

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

IMO your posts continue to be unrealistic and not just with regard to your expectations for DL in a 3-4. For example I wonder what percentage of serious Packers fans believe Nick Perry is a “great 1st round pick”? Is there another poster here who believes that? BTW, Jones started 3 games according to the Packers website, but he did average about 25 snaps/game. But not at DE: Most of his snaps were at DT in the 2-man DL. Also, the Packers consistently pick in the 20s, not 30s.

He would be a great 4-3 DE in my estimation...
And jones started 4 games, because 4 games the base defense was the first defense called maybe? And if you looked at the depth chart of our 3-4 on any given day last year, who was listed as the starting DE opposite daniels?

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

He just asked you how you plan to get a guy in the draft with the #30 overall pick that is projected by most to go in the top 15. How is that "nit-picking?" Seems like a reasonable question to me. Are you giving up our 2nd round pick? If so, you'll go the first 2 rounds without addressing ILB or CB, keep in mind. Perry isn't going to get you into the top 15 or even top 20.

I also doubt that Shelton is going to get the 6 sacks a year you want at NT against NFL competition.

Shelton will be strong side DE. And suspect he would have at least 6 his rookie year doing just that. If Raji makes a strong come back, he could hit the 10...

And from the last thread. The 12 sacks I mentioned the first time was a play off Daniels 12 sacks over 2 years. said it once, and then got entrenched at my double digit mark. I consider double digit sacks, the 10 mark to be the sign of having reached the promised land. for any DE. 3-4 or 4-3. Like I said repeatedly, the 3-4 should have 3 great D-linemen to compensate for being short handed. You call them 2 gappers, and wait for the ball to come to them, and space eaters? You going to put bumps on a log, you might as well just use 2, OR ONE!!! ...............oh wait...?

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

He just asked you how you plan to get a guy in the draft with the #30 overall pick that is projected by most to go in the top 15. How is that "nit-picking?" Seems like a reasonable question to me. Are you giving up our 2nd round pick? If so, you'll go the first 2 rounds without addressing ILB or CB, keep in mind. Perry isn't going to get you into the top 15 or even top 20.

I also doubt that Shelton is going to get the 6 sacks a year you want at NT against NFL competition.

My reply was that I just answered that question on the draft board , while he was asking it.

 

[OldSchool101]

This is an important ? because we have been trying to find Jenkins replacement for far too long. Reggie, Kampman, Cullen.. These were formidable pass rushers and their presence dictated the game plan of opposing offenses.
We have a great D team overall to build on, but we can't continue to play on our heals dropping 8. 4th n 26 is a household memory in Philly but we tend to ignore that concept until we are behind the 8 ball. In this game you're either the aggressor for 4 silid qtrs or you allow other quality teams to stay in the game
I'ts apparent Neal is not the man by the reaching of the DC to integrate him elsewhere.
IMO, This is Datones opportunity to set a statement. He's a fraction of a second, a little heart and a touch of confidence from creating confusion in the opposing backfield. He needs a good talking to and needs to emerge now as a the man we know he is. As Vince used to say.. This game is about heart.. Yeah you need intelligence but if you have both you have a Champion.

 

[TJV]

He would be a great 4-3 DE in my estimation...
And jones started 4 games, because 4 games the base defense was the first defense called maybe? And if you looked at the depth chart of our 3-4 on any given day last year, who was listed as the starting DE opposite daniels?

This link shows 3 starts for Jones in 2014 and zero in 2013: http://www.packers.com/team/roster/Datone-Jones/60e4b70d-1868-4763-ad8a-8b57412cde1f

The depth chart didn't reflect reality, did it? Again, he played more in the nickel than in base.

 

[adambr2]

Shelton will be strong side DE. And suspect he would have at least 6 his rookie year doing just that. If Raji makes a strong come back, he could hit the 10...

And from the last thread. The 12 sacks I mentioned the first time was a play off Daniels 12 sacks over 2 years. said it once, and then got entrenched at my double digit mark. I consider double digit sacks, the 10 mark to be the sign of having reached the promised land. for any DE. 3-4 or 4-3. Like I said repeatedly, the 3-4 should have 3 great D-linemen to compensate for being short handed. You call them 2 gappers, and wait for the ball to come to them, and space eaters? You going to put bumps on a log, you might as well just use 2, OR ONE!!! ...............oh wait...?

You literally said "I want 12 sacks from ends and 6 from NT". That part had nothing to do with Daniels. If you want to backtrack and change it to 10, that's fine, but it's silly to deny something that is easily verifiable.

Also Raji hasn't had a sack since 2011 and has 10 1/2 in his career. He isn't getting 10 sacks in 2015 no matter how motivated you think he will be.

 

[mradtke66]

Okay. I don't know how much more simple I can explain this to you. Here we have a 3-4, a 4-3 over, and 4-3 under. In each, I've drawn the linemen as X's and linebackers as O's.

Next, I've drawn up simple, single gap run fits.

If it starts to blend together and you start asking yourself, "What's the difference between these pictures?" You'll start to finally understand how 3-4 OLBs are basically defensive ends: Similar body types, job responsibilities and alignments.

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[Einstein McFly]

My favorite model for a DE, in either the 4-3 or the 3-4 is Cullen Jenkins or on todays roster Daniels. Inspired by Reggie White. Ideally he would have a little more length to knock down balls like Jolly did, and Peppers does. 300-315 or so. Strong as an ox. But the biggest thing is they have to have that burst, and motor. Be able to break off the block, take two quick steps, and get to the ball. Guys like this can not be blocked by a single O-lineman. or I should say rarely... Which forces the double team, and despite the double, these guys will still make plays in the trenches. Jones will get there soon IMO. But Guion is there already. Jones ceiling is much higher IMO.

Jenkins and Daniels are anomalously good for small 3-4 DEs. You have to be really quick and get in the backfield to make up for all the passes you don't bat down (a really underrated stat IMO) and the times that you get pushed around in the run game because of the shorter arms. The archetypal 3-4 DEs are guys like Wilkerson from the jets or Watt. Taller with longer arms and better verticals.

I've been banging the drum for a long time to get enough big guys on the dline so that, when we KNOW the other team is going to try to run out the clock we can reliably stuff it. We had that with Raji and Howard Green and Pickett in the last super bowl and it's killed us a few times since then (the 9ers in the playoffs two years ago, the bears in the game that Rodgers was hurt etc). Last year I was pushing for Nix for just that reason. The thing is, I don't know if we really need to spend a #1 on that position. If it were a 22 year old Ngata or Wilfork, that'd be one thing but I don't know if Shelton is going to be that much better than, say, Guion or Pennel over the 30% of the downs he's out there for that it's worth it. A three down ILB or a solid outside corner will be out there for every down. However, in TT I trust. If he picks a big, I'll be cool with it.

And you should really pay attention to what the guys are saying about the details of the 3-4 alignment. I think it'll improve your enjoyment of the game to better see what the defense is trying to do.

 

[Carl]

You guys just had to get Eli going again?

 

[Carl]

Shelton will be strong side DE. And suspect he would have at least 6 his rookie year doing just that. If Raji makes a strong come back, he could hit the 10...

And from the last thread. The 12 sacks I mentioned the first time was a play off Daniels 12 sacks over 2 years. said it once, and then got entrenched at my double digit mark. I consider double digit sacks, the 10 mark to be the sign of having reached the promised land. for any DE. 3-4 or 4-3. Like I said repeatedly, the 3-4 should have 3 great D-linemen to compensate for being short handed. You call them 2 gappers, and wait for the ball to come to them, and space eaters? You going to put bumps on a log, you might as well just use 2, OR ONE!!! ...............oh wait...?

If a 3-4 needed all great lineman to be good and ends need 10 sacks to be great, then good 3-4 defenses should all have DEs with at least 10 sacks. One of those defenses didn't not exist last season, yet there were good 3-4s. That simple fact alone says you're wrong.

Everyone here says you're wrong. If you look outside the forum, you'll see the same.

You're insistence that you're right is just as bad as the guy who used to show up here claiming the league was fixed.

 

[mradtke66]

You guys just had to get Eli going again?

I just can't help it.

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I thin the Packers paly alot of 2 down linemen, because we dont have a productive 3rd.....
Hyde's phenomenal play will make it harder to find the consistant 3rd down lineman to out produce him. But without Williams, and House, he might be needed other places now.... But im still convinced we have to play the nickel so much because we have better talent in the secondary, than the line. we are compensating for the weakness.

The Packers play a lot of nickel defense to be able to defend three wide receiver sets. There´s no other way to cover a WR than with a cornerback.

I cant believe we are not able to cover 4 recievers with 4LBs and 4 secondary....... When we drop down to 2 D-linemen, the Qb pressure suffers, and with time they pick us apart. So the nickel has to come in to help bend but not break. IMO

The extra secondary guy is supposed to come from the LB corps in a 3-3-5. That would make sense since our 2nd middle LB is an apparent weak point on our roster.

The pass rush doesn´t suffer because we only play two DL in the nickel and dime package. Capers lines up the best pass rusher on the defensive line at tackle as well as two OLBs at the ends to get after the QB. This scheme is more vulnerable against the run but will create additional pressure compared to the base defense.

In additon there´s no way defense are capable of covering four receivers with only four defensive backs. A team wants to at least have a single high safety to provide help over the top. Preferably a defense would like to play a Cover-2 scheme with two safeties deep but that hinges on the ability to stop the run without the strong safety providing help in the box.

peppers has been playing good in coverage too if you didnt notice. That wingspan has actually become a big play threat! And Mathews playing ILB more and blitzing from all over. He played safety in college before OLB and DE. The guy is just great, and I love him being face to face with the QB and RB. He's violent, and i love it....

Peppers dropped into coverage a total of 36 times last season being targeted only four times. The Packers don´t use him or any other OLB regularly to cover somebody because teams would find a way to exploit it.

The problem is....... When you consistantly pick in the 30's. You never get the obvious difference makers.

The Packers always pick in the bottom half of the first round because the team is succesful!!! I really like having this problem.

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

The Packers play a lot of nickel defense to be able to defend three wide receiver sets. There´s no other way to cover a WR than with a cornerback.


The pass rush doesn´t suffer because we only play two DL in the nickel and dime package. Capers lines up the best pass rusher on the defensive line at tackle as well as two OLBs at the ends to get after the QB. This scheme is more vulnerable against the run but will create additional pressure compared to the base defense.

In additon there´s no way defense are capable of covering four receivers with only four defensive backs. A team wants to at least have a single high safety to provide help over the top. Preferably a defense would like to play a Cover-2 scheme with two safeties deep but that hinges on the ability to stop the run without the strong safety providing help in the box.



Peppers dropped into coverage a total of 36 times last season being targeted only four times. The Packers don´t use him or any other OLB regularly to cover somebody because teams would find a way to exploit it.



The Packers always pick in the bottom half of the first round because the team is succesful!!! I really like having this problem.

OK. But could you take away a LB and leave 3 linemen, call it a nickel as well? Seems you add the 4th CB and then go down to 2 linemen.


Peppers had 2 ints returned for TDs on 4 targets all season... Beat that Revis !

Me too. My sarcasm was subtle and lost on that comment about always picking in the 30's... It was a play on being great all the time for soo dang long....

 

[Deleted member 6794]

OK. But could you take away a LB and leave 3 linemen, call it a nickel as well? Seems you add the 4th CB and then go down to 2 linemen.

The nickel is a defensive alignment which features five defensive backs, mostly three cornerbacks and two safeties. Of course the Packers could keep a third defensive lineman on the field but it doesn't make any sense. Teams mostly want to have a balanced front four in this scheme to be able to rush the passer with only four while accounting for the run as well. In obvious passing situations the Packers used the NASCAR package without any DL last season as well.

The scheme you´re talking about with four cornerbacks is the dime package in which teams bring on another CB by replacing one of the ILBs. Even in this package the front four mostly consists of two DL and two OLBs.

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

I just can't help it.

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

The nickel is a defensive alignment which features five defensive backs, mostly three cornerbacks and two safeties. Of course the Packers could keep a third defensive lineman on the field but it doesn't make any sense. Teams mostly want to have a balanced front four in this scheme to be able to rush the passer with only four while accounting for the run as well. In obvious passing situations the Packers used the NASCAR package without any DL last season as well.

The scheme you´re talking about with four cornerbacks is the dime package in which teams bring on another CB by replacing one of the ILBs. Even in this package the front four mostly consists of two DL and two OLBs.

I understand. But my point is the 4th LB should be taken out instead of the 3rd Dlineman , for the nickel. And the 3rd Dlineman comes out for the dime... I firmly believe we would do this if we had the D-linemen who make impacts... If we built the team this way, I would say its too much razzle dazzle, and needs to get back to the fundamentals of power, and owning the trenches...

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I understand. But my point is the 4th LB should be taken out instead of the 3rd Dlineman , for the nickel. And the 3rd Dlineman comes out for the dime... I firmly believe we would do this if we had the D-linemen who make impacts... If we built the team this way, I would say its too much razzle dazzle, and needs to get back to the fundamentals of power, and owning the trenches...

Please let me know about the benefit of having a third defensive lineman on the field in nickel???

I'll answer it for you: THERE ISN'T ANY!!!

It would be great if you could finally stop being stubborn and realize there are a lot of knowledgeable fans on this forum who have done a good job explaining the basic concepts of a 3-4 defense to you.

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

Please let me know about the benefit of having a third defensive lineman on the field in nickel???

I'll answer it for you: THERE ISN'T ANY!!!

It would be great if you could finally stop being stubborn and realize there are a lot of knowledgeable fans on this forum who have done a good job explaining the basic concepts of a 3-4 defense to you.

Look at the hair you are splitting here.....
You say the nickel is 2 D-linemen and two pass rushing OLBs, one of which is Peppers and could be considered a stand up DE here... Is this correct?

Im saying we need 3 big powerful destructive D-linemen and 1 OLB named Peppers edge rushing..... So basicly we are talking about the same amount of roster spots devoted to rushing the passer. Only I prefer a 300+ pound DE equivelent to Daniels or better, rather than say Perry or Neal coming off the edge? Guion at nose could be considered a good passing down NT considering Raji needs to stay fresh... And the second of your D-linemen I would have Daniels instead of Jones..............

My starting Nickel D with only one person changed from our current nickel...

Dominant Mystery DE, say Guion, Daniels
Perry/Mathews Peppers
Hayward,Hyde, Burnett, Dix, Sheilds.

Your version, which is GBs version with last years roster...

Daniels(was it?), Jones
Perry/Mathews, Barrington/rookie dominant mystery ILB?, Mathews/Barrington, Peppers...
Hayward, Hyde,Burnett, Dix, sheilds.

To be fair I added your 1st round ILB you want, and made him dominant as well...

Now besides the slight shift in D-line size. Basicly dictated by the quality of our D-linemen and seen in our LB shift as well. How different are the two 3-4 nickel schemes??? Same rosters, but with one strategy/draft pick towards 2-4-5, and one strategy/draft pick towards 3-3-5..... Still pretty close IMO... Still rushing 4...

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Look at the hair you are splitting here.....
You say the nickel is 2 D-linemen and two pass rushing OLBs, one of which is Peppers and could be considered a stand up DE here... Is this correct?

Im saying we need 3 big powerful destructive D-linemen and 1 OLB named Peppers edge rushing..... So basicly we are talking about the same amount of roster spots devoted to rushing the passer. Only I prefer a 300+ pound DE equivelent to Daniels or better, rather than say Perry or Neal coming off the edge? Guion at nose could be considered a good passing down NT considering Raji needs to stay fresh... And the second of your D-linemen I would have Daniels instead of Jones..............

My starting Nickel D with only one person changed from our current nickel...

Dominant Mystery DE, say Guion, Daniels
Perry/Mathews Peppers
Hayward,Hyde, Burnett, Dix, Sheilds.

Your version, which is GBs version with last years roster...

Daniels(was it?), Jones
Perry/Mathews, Barrington/rookie dominant mystery ILB?, Mathews/Barrington, Peppers...
Hayward, Hyde,Burnett, Dix, sheilds.

To be fair I added your 1st round ILB you want, and made him dominant as well...

Now besides the slight shift in D-line size. Basicly dictated by the quality of our D-linemen and seen in our LB shift as well. How different are the two 3-4 nickel schemes??? Same rosters, but with one strategy/draft pick towards 2-4-5, and one strategy/draft pick towards 3-3-5..... Still pretty close IMO... Still rushing 4...

With the current roster the Packers should line up Matthews and Peppers on the edges as much as possible with Perry and Neal rotating in. At tackle Inprefer to play Daniels and Datone for most of the snaps. Other DL will take snaps rushing the passer from time to time as well.

Take another look at your proposed nickel package. Aside of it having only 10 players it seems you don't have any ILB on the field with five guys lined up at the LOS. That's not how this scheme works.

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

Mathews is the only ILB in the 3-3-5 I propose. I put our best 3, powerful, LBs on the field. Mathews intimidates, and can cover sideline to sideline... Peppers and Perry are handfulls, to say the least... All about power and pressure, even in the nickel IMO. The secondary, and the capable LBs can worry about covering...

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

I'd like to add, that with QB pressure, and beef up front to stop the run. The secondary's job becomes much easier. They can play up tight, and more aggressive in anticipation of the dump offs. Snub out their fire! Suffocate them! And keep the safeties in center field, because Im not completely crazy . Those center fielders can ball hawk. But I would prefer them to be punishing!!! make the WRs hear footsteps in their sleep.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Mathews is the only ILB in the 3-3-5 I propose. I put our best 3, powerful, LBs on the field. Mathews intimidates, and can cover sideline to sideline... Peppers and Perry are handfulls, to say the least... All about power and pressure, even in the nickel IMO. The secondary, and the capable LBs can worry about covering...

Matthews isn't great in coverage and he won't be able to cover RBs or TEs sideline to sideline.

It doesn't work rushing five regularly in the NFL as offenses will find a way to exploit it.

 

[TJV]

Take another look at your proposed nickel package. Aside of it having only 10 players …

But you'd have to be a self-proclaimed "mathematical wizzard" to …

It would be great if you could finally stop being stubborn and realize there are a lot of knowledgeable fans on this forum who have done a good job explaining the basic concepts of a 3-4 defense to you.

But he’s stubbornly ignorant – unwilling to learn anything and he’s stated as much…