Wonder what everyone thinks of Barrington being only ILB in dime?

[GreenBaySlacker]

I seem to remember getting slammed repeatedly for saying we would play 3 down linemen in the dime, if we had the talent...... Now that we have the talent to play 3 Dlinemen, we see that I was right (at the begining of OTA's at least). Barrington was the only ILB on the field for the dime. Mathews played OLB.

If you soak your crow in salt , it gets rid of the gamey taste.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I seem to remember getting slammed repeatedly for saying we would play 3 down linemen in the dime, if we had the talent...... Now that we have the talent to play 3 Dlinemen, we see that I was right (at the begining of OTA's at least). Barrington was the only ILB on the field for the dime. Mathews played OLB.

If you soak your crow in salt , it gets rid of the gamey taste.

Geez, the dime package features only one linebacker off the line of scrimmage. That doesn´t mean the Packers play three defensive lineman on the LOS in that scheme.

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

what happened on the field wimm? Im not talking about some obscure "what if" to prove me wrong...

 

[Deleted member 6794]

what happened on the field wimm? Im not talking about some obscure "what if" to prove me wrong...

Please, get a clue or don´t talk about things you obviously have no idea about. The dime package features four guys (mostly a combination of defensive linemen and outside linebackers) on the line of scrimmage, a single inside linebacker off the LOS and six defensive backs.

Barrington being the only ILB in the dime package doesn´t have anything to do with the combination the Packers use on the LOS in that scheme.

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

Who was on the field for the dime package???

 

[Pack-12]

How does 1 ILB mean 3 DL in the dime formation?
2 outside CB
2 slot CB
2 S
2 OLB
1 ILB
... that leaves room for 2 DL

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

Who was

How does 1 ILB mean 3 DL in the dime formation?
2 outside CB
2 slot CB
2 S
2 OLB
1 ILB
... that leaves room for 2 DL

on the field during OTA's when Barrington was the only ILB. Thats my question.
? anyone know?
I know you can build a defense with only 2 Dlinemen and 1 ILB and call it a dime. Its what we have been doing. I want to know who was on the field now.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Who was on the field for the dime package???

I wasn´t there for yesterday´s OTA. But I would expect the Packers lined up with Matthews, Peppers, Daniels and another DL on the LOS, Barrington as the only ILB and six defensive backs in the dime package.

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

Wasnt the dime 1 D-lineman last year? and "Peppers is basicly playing DE in this package"?

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Wasnt the dime 1 D-lineman last year? and "Peppers is basicly playing DE in this package"?

The Packers played different variations of a dime package last season. Most of the time they lined up with two DL and two OLBs, occasionally their NASCAR packages didn't feature any DL.

The number of DL/OLB doesn't matter though for a package to be considered a dime scheme though, it's the amount of defensive backs (exactly six) that's determining.

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

Ok. lets defuse this a bit. I may not be 100% right. But damn it im not wrong! truce?

 

[Mondio]

it's an OTA, what's the big deal? and I"m not even sure what you're crowing about??? so barrington was at ILB in OTA's, what's the revelation?

 

[thisisnate]

Huh, I guess it has been awhile since your last "look at me, I was right about something" thread. This one didn't work out very well though. Back to the drawing board.

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

My point is last year we had 2 ILBs and 1 D-lineman in this exact package. I got a jabbed by many for saying if we had the tallent we would play more D-linemen..... Right now Barrington is the only ilb in the Dime package. Meaning 1 less LB and 1 extra D-lineman..... Our D-linemen are good enough to run the 3-4 finally!!!

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

Huh, I guess it has been awhile since your last "look at me, I was right about something" thread. This one didn't work out very well though. Back to the drawing board.

I dont have the right to point out that the actual greenbay packers are doing what i said they should do. and you ALL were wrong. take it like a man and admit it. Our 3-4 couldnt be a 3-4 because we didnt have the tallent. Capers isnt a bad coach because he didnt have tallent to play. Raji is a huge difference maker, but disapears without help... All these points are on test mode this year.

If it fails, I will eat crow. I can admit when im wrong.

 

[Snoops]

Lets see the PSYCHO package again!

 

[Luca]

Wasnt the dime 1 D-lineman last year? and "Peppers is basicly playing DE in this package"?

Isn't that the "Bat package" in which the used Datone as lone D-lineman, and used 3 rushing outside linebackers? When I remember correctly we used such a package early in the year? I can't remember that I've seen it since though. They probably stopped using it because it didn't work? (or I didn't notice that they used it?)

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Ok. lets defuse this a bit. I may not be 100% right. But damn it im not wrong! truce?

You're completely wrong.

My point is last year we had 2 ILBs and 1 D-lineman in this exact package. I got a jabbed by many for saying if we had the tallent we would play more D-linemen..... Right now Barrington is the only ilb in the Dime package. Meaning 1 less LB and 1 extra D-lineman..... Our D-linemen are good enough to run the 3-4 finally!!!

There's not a single team in the NFL running a dime package (six DBs) with two inside linebackers. The Packers mostly use two ILBs in their nickel scheme (five DBs).

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

You're completely wrong.

One defensive lineman in the dime last year. 2 this year. Who is wrong? Last year you justified it because Peppers is always rushing the passer. " so he is basicly a DE". Fact remains, if we had the defensive line tallent, we would have played 1 less LB and one more Dlineman, even in the dime. This is showing clearly, and you deny deny deny... lame.

There's not a single team in the NFL running a dime package (six DBs) with two inside linebackers. The Packers mostly use two ILBs in their nickel scheme (five DBs).

Except GB who played 1 D-lineman, and 4 LBs...

Point is we are back to running a normal 3-4 and not a 2-4.... You all got so wrapped up in what we were doing, you literally mislabeled it as a 3-4. Im debating what a 3-4 is and you guys say thats not what we do! DAAAAA! We didnt run a 3-4...

I have to bake my wife a gluten free cake. I will be back to dispute every naysayer...

 

[Pack-12]

My point is last year we had 2 ILBs and 1 D-lineman in this exact package. I got a jabbed by many for saying if we had the tallent we would play more D-linemen..... Right now Barrington is the only ilb in the Dime package. Meaning 1 less LB and 1 extra D-lineman..... Our D-linemen are good enough to run the 3-4 finally!!!

Incorrect, it's a package that they ran but the typical Dime was 6DB, 1ILB, 2OLB, 2 DL
That isn't at all what that means. Heck against Seattle they ran a package with 0 ILB and still only kept 2 DL, they just replaced Brad Jones (the lone ILB) with Jarrett Bush and had 7 DBs

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Except GB who played 1 D-lineman, and 4 LBs...

Point is we are back to running a normal 3-4 and not a 2-4.... You all got so wrapped up in what we were doing, you literally mislabeled it as a 3-4. Im debating what a 3-4 is and you guys say thats not what we do! DAAAAA! We didnt run a 3-4...

I have to bake my wife a gluten free cake. I will be back to dispute every naysayer...

There's really no point in discussing the topic any further as you don't understand or can't comprehend what you read about the basic principles of the Packers defensive schemes.

 

[I asked LT to delete my acct]

Okay. This going nowhere other than a slanging match. Time to pull the plug. Sorry