Packers' defensive line looks to rise to another level

[mradtke66]

It stuffs the run.

Correct here.

It collapses the pocket. And it causes mistakes...

1/2 right. Yes, it might collapse the pocket. But if you aren't threatening around the edge, the QB is not under duress. Edge rush + Interior rush are related.

If all you have is edge rush, the QB can step up. If all you have is interior rush, the quarterback can just drop back a little further and/or escape contain and again not be threatened.

And even if its some what of a one trick pony. This trick will work. We will always get a push. We will always disrupt the run and cause mistakes with those four studs up front.

So, when I read that, all I hear is: Step 1, steal underpants, Step 3, profit. And no details what step 2 actually is.

Yes, those three linemen + Perry and Matthews in base is an excellent run defense. That's kind of the point of a 3-4--you play bigger linemen to clog up the middle and play two ends. Ideally, the front 5 in a 3-4 is bigger than the front 5 of a 4-3 in total. We get to 5 in each by comparing including 4-3's SOLB and both 3-4 OLBs.

But again, one passing downs, those bigger, slower guys are at a disadvantage. Across the board, NT, DT, 3T, 5T, 7, Wide9, the pass rusher will be smaller than the run stuffer. Bigger is great in the run game, when the defense wins by merely saying, "No, you move me." Pass rushing is attacking a gap. And rushing the passer is more tiring. Dragging that extra weight will tire guys out faster.

Compared to OTs, that weight is an advantage. An OT in pass protection is catching. He uses that weight to anchor and he doesn't have to move as far, for as long, or as quickly. OT is largely about efficiency of movement.

One thing that has to be done to allow for the big dogs' lack of speed. Is big fast secondary who can tackle, and a ilb who is sideline to sideline. Check and check.

A sideline to sideline linebacker isn't going to help in pass rush.

The speed rusher does have certain characteristics that are valuable, that I apparently don't value enough according to the lb gurus. But selling out to rush Mathews all the time at 255 with a #60 disadvantage to the OT. Seems to not value the power that guys like mo and Clark and Daniels, bring to the table, enough...

It's not that I don't value the power, it's that compromises have to be made. Friction is a thing, budgets are a thing, etc etc.

I would prefer 300 pound DEs that can run a 4.5 40. But those guys are somewhere between "non-existent" and "stupid rare." I'd happily have a prime Reggie at EDGE in any scheme. Ditto Peppers or JJ Watt. But there are only so many of those guys period, let alone those guys playing at the same time, let alone on the same team. So you start to compromise and optimize: take what is shown to be useful at each position and be willing to give up what isn't strictly required.

Interior linemen are bigger to take abuse in the running game. They also tend to be shorter, in the hopes they have better leverage against double teams. Speed isn't generally important at all. This gets more and more extreme the closer you get to the center. A 0-NT will be the biggest, a 1-NT might be a little smaller, 3Ts regularly slip under 300 pounds. Also, you need to adjust your weight preferences in general. Your talk of 320, pass rushing DEs is crazy. The only one I've seen close to that was Pickett in 2010. And he was no pass rusher--he was a run-down blocker eater. 280 is huge DE in 4-3 schemes.

As you get further away from the center, straight weight isn't as important, because the job changes. Outside contain, keeping the quarterback in the pocket, and getting your hands up in the air, makes length/height more important. Part of that is also how rushing works on the edge vs. the interior. Interior rushing is wrestling, the outside it boxing. OTs, with the long arms and kickstep can neutralize bigger, slower players from the second the ball is snapped. Inside hands is the key. If the OT can get to your chest plate, he's won. If you're 320 and 6'1", you likely have some stubby arms. He's 315, 6'5". Get that chest plate, lock arms, and that rusher won't be pushing a damn thing. Size be damned. Thus, you want your EDGE guys to also have long arms to counter the OT's long arms.

More dead-horse beating: But Matthews is the typical size of an EDGE defender in most any scheme.

Von Miller: 249. Clay's bigger.
Khalil Mack: 247. Clay's bigger.
Demarcus Lawrence: 250. Clay's bigger
Justin Houston: 258. Willing to call that Equal?
Melvin Ingram: 265
Chandler Jones: 260
Jadeveon Clowney: 267
Ryan Kerrigan: 260
Carl Lawson: 260
Bosa: 276.
Everson Griffin: 273
Brandon Graham: 269

 

[HardRightEdge]

Keeping 5 or 6?
This isn't Thompson/capers defense anymore. We will keep more.

And the olbs/ilbs will be less than before.

Whjy? I don't see any indication this will be a 4-3 defense. Pettine is fundamentally a 3-4 guy which is one of the reasons he was hired. 3-4 with some variations, maybe 4-3 under with Perry hand-in-the-dirt, is about what I expect.

You don't need 6 DL if you average 2.2 DLs per snap. It isn't just Capers who runs/ran 80% nickel/dime. It's the league trend.

Daniels, Clark, Wilkerson. Lowry's a good run defender for base rotation. Maybe somebody can beat him out. Then one other spot.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

You don't need 6 DL if you average 2.2 DLs per snap. It isn't just Capers who runs/ran 80% nickel/dime. It's the league trend.

Teams combined to line up in base defense on only 33.1% of the snaps last season. Only two teams used it less than the Packers (23%) in 2017 though.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Teams combined to line up in base defense on only 33.1% of the snaps last season. Only two teams used it less than the Packers (23%) in 2017 though.

20% or 23% or 33%, the point remains the same: you don't need 6 DL in what looks to be primarily a 3-4 defense.

 

[PackerDNA]

20% or 23% or 33%, the point remains the same: you don't need 6 DL in what looks to be primarily a 3-4 defense.

I'd consider 6 for a couple of reasons. Depth for injuries, and a rotation to keep guys fresh and effective.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I'd consider 6 for a couple of reasons. Depth for injuries, and a rotation to keep guys fresh and effective.

With only two defensive linemen playing for the majority of the snaps and the Packers in need of depth at other positions there's no need to keep six on the roster.

 

[Mondio]

If there is a shift to attacking behind the LOS with Dlinemen rather than have them just hold space at the line, I can see 6 being kept. If you keep attacking with those big guys, it will take their toll and are a lot of teams going to just 2 dlinemen because that's the best alignment or that's the best they can maintain for a season or a game with who they have?

We have Daniels, Clark, Wilkerson, Lowery. We'll see what Adams has, he still intrigues me. His college tape shows a guy that can flat out push the middle and attack behind the LOS. He wouldn't be the first to not be able to bring it to the NFL, but maybe he had a bad start and then the injury slowed his progress. We'll see. But that's 5 right there. IF a team had a roster where they have 5 or 6 legitimate guys that can just play the run and push the pocket back into the QB on every play I think we'd see more of them do it. I think at best most teams have 2-3 decent Dlinemen and then some guys. Well they aren't going to keep and extra 4 "guys" if they aren't something special. They'll keep their 2-3 and then another 2 or so for rotation or injury and try and put better guys on the field in other positions. But if Adams does look to be in the mold of another Daniels or Clark and shows it, I think it becomes interesting. If you can keep those 5 guys in a rotation and keep attacking all game long and all season long, you do it. Keeping an extra guy for injury isn't out of the question. But maybe we don't have that guy that is interesting enough to keep. I think most teams in the league might have 1 line of 3 strong and the drop off to the 2nd rotation would be just a bunch of guys and not strong enough to keep attacking. That probably has as much as anything to do with how teams line up as anything the offense is doing.

I think a team that has a dline that can attack all game long will win in the end more times than not. They aren't light up front against the run and pressure up the middle all game long will have a greater impact on the QB but games end than trying to play coverage all game long. I think playing coverage these days is just a slow suicide in football terms.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

If there is a shift to attacking behind the LOS with Dlinemen rather than have them just hold space at the line, I can see 6 being kept. If you keep attacking with those big guys, it will take their toll and are a lot of teams going to just 2 dlinemen because that's the best alignment or that's the best they can maintain for a season or a game with who they have?

I'm convinced that teams line up with only two defensive linemen for the majority of the snaps because it presents the best alignment defending most offensive formations.

 

[HardRightEdge]

I'd consider 6 for a couple of reasons. Depth for injuries, and a rotation to keep guys fresh and effective.

Even if you carried 6 on the 53 man roster you would not carry 6 on the game day roster. So forget a 6th. adding "fresh and effective". 5 guys gets you plenty of "fresh" in a primarily nickel game. A 6th. could be carried on the practice squad.

 

[HardRightEdge]

I'm convinced that teams line up with only two defensive linemen for the majority of the snaps because it presents the best alignment defending most offensive formations.

In a 3-4 defense. The generic 4-3 nickel pulls a LB for an extra DB and may rotate in a pass rush specialist at DE. Of course variations are run off that with three DLs and a LB or even a safety on the line.

The trend toward more nickel and dime and fewer DLs is a function of more 3 and 4 wide sets and more TEs who don't block all that well when in-line while playing out of the slot or out wide half the time. In other words, NFL offenses have become more spread with more speed and more targets.

First they ditched the FB in lieu of a TE/H-back in the backfied to add a receiveing threat. Now it seems you see less and less of that and more single-back sets. 3 wide, or 4 wide with the TE in the slot, and a single back is base offense these days.

 

[gopkrs]

Just a question. would you want a sixth on game day if the other team is winning and starts running the ball effectively?

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Just a question. would you want a sixth on game day if the other team is winning and starts running the ball effectively?

No, five defensive linemen being active on game day is plenty enough.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Just a question. would you want a sixth on game day if the other team is winning and starts running the ball effectively?

This will be fundamentally a 3-4 nickel/dime personnel defense. This is not a 4-3 defense. You don't need all those DLs. If you run base 1/3 of the time, you're using on average 2.33 lineman per play. If you spread that evenly over 5 guys, they'd all be playing at a 47% snap count. Now you're wasting the talent you drafted and are paying for in Daniels, Clark and Wilkerson. 65%, give or take, is probably a good number for those guys to get what you're paying for while keeping them reasonably fresh. There may be matchups where the Packers suit up only 4. You might also see OLBs lined up as DEs with a hand in the dirt on occasion, Perry in particular. It was Perry and Brooks last season.

You have to cover a lot of bases with a 45 man game day roster: starters, rotations, special teams, and injury contingencies at every position, starting and rotational, and backups who can also come in for some snaps to give the front line guys a blow. A 6th. DL is purely a luxury that cannot be afforded in what is fundamentally a 3-4 defense.

For a little perspective, Football Outsiders provides the follwing DL snap counts from last season:

Clark: 65.2%
Daniels: 59.7%
Lowry: 47.0%
Dial: 29.3%
Adams: 6.2%
Francois: 5.7%

Add up all those numbers and you get 213.1%. That means 2.131 DL per play was the average, or on average 3 DL only 13% of the time. Will those percentages go up? Probably, but not appreciably so.

And it's probably worth noting that stopping the run was not the problem last season despite having so few DL snaps: 8th. in average at 3.9; tied for 9th. in TDs surrendered with 10; tied for 15th. in forced fumbles with 6.

 

[PackerDNA]

Even if you carried 6 on the 53 man roster you would not carry 6 on the game day roster. So forget a 6th. adding "fresh and effective". 5 guys gets you plenty of "fresh" in a primarily nickel game. A 6th. could be carried on the practice squad.

Good enough for me.

 

[wist43]

Given the overall weakness of our linebackers, I'm hoping we'll see a lot more 3-3 and 4-2 nickel alignments.

I think it's safe to say we won't be seeing nearly as much 2-4 as we saw with that idiot Capers.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Given the overall weakness of our linebackers, I'm hoping we'll see a lot more 3-3 and 4-2 nickel alignments.

I think it's safe to say we won't be seeing nearly as much 2-4 as we saw with that idiot Capers.

Every defensive coordinator in the league prefers to line up in a 2-4 nickel formation. Unfortunately Slacker and you don't get that it's the most efficient one defending the pass.

 

[swhitset]

If there is a shift to attacking behind the LOS with Dlinemen rather than have them just hold space at the line, I can see 6 being kept. If you keep attacking with those big guys, it will take their toll and are a lot of teams going to just 2 dlinemen because that's the best alignment or that's the best they can maintain for a season or a game with who they have?

We have Daniels, Clark, Wilkerson, Lowery. We'll see what Adams has, he still intrigues me. His college tape shows a guy that can flat out push the middle and attack behind the LOS. He wouldn't be the first to not be able to bring it to the NFL, but maybe he had a bad start and then the injury slowed his progress. We'll see. But that's 5 right there. IF a team had a roster where they have 5 or 6 legitimate guys that can just play the run and push the pocket back into the QB on every play I think we'd see more of them do it. I think at best most teams have 2-3 decent Dlinemen and then some guys. Well they aren't going to keep and extra 4 "guys" if they aren't something special. They'll keep their 2-3 and then another 2 or so for rotation or injury and try and put better guys on the field in other positions. But if Adams does look to be in the mold of another Daniels or Clark and shows it, I think it becomes interesting. If you can keep those 5 guys in a rotation and keep attacking all game long and all season long, you do it. Keeping an extra guy for injury isn't out of the question. But maybe we don't have that guy that is interesting enough to keep. I think most teams in the league might have 1 line of 3 strong and the drop off to the 2nd rotation would be just a bunch of guys and not strong enough to keep attacking. That probably has as much as anything to do with how teams line up as anything the offense is doing.

I think a team that has a dline that can attack all game long will win in the end more times than not. They aren't light up front against the run and pressure up the middle all game long will have a greater impact on the QB but games end than trying to play coverage all game long. I think playing coverage these days is just a slow suicide in football terms.

Be careful or Brian Price’s dad will be back to tell us how stupid the Pack was to cut him last year.

 

[wist43]

Every defensive coordinator in the league prefers to line up in a 2-4 nickel formation. Unfortunately Slacker and you don't get that it's the most efficient one defending the pass.

I don't think that's the case at all... although I admit I don't have time to watch as much football as I used to.

From what I've seen, the 4-2 and 3-3 are used in at least equal measure.

That said, I wouldn't mind the 2-4 if we had the personnel to excel at it, but simply put - we don't.

A good coach will adapt his alignments to the strengths of his personnel - Capers was not a good coach.

For the Packers, our DL is light years better than our LB's, so it only makes sense to go with a 4-2 or 3-3.

Given our personnel, we shouldn't see much 2-4 next year, and I really don't think we will.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I don't think that's the case at all... although I admit I don't have time to watch as much football as I used to.

I have realized by now that you don't understand it.

 

[wist43]

I have realized by now that you don't understand it.

I've forgotten more than you'll ever know wimm

I'm sure you believe the 46 defense was 4 DL and 6 LB's, lol...

 

[AmishMafia]

Every defensive coordinator in the league prefers to line up in a 2-4 nickel formation. Unfortunately Slacker and you don't get that it's the most efficient one defending the pass.

Actually, 29 of the 32 DCs currently in the NFL prefer a 3-4 hybrid over-shift defense. They just dont have the DL to pull it off.

I don't think that's the case at all... although I admit I don't have time to watch as much football as I used to.

It's tough to argue with someone who is so condescending and delusional to think he knows the personal preferences of every coaching staff in the NFL.

 

[wist43]

Actually, 29 of the 32 DCs currently in the NFL prefer a 3-4 hybrid over-shift defense. They just dont have the DL to pull it off.

It's tough to argue with someone who is so condescending and delusional to think he knows the personal preferences of every coaching staff in the NFL.

Worthy of a full delete... after conversation with Amish, I realized I misunderstood his post.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Actually, 29 of the 32 DCs currently in the NFL prefer a 3-4 hybrid over-shift defense. They just dont have the DL to pull it off.

There's no way for a defense to pull it off because 300+ defensive linemen aren't athletic enough to consistently rush from the edge.

 

[wist43]

At the very least I expect Pettine will have 3 down linemen in most nickel situations.

Wilkerson at LDE, Clark at LDT, Daniels at RDT, and Perry variably with his hand on the ground or not.

I expect Matthews will rush less and drop more, while Jones will stalk the LOS more, and Ryan will see the field less.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

At the very least I expect Pettine will have 3 down linemen in most nickel situations.

Wilkerson at LDE, Clark at LDT, Daniels at RDT, and Perry variably with his hand on the ground or not.

I expect Matthews will rush less and drop more, while Jones will stalk the LOS more, and Ryan will see the field less.

It would be a terrible idea to have Wilkerson rush from the edge and move Matthews away from the LOS.