Who should start at DE opposite Daniels?

[Sunshinepacker]

I know this is not protocol. But what about a 1-1-9 with Raji in front, Guion prepared to leap frog him into the pocket while hollering "Remember the Alamo!"
And then the rest feather fan out like on a fake onside immediately before the snap?

Might have worked if they'd kept Hawk to make sure everyone lined up correctly. Without Hawk though you'd probably just end up with Guion diving into Morgan Burnett while Sam Shields was holding a pom-pom on the sideline.

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

How can anyone claim any "victory" from an OTA? and what is there to win?

Why you quote victory? I didnt claim "victory"...

Again. Last winter people were calling Peppers basicly a DE in the dime, because he almost strictly pass rushed. Trying to justify the goofy 1 down lineman strategy... As if that is normal. Now, for their arguments sake, he is a LB again. But honestly in the original post I wasnt even counting Peppers. I thought it said there was only 2 LBs in the dime package. Meaning 3 D-linemen... I just mentioned afterwards that by last winters logic, Peppers was a DE. We had 4 LBs in that formation last year...

That move right there (3 down linemen in the dime) lead me to speculate... Has Capers been playing this weird 1 and 2 D-linemen nickel/dime packages because lack of talented D-linemen? Raji newly motivated because he will have two big destructive guys next to him again and 2 beastly LBs behind him. He is going to wreck everyone! If this D-line turns this defense into an elite unit... Then us guys preaching about beefing up the D-line, should get some credit. We have the talent to be a very good D-line now. But thin with our starter quality guys. Wish we had one more good one to be honest. Hope one of the young guys breaks out ...

still havnt heard who was on the field for the dime package. Was anyone at OTA's?

Correct me if im wrong. Last years Dime had 1 D-lineman and Peppers rushing full time. But technically 1-4-6. Right? This year 2-3-6. Right? Its not 3 d-linemen like i originally thought. But its 100% more D-linemen than last year.

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

No, you didn't. You BEGAN by BRAGGING about being right, even though you didn't know what the alignment was at OTAs. See the difference?

What my second post i asked who was on the field? Good greif. And i was joking about eating crow! It was light hearted. You people got all mean right away. Thats not right.

Nobody knows what alignment was at OTA's! at least nobody has answered yet... I wish they would... Regardless. there is one more D-linemen in our dime this year than last... right? Nobody caught the point. too busy witch hunting...

 

[Mondio]

right/wrong, win/lose, victory/defeat. Does the wording matter? I used victory, BFD the message is still the same. it's OTA's, quit trying to claim anything.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

What my second post i asked who was on the field? Good greif. And i was joking about eating crow! It was light hearted. You people got all mean right away. Thats not right.

Nobody knows what alignment was at OTA's! at least nobody has answered yet... I wish they would... Regardless. there is one more D-linemen in our dime this year than last... right? Nobody caught the point. too busy witch hunting...

I'll give it a last try to explain the dime defense to you. A typical formation in a dime package consists of six defensive backs and a single linebacker off the line of scrimmage.

A team likes to have their best pass rushers on the field when playing in dime as they're expectating a pass based either on down and distance or the offense's formation. With the OLBs being the primary pass rushers on a team playing a base 3-4 defense they would prefer to line up as many outside linebackers as possible (hence, Capers introducing the NASCAR package without a single DL in 2014). The problem with that is opponents would opt out of a pass to run against a front without any big guys forcing teams to mostly use a balanced formation (two defensive linemen and two OLBs) on the line of scrimmage in a dime package.

There's no report of the Packers using an additional defensive lineman at the LOS in dime during OTAs which as mentioned above wouldn't make any sense at all.

BTW nobody ever considered Peppers a DE in a 3-4 defense. He's best suited to rush the passer from the edge in the Packers defensive base alignment.

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

Im starting to think i dont like the traditional 3-4. I love how flexable it is, but feel like it doesnt emphasize the D-line enough. Basicly abandons them as nothing more than space eaters... Thats a mistake IMO. When we switched to the 3-4, I needed to believe the 3 D-linemen had to do the job of 4, so they had to be better............ Meaning i am willing to play a 3-4 as long as we can hold the front with 3. Otherwise, no way... Capers said yes way and failed IMO. Now with better D-linemen his defense is looking good again....

I feel like the D-line we have now is powerful enough. daniels, Raji, and Guion. Along with Peppers rushing. That will hold the front as well as most 4-3's if not better. It will also make the 3-3-5 nickel a much more viable option

 

[mradtke66]

I feel like the D-line we have now is powerful enough. daniels, Raji, and Guion. Along with Peppers rushing. That will hold the front as well as most 4-3's if not better. It will also make the 3-3-5 nickel a much more viable option

And now you've taken our best defender (Matthews), with his monster contract to match, and moved him further from what he does--rushing the passer, and turned him into a lock-stock-and-barrel 4-3 LB. Yes, Matthews did alright for us at ILB, but that's more because he is so damn fast, he can out play his mistakes. And he made them. Watch him close. He made plays in spite of himself. False steps. False steps everywhere. Yes, he had more sacks after the move, but most (all?) of them came when he moved back to his outside rushing position.

And you refuse to realize that we tried the alignment last year. The "quad" defense that we debuted against the Seahawks in week one. And we scrapped it because it was terrible.

Im starting to think i dont like the traditional 3-4. I love how flexable it is, but feel like it doesnt emphasize the D-line enough.

See, now we get down to it. You have a preconceived notion of what a defense to look like. There is more than one way to skin a cat. The scheme is based on your OLBs being the primary rushers. Game over, full stop, end of story.

Basicly abandons them as nothing more than space eaters... Thats a mistake IMO

Why is it a mistake if it works? This is the template that nearly all 3-4s use. There are exception, obviously. If you get a great talent that exceeds the base requirements (Justin Smith), you adjust. You get a once in a generation player,(Watt) you build your whole scheme around featuring him.

And because they are more run defending space eaters, that's why we pull one or more them for guys who are better rushers. Rushers tend to be smaller, faster, and more athletic than their run plugging counterparts.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Im starting to think i dont like the traditional 3-4. I love how flexable it is, but feel like it doesnt emphasize the D-line enough. Basicly abandons them as nothing more than space eaters... Thats a mistake IMO. When we switched to the 3-4, I needed to believe the 3 D-linemen had to do the job of 4, so they had to be better............ Meaning i am willing to play a 3-4 as long as we can hold the front with 3. Otherwise, no way... Capers said yes way and failed IMO. Now with better D-linemen his defense is looking good again....

I feel like the D-line we have now is powerful enough. daniels, Raji, and Guion. Along with Peppers rushing. That will hold the front as well as most 4-3's if not better. It will also make the 3-3-5 nickel a much more viable option

The main purpose of playing a base 3-4 defense is to stop the run with the defensive linemen eating up blockers and holding them off other players for them to make the tackle. The formation isn't best suited to defend the pass though, hence why Capers only plays it approximately 30% of the time.

The front four in the subpackages is actually pretty similar to a traditional 4-3 alignment. It doesn't make any sense to have three big bodies and only one OLB on the field in either a nickel or a dime defense as their main purpose is to rush the passer on nearly every single play. The only reason teams don't put four OLBs (they're the best pass rushers on a 3-4 team) on the field in that situation is the possibility of the offense optimg out of a pass play to run the ball against a light front.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Yes, Matthews did alright for us at ILB, but that's more because he is so damn fast, he can out play his mistakes. And he made them. Watch him close. He made plays in spite of himself. False steps. False steps everywhere. Yes, he had more sacks after the move, but most (all?) of them came when he moved back to his outside rushing position.

Agreed, Matthews even admitted during the first week of OTAs that he didn't have a clue about how to play the position and mostly did it on instincts.

FYI he had two sacks rushing from inside last season.

 

[Pack-12]

Correct me if im wrong. Last years Dime had 1 D-lineman and Peppers rushing full time. But technically 1-4-6. Right? This year 2-3-6. Right? Its not 3 d-linemen like i originally thought. But its 100% more D-linemen than last year.

Ok man pay attention here because it's been pointed out before. The Packers usual dime formation last year was not 1 D-lineman it was 6DB, 2 OLB, 2 DL, and 1 ILB. They have a package that features 1 d-lineman just like they have one that has 7 DB and no ILB and one with 0 DL and one with 4 OLB but it's not the usual dime formation and they only used it a couple times a game at most and it's not just Peppers rushing, the other OLB be it Matthews, Perry, or Neal usually rushes too along with both DL and sometimes even the ILB or a DB.

 

[TJV]

We could use a 'head banging against a brick wall' smilie regarding the attempts to educate a certain poster.

 

[I asked LT to delete my acct]

We could use a 'head banging against a brick wall' smilie regarding the attempts to educate a certain poster.

tut tut .