2017 Packer Defense

Grave Digger posted:

Ted seems to prefer underrated guys that haven't reached their ceiling yet rather than established college performers. It's worked out with some guys like Perry and Matthews, and getting established college performers doesn't always work out (Abdul Hodge), but the fact is that the D has been lacking in talent for years. 

Which is strange considering it is the exact opposite with his offensive picks.  I wouldn't call Perry a project.  His challenge was transitioning from 4-3 to 3-4.

I also wouldn't call Morgan, Ha Ha, Randall, Daniels development projects either.  So there's that.

Two years $5 million for Harris. Pocket change.

El-Keston-Hiura posted:

For ****s sake, you talk like Dom was given don mortons badgers on defense.  He's a professional damn coach, be nice to see some results from that paycheck. 

I don't know what that means. Pick a more contemporary reference that non-Badger fans can understand you old fart.

Randall, Perry, Datone all had to go through position changes. Those are projects plus they took guys like Clark, Thornton, Worthy, Neal, McMillan, and now Monty Adams more or less on spec that they were getting an underrated talent with a high ceiling at a discount. Other than the two new guys who we don't know about, it hasn't worked out. As you point out, when he's taken proven guys like Haha and Burnett and Daniels, it's worked out. Maybe those guys were close to their ceiling at draft time, but that ceiling was already high.

So you're going to use the best D in the last 5 years as an example of why drafting late in each round doesn't hurt you?  OK.  And the real problem with the Packers is that they aren't the Patriots.  It's so easy to do either.

Maybe we need to take fewer players who are projected at different positions. Take more guys and play them where they're familiar. It might speed up development and make it shorter than three years. A test of this will be how Datone does in Minny.

The problem, Fandame, is that players go from Green Bay to Minnesota to fail.  If Datone went anywhere else your analysis would be solid. 

Fandame posted:

Maybe we need to take fewer players who are projected at different positions. Take more guys and play them where they're familiar. It might speed up development and make it shorter than three years. A test of this will be how Datone does in Minny.

You mean like on the offensive side of the ball?  I don't think it's unfair to say TT is much better at drafting offense (and no, it isn't all Rodgers).  Is this where drafting at the end of the 1st round doesn't match up with his scout skills?  I can definitely see the desire to get guys that would have to develop or change up positions as the "sure fire" guys who are dropping dropped for a reason.  The last pick where TT had a sure fire big conference producer was Dix.  

But again, that strategy requires a coaching staff that can refine those tempting nuggets of gold.  You can't go all Bradford on the defensive side of the ball and not get the proverbial chicken**** salad.  I'm still not overly hyped on Perry, a guy that took time to develop between all his injuries to cash in on a contract year.  

Yeah, maybe TT should look at more established players on a regular basis but how about a little help from the ****ing coaching staff?  Essentially, why is the learning curve supposedly so steep in Green Bay?

Haven't done much digging into stats but maybe we were the 8th ranked run defense.... Because everyone passed the ball on us. 

..... And maybe that's also why the sack numbers were a little higher than normal.

Henry posted:

Yeah, maybe TT should look at more established players on a regular basis but how about a little help from the ****ing coaching staff?  Essentially, why is the learning curve supposedly so steep in Green Bay?

Why are you so sure it's the coaching staff that is failing these players? It's not like the failures have gone elsewhere and had success. I don't hear Jerron McMillan tearing it up for another team. It seems more likely that TT has just found too many duds. 

I have to say that the problems on defense are (as has been said) multiple in origin. Injuries, scheme and talent all play a part. It seems to vary year by year. Yet the one constant has been the DC. I am at the point of wondering if one of the assistant coaches could step in and do a better job. Some coaches lead with X's and O's while others lead by motivation. Dom seems more of the former and I wonder if players have bought into his approach. A couple of years ago MM said he was going to get more involved in D and ST's but had to step back when his playcaller fizzled. Moss is supposed to be an "assistant HC" but does not seem to have that great of a record as LB's coach. Witt seems to be a good teacher but may have risen as far as he can in this organization. Capers is better than the guy he replaced but that's not saying much a few years down the road. Maybe we need another Rah-Rah guy on the staff like we had with Greene. OR a college coach with a knack for defense. Or maybe some better scouting for players on defense.

Anyone interested in a Tramon return?

Some more veteran leadership?

if it were Tramon from 2010, sure.  but it's 2017 and he ain't got faster in that time, and  there still ain't a wayback machine.

Grave Digger posted:

Henry posted:

Yeah, maybe TT should look at more established players on a regular basis but how about a little help from the ****ing coaching staff?  Essentially, why is the learning curve supposedly so steep in Green Bay?

Why are you so sure it's the coaching staff that is failing these players? It's not like the failures have gone elsewhere and had success. I don't hear Jerron McMillan tearing it up for another team. It seems more likely that TT has just found too many duds. 

CARL BRADFORD!!  

I'm talking more about the top of the draft.  Yes, Khyri Thorton would've been a better example.  I clearly made the point that TT could use adjustment in his defensive drafting if the potential/change of position picks keep failing as well as the coaching staff can't coach up ****.

Grave Digger posted:

Anyone interested in a Tramon return?

Some more veteran leadership?

Yep.  In a heartbeat.  No way Tramon is worse than the stiffs at the bottom of the CB roster.  

Sure why not?  He may not have much left but it would be worth a look in camp.  As a matter of fact I it was up to me I would hold open tryouts for DB's if I was the Packers.  I am not being sarcastic I am being dead serious.

I agree, leave no stone unturned. However, I doubt he has much left except as a veteran voice. He has plenty of experience at the position. Right now its Guions position that may need a back-up and that may be easier than CB.

No thanks. Old and slow. 

Want to feel better about the D? Last night I watched the late in the season Lambeau beatdown of Russell and the Seahags, 38-10 with the Janis reverse for the final TD. Six turnovers. With Cutler gone and Wilson only on the schedule once each season, we'll have to do that against real quarterbacks.

YATittle posted:

With Cutler gone and Wilson only on the schedule once each season, we'll have to do that against real quarterbacks.

You mean like #14 player overall Dak Prescott?

I'm concerned

I think he meant Sam Bradford, or whoever his injury replacement is.

Tramon is fine for improving the bottom of the roster at DB but it's a two way street.  He may not be interested in such a role.

Beggars cant be choosers. He may be lucky to get a contract from anybody.

He's done. Pass.

The more I think about it the more I am willing to buy into the idea of Randall at the "Star" position. First I trust our staff when they say it suits him best and second I think that the loss of Hyde means that we need somebody to fill that role anyway. Randall is faster than Hyde and has played Safety like Hyde did. My remaining concerns are over the other CB's. I really doubt King will be ready for the tough early season matchups. House has struggled at JAX and may not be up to covering a healthy J. Jones. I still see CB as a weakness esp. with Capers calling the plays. On the other hand I see MM stressing that part of the defense and perhaps "better" performance  will be good enough for a few wins in those early tough games. By seasons end King will be better and the newer players will be used to the defense.

I sure hope that MM keeps a tight reign on Capers and means what he said about a renewed emphasis on that part of our defensive game plan and health issues go away.

With Randall moving to Slot, I'm guessing King starts opposite House to open the year. 

GD, from what happened in practices Gunter was there. I realize that King was not in camp but doubt King starts the season there. The team doesn't seem to like to starting rookies right away. My hope is that he catches on really really quick and you are right.

Its hard to believe that Gunter is actually a veteran player, but he is and MM prefers to start a vet over a rookie.

I think MM may want to put up with the inexperience so that he can get someone significantly faster on the field.  Need to keep up with the J Jone's of the world.  Just my opinion.  

He's got some rhythm but doesn't look that fast to me.

Ghost of Lambeau posted:

I think MM may want to put up with the inexperience so that he can get someone significantly faster on the field.  Need to keep up with the J Jone's of the world.  Just my opinion.  

He may  and it might even be a good idea to start King. But it has not been the MO of this team to start rookies early in the season. My guess is that we use House to cover J. Jones. Gunter has not faired too badly against #2-3 players so I expect that the conservative minded coaches do that again this year and bring King along slowly. By mid to late season he may even start. They did that with Clark and Ha Ha. The problem ,as you noted, is that some of the toughest WR's are in the beginning of the season.

Gunter is a good matchup against Sanu, both are big and physical but not very fast. Taylor Gabriel will be the interesting one. He's a hobbit but can flat-out fly.

Gunter needs to take his game to the next level despite his speed limitations if he hopes to follow the Sam Shields road and eventually get a big payday.

Sam Shields ran 4.3. Gunter will never be able to do that. He will never be Sam Shields. I'll be thrilled if he approaches Mike McKenzie status

If he can stay healthy we're going to see a very different D Randall.

Yes, Boss, I know Shields is a burner but Gunter brings height and a physical style to his play that are assets.

And I loved how Gunter frustrated OBJ in the last Giants game and the visitors locker room ended up with a mysterious hole!

Randall had those baseball/safety skills that allowed him to track the ball well and he got an interception or two out of that. On the other hand, I think he got caught looking at the QB too often. And it did not help him by playing him with a 10 yard cushion on players known for double moves and short yard situations. I have been criticized for this but don't think he liked to tackle. He sort of threw himself in the direction of the player rather that use good form.

Brainwashed Boris posted:

Sam Shields ran 4.3. Gunter will never be able to do that. He will never be Sam Shields. I'll be thrilled if he approaches Mike McKenzie status

Without the douchiness that McKenzie exhibited once he became a starter.  

Douchiness is kind of a job skill for corners though, it's a double-edged sword.

Or a double-nozzled bag.