Did Ted Thompson fail the ILB position? (National football Post

If I'm reading this chart correctly...

 

If I make a chorizo and egg breakfast burrito and wash it down with a dark Guatemalan roast and have a 48 mile commute in traffic my Urgency Index would fall somewhere between 547 and Rest area? 

Ted's days playing linebacker were a long time ago. Get over it.

Clay Mathews is a pretty good ILB.

 

I'd argue that the need at CB was much higher.

And Clay is so much better in the run game inside than he is outside. Outside, I think Perry is better than Clay stopping the run.

 

I really hope hope they leave Clay inside except for obvious passing downs.

The biggest correlation to winning in the NFL is the difference between how well you pass the ball to how well you defend the pass.  Passer Rating Differential has consistently been the biggest predictor of success, and shoring up our defensive backfield makes perfect sense to me.

 

 

It's not like we have zero options at ILB, Barrington got a lot of experience and wasn't that bad. Matthews can also play ILB when needed. We had Hayward, Shields and...Goodson at CB. I guess Hyde can play CB also, but in reality our depth was pretty terrible at CB before the draft. Do Randall and Rollins solve that problem? Maybe, maybe not, but in a league where you see more teams that are pass first than run first, the need for CBs outweighs the need for ILB.

Originally Posted by CAPackFan95:

The biggest correlation to winning in the NFL is the difference between how well you pass the ball to how well you defend the pass.  Passer Rating Differential has consistently been the biggest predictor of success, and shoring up our defensive backfield makes perfect sense to me.

 

 

Bad Bob wrote in JSO this morning that the Packers are one of just a handful of teams in the NFL who could draft some players out of luxury vs. pure need. We upgraded our secondary by bringing in speed (really our only speed guy was Shields), depth and versatility. We upgraded our ST's which were woeful.

 

CMIII was either the top ILB or I believe #2 in the NFL in production at ILB in the entire NFL according to MM. I think Barrington will play with his hair on fire in 2015 and Ryan could be a nice addition.

 

This was a 12-4/13-3 type team before the draft. They are still there after the draft. As long as 12 is healthy and upright, they are still the team to beat in the NFC North. And it's not even close.

We'll have a much better idea in about a year. My initial impression is no.

 

CB is definitely a more valued position and the exodus at the position makes the value more tangible.  Yeah, you can get gashed up the middle and still survive but you won't getting beat over the top.  

 

They'll bandaid ILB and let guys develop.  There will always be at least one weakness on a team.  Better than having a highway outside.

 

I think Ted has demonstrated over and over again how he brings nothing to the table as a GM.  This article simply reinforces what we have all been saying for the last 10 years.  

I see a lot of folks pumping expectations that Barrington at ILB is going to jump. That somehow last year's PT equates to some sort of breakout. But I have doubts. Typicay a guy that's going to breakout shows some signs in the previous year. I didn't see any of that. Barrington was not impactful in any discernible way. Matthews did.

I thinks he's pedestrian at best. I don't think we'll see any kind of breakout.

Don't forget, Brandon Spikes is still available.  Yes he's only a 2 down guy but he'd give the defense a proven guy at ILB if you're not sold on Barrington.  And even if you are sold on Barrington, Spikes would provide much needed depth.  

at first glance, I say he did overlook it - so does everyone else, but considering our drafting record, you can't really complain, as some udfa will be our next ilb, so its against the grain because tt doesn't necessarily draft the 'names' we know, but its hard to argue the results, look at the team...

Why is Spikes still available ?

Is it because he sucks ? I don't believe so...More likely its because what he brings to the table isn't valued as highly around the NFL anymore.

 

Teams want 3 down LBs because the offenses they are facing don't just run on 1st down and throw on 3rd down. The offenses exploit match-ups that are favorable, and players that are a liability vs the pass....invite the pass. Its the same reason that teams didn't try to run on Raji/Pickett/Jolly.... because those guys invited the pass.

 

Recently, the Packers have invested in hybrid players, sometimes to the fans chagrin

 

MM, Capers and TT are trying to build defensive packages that can handle run or pass with equal aplomb, by using versatile players instead of relying on subbing.

 

Its just an adaptation to the no-huddle offenses they face with increasing frequency.

Players play different roles; they slide over, move up, move back and now its a completely different defense - without substituting. In some ways, the Packers are building a defense to handle their own high-octane "go fast" offense

 

Having "2 down LBs" are counter to that effort and while Spikes is still a talented guy, he doesn't really fit the plans going forward. Even his own team, the Bills told him if he wanted a part time job, they have one for him.

 

We may also see more 3-3-5 nickel defense instead of 2-4-5 and then you only have (1) ILB on the field in nickel. More creativity, less volume.

 

On offense, GB doesn't bring in a 3rd down RB anymore- they sub for an entire series. The same thing has to happen on defense - they can't rely on swapping guys out because the offenses won't let them anymore. With the Packers offense lighting up the scoreboard, few teams have the testicular fortitude to keep calling run plays when they are behind 2 scores

 

So a solid and opportunistic pass defense (with some weakness vs the run) is the best bet for the Packers defense going forward. Note the ball-skills of the 2 corner/safeties drafted

They grabbed former bball players who know how to cover without "fouling"- that's another adaptation to the modern passing game. 

 

It'll drive the fans nuts, but you have to pick your poison in the salary cap era, you can't have it all.

That's why Dom often says: " How do you want to die ?

The Packers are betting you can't run them out of the stadium.

 

Dom may be an old dawg...but at least we don't have to teach him new tricks. 

 

Dom knows his PRD...

 

http://www.coldhardfootballfac...stat-football/20756/

Wasn't sure where else to put this......but just another reminder that TT knows what he's doing. With all the issues at ILB and TT's aversion to devoting significant resources toward the position, sometimes I need a reminder of his track record.  In TT we trust....

Rivera - dallass were such suckers.  Rivera knew he was hurt when he signed that contract but that didn't stop jerruh from being jerruh.

Verdict: Thompson was correct. In his two years in Seattle, he (Colin Cole) only managed 65 solo tackles and one quarterback sack. Somehow, he’s still in the league. Good for him.

 

Measuring a space-eater by his solo tackle and sack numbers is dum. Ryan Pickett must have been a waste of roster space. While I agree letting Cole go for that money was fine, he's obviously been good enough to play for a very strong defense since leaving so that analysis is lacking in sense.

Wow, if each occurrence was akin to a problem in a test, TT scored something like a 98 (the one push perhaps reducing from a 100, a perfect score).

MONEYBALL!

 

Guys like potentially Jarrett Bush & John Kuhn are probably out the door with younger, cheaper replacements that will probably play better.

 

Guess we'll see what happens this year...

Apparently you haven't read the "Time to Move On to 2015" thread.

But the Mike Sherman way was more fun in the offseason.

 

Couple that with Ted's horrible treatment of Micah Hyde, and you can see why so many of us think it is time to move on past ROTT

"There’s the old adage that a general manager should do whatever it takes to bring in a player he covets, whether through overpaying with draft picks or with big contracts."

 

Is this really an old adage?  Really? 

Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl harbor?

I don't think Ted plays Moneyball in that he doesn't try to replace the production of high priced players with a lower cost player. He simply refuses to pay if the production doesn't match the price. I don't think it's always about age either, it's if you are producing or if you are in decline. He's let young players walk who just weren't producing or weren't producing at the dollar value they were demanding and he's signed older vets who were producing at a level he felt comfortable paying them.

Given that GB devoted more money to the ILBer position than all but 3 other NFL teams in 2014 (Hawk, even after taking a pay cut, had the 11th highest cap hit and Brad Jones the 16th highest -- http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/ran...it/inside-linebacker), I don't think it is accurate to say TT has an aversion to devoting significant resources toward the position.

GD,

 

Absolutely and Woodson is proof.  Not anti-age only when he sees it as not enough production for the dollars.

Some guy named Peppers too.  

 

Production many times wanes without proper motivation.  Once the check clears so does production.  Some vets chase a more rewarding goal however that never gets cashed.

 

That's awesome, dude

Peppers is proof too. Good value, good production, he stays.

Exactly which players that left the Packers under TT actually played at the same level they did while with GB?  Colledge?  Gerg? James Jones?  EDS?  Bishop? About the only one that "got away" that I can think of is Cullen Jenkins and that was short lived.

Longwell.

 

That's it.

Petve.

any chance you are experiencing numbness or weakness in your face, arm, or leg, especially on one side?

Or an erection lasting more than four hours?

bad combination.

Pointing to Barrington and suggesting he is worthy of playing time because he overtook Hawk and Jones is like bragging about medaling in the special Olympics.  It really doesn't mean much of anything.

 

The best of the worst, yipeeee.

Hey!  It meant a lot to me.

Whatta jerk!