My thing on Carl Bradford is I've seen what he can do to change games, and he did, with regularity at ASU.
Do it once, even in the pre-season, and he might start turning heads. There are many stud college players who's game does not translate to the NFL. #tebow
I don't know why there is this problem with Clay at ILB. Of course he will line up at OLB at times but who really cares where he lines up if we have a more effective defense? I must say, he isn't great at holding the edge in the run game when he is at OLB and I have never been that impressed with how he plays the read option from the OLB. Our defense was better with him at ILB and I would assume he can only improve having another year under his belt.
Yeah, he really blows at OLB. Neal would be a better option.
If they are bringing him on blitzes up the middle, nobody cares. But if you're dropping him into coverage on a regular basis instead of using his talent to get to the QB that's pretty stupid. Matthews racked up most of his sacks outside.
I also wonder if they start running more of a hybrid defense with three pass rushers and one, "true" linebacker more often. If they stick with more of a one-gap approach, this will still leave them with 5 base rushers even in nickel. That's a lot of gambling but a possibility.
quote:
There's no doubt that ILB is a need, but just how big of a need is it? Is ILB a position we absolutely have to get a starter for this year? Should we reach in the 1st? Is it okay to get a guy in the 2nd? Should we get a depth guy that can become a starter in the 3rd or later? We need to talk about who we have in order to figure this out.
ILB's we have are Barrington, Bradford, Francis, and Thomas. We could potentially move Palmer from OLB to ILB because he's a good size for ILB at 6'2" 248 lbs. Bradford is up for debate on whether he's an ILB or OLB because the Packers played him at OLB (although he was horrible at it), but we also played him at ILB toward the end of the off/preseason and he played pretty well. I think the negativity surrounding Bradford is form his OLB play, not his ILB play. Thomas was an offseason stud, but unfortunately he is undersized at 6'1" 227 lbs. Hopefully he bulked up this year. Francis shouldn't be expected to do much because going from the IFL to the NFL is a huge jump where the game is completely different (the OC actually stands on the field, the field is only 50 yards, the games are played with fewer players on the field, teams typically go for it on 4th down, and it's almost all passing) and the level of play is way worse than the NFL.
I really see Carl Bradford as the guy who could make the Packers believe we have more talent than a lot of fans believe. As I said before, he's hated mainly for his OLB play, but at ILB, he has promising size. People forget that he was a 4th round draft pick, which is a pretty high pick, and also a pick that you expect to be a developmental guy. He also went to Arizona State, which means his coach was likely pretty decent. He's coming from the Power 5 conferences.
Another sign that the Packers might like Bradford more than most fans is the depth chart: http://www.packers.com/team/depth-chart.html
As you can see, Bradford is listed as the backup at ROLB, but more importantly, both RILB and LILB. You have to beat out the other guys to earn those spots as Jayron Elliott did at LOLB. I think this shows that the Packers see him as the top guy behind Barrington right now. Thomas will offer up some stiff competition, but I think the size is an issue so the Packers are probably hoping Bradford beats out Thomas.
Athletically, Carl Bradford is really interesting. Here are the SPARQ scores: http://imgur.com/a/D2r20#21
As you can see, he's at 54% for OLB's, but he's actually over 90% for ILB's (just comparing the SPARQs). I know a lot of people like Chris Borland and Bradford tests better than Borland does. How Bradford gets there is interesting because his running isn't very good, but his jumping is. (Btw, he lowered his 3-cone by over 2 tenths at his Pro Day, so that would increase his SPARQ.)
There is also something I just can't turn down showing you guys. Here is Bradford's profile: http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/d...737364/carl-bradford
Who does Bradford compare to? None other than Brandon Spikes. A lot of people are wondering why we didn't sign Spikes and if we will in the future, me included. Well from the Packers standpoint, after seeing this I imagine we won't sign Spikes because we already have a younger version of him on the roster.
If you look further into the profile, a lot of Bradford's weaknesses are negated by moving to ILB. Things like his short arms and ideal physical traits don't matter as much at ILB. If you look at his strengths you see traits that really translate to ILB such as "physical", "instinctive", and "fair fluidity in coverage".
Overall, I think the Packers have a plan. Bradford and Barrington will be the two starting ILB's and Thomas will back them up most likely. I wouldn't be surprised to see Thomas come in for special packages. I think Francis was signed to be a camp body that will either be put on the PS for development or will be back-end depth/ST's if he shows enough promise. I doubt the Packers would pass on a top ILB if there was decent value, but I'd be surprised if they really reached. They probably feel like if they can't get an early guy then they can get a later guy for depth and develop him. ILB Ben Heeney KANSAS is projected as a 3rd-4th round guy and would fit perfectly into that role IMO.
I have not heard very many good things about Carl Bradford. I believe in him at ILB, and I think the Packers do, too. I hope some people reconsider their stance on him.
Herschel, IMO that's an objective to be sure. Depends on being able to man-cover in the secondary. Dom's preferred package for years, flood the opponent with blitzers while covering like a glove on the back end. Which is why the defense sucked in 2011 crunch time up through getting Ha Ha onboard, just didn't have the safety play needed to pull that off.
Palmer moved to ILB late last summer, the same time as Bradford.
Yeah, GD, I've been carrying the guy's water for a while now, and I sure as hell hope he produces. 
I agree with you, we have not seen anything prior to Thursday, to suggest he will make a good ILB. He did get a sack, and some great pressures, broke up a pass in the flat, and got a couple of tackles against NE. He also had his jock taken off on a juke by White ( as did a few other players unmentioned), and missed on another tackle that would have been a good loss had he gotten home on it. At the same time, the sentiment is as if he didn't do anything at all, which I completely disagree with. Just watch him isolated through that game film. He covered his assigned player, relentlessly. A lot of action went away from him. I can't really say anymore on his play that day, but I believe it to be better than many perceived it to have been.
He was what they called, a "Devil Backer," at ASU, kind of a hybrid OLB/ILB. Definitely a playmaker, one who moved around in their defense. He had more than double the sack total of Stephone Anthony, 22 to 10, along with 2 INTs, 9 PDs, 6 FFs.
All I know is you guys are considered friends by me and I wanted to share what I've come to know and see from this player. I guess, just a bit taken aback by how widely considered by many to be a bust pick, when a guy like Barrington is essentially handed the keys, and Sam did virtually nothing last season, from a statistical standpoint. I mean, really, 1 sack against the Bears, and 1 PD all year? A lot of zeros on his stat line.
I think we're all saying the same thing about Barrington and Bradford. And that is that Jake Ryan better be better than any of us originally hoped for.
I donât think anyone is assuming bust for Bradford but after two training camps, a 4th round pick needs to show tangible, on-field proof that you belong in the NFL. Potential only gets you so far as a later round pick. A guy like Janis, who has unbelievable potential, has shown just enough on the field to keep him on the roster (at least IMO). Iâm not sure Bradford has shown his yet based on the practice and game reports Iâve read.
And for the record, I donât think Bradford should be cut. Iâm very intrigued by his potential and IMO, the coaches screwed up in having him work at OLB last year (wasting an offseason of development â but hey, hindsightâs 20/20). But I donât think there is any way in h**l Bradford makes this team OVER Barrington. That would easily be the biggest surprise in TTâs history of final cuts.
I'll add this regarding Clay being an answer at ILB...
If he plays there most of the time, he will get beat up. A LOT. It's what 3-4 ILBs are supposed to do. My problem with this is that he has had a history of getting nicked up regularly and missing time when playing OLB and not getting the kind of regular contact that he'll get at the ILB position. Clay is not the long-term solution there IMO. I hope Ryan can develop quickly and one of the others can at least become competent until next year's draft.
Pack should win the Superb Owl if the offense performs as we expect.
Moss and Trgovac better show a little ability to develop guys. Fast. No one is telling me Ted has the ability to draft every position except for ILB and DL. Trgovac has been fed a steady diet of early picks and his develop record is ****. The best ILB Moss has had is an OLB taking a grenade for the greater cause. He didn't teach Clay a damn thing.
Moss hasnt been given the early picks Trgo has but he has shown the ability for his guys to look utterly lost. I just hope he doesn't completely **** up a promising kid like Ryan who's still playing on instincts.
(Reminds me of the pivotal fumble in the SB caused by him and Clay.)
That fumble was caused by Pickett and Clay.
"Spill it Pickett. Spill it" Pickett crashed down. Center pulled and swung back inside to a flashing Pickett. Clay put a hat on Mendenhall in front of a lost H back thinking the C had Clay. Bishop cleaned up. Right after Greene told Clay, "It is time".
Coaching matters.
Pitt thought the best bet was to run at Clay. Never tug on Supermans cape.
I spit in the wind once.
Watch the C pull and 85 get totally washed by Clay's call. Clay knew they wanted to run his way and asked Pickett to lay waste to his plan to blow the whole thing up. The only thing better than being good is is being good and being smart.
Ryan was a well sung hero. So was Cullen. So was damn near every soldier that delivered the 2010 Lombardi. ****, CJ Wilson tickled the keys that kept everyone loose. Howard Green never accomplished anything else but that middle rush will never be forgotten. Neither will Zombos sack that added 4 yards to a FG miss that might have been good.
Nothing anyone one does in GB that leads to winning goes unsung. Thanks Vince.
I miss Pik.
I spit pissed in the wind once and decided I liked it.
FIFY
McGinn pops in on the 53 man roster: http://www.jsonline.com/sports...686z1-322125701.html
McGinn misses on Gunter. The guy is a lock at this point.
Sounds about right.
I wouldn't say Gunter is a lock. For now let's just put him in the All Oneida category.
Bob only really considers the core players as locks. He doesn't even have Ty Montgomery as a lock so he wouldn't have Gunter as one.
I spit in the wind once.
Knew that was yew.
Yeah, Montgomery not being a lock is a joke to me too. No way that guy isn't fourth WR.
I think backup OT has become interesting. IMO back up Center and Guard are solid, but with how poorly Barclay played and that the current G and C backups don't seem well suited to swing out, it looks like we need a guy like Vujnovich to step forward. He seems athletic enough but not equipped with the strength needed at this level.
Quite the dilemma at OT Packdog.
Even at cutdown time, any OT good enough to start is going to choose a team with a starting role available. GB is awfully thin at OT, but I'm not sure what options are even available.
MM talked about Barclay being a starting OL in the past and about him increasing his value by taking snaps at LT now. Are the Packers actually thinking of moving him ?
If Barclay is an interior-only player post injury, then he may get moved.
If Don can still offer spot duty at RT, he likely sticks around in 2015.
Vujnovich, Kowalski and Fabio are still early on in their development
Is anybody else concerned about our DL?
I'm thinking we may be just as thin there, especially with the suspensions of Guion and Jones pending. Our first 4 games are Bears, Seahawks, Chiefs and Niners. All of them running teams. Without Guion, especially, we could be in for a tough time with a rotation.
Hoping like hell Ted signs someone like Red Bryant. It would make SO much sense.
You've mentioned Bryant before. What about him do you like for the Packers?
note: do not google red bryant wood
well, some of you might want to
IF GB plays 25 % of the snaps in base, then you need 3 DL for a quarter of the game
IF GB plays 75 % of the snaps in nickle, then you only need 2 DL for 3/4 of the game
Taking out Jones and Guion for the first game, you still have 6 wide bodies available
( not sure how many are active)
Base would use Boyd, Raji and Daniels across the DL
2nd string Base is Gaston-Pennell-Ringo across the DL
In nickle, you only need 2 and Neal, Peppers and even your BFF Perry can kick inside and take nickle-rusher snaps in addition to the 6 DL listed above
Once Guion and Jones are back, reshuffle again. I am hoping that Guion gets only 2 games off. And then he'll be slightly fresher than if he did play.
We are gonna destroy the first two teams we play no matter what.
MARK IT DOWN!
Went 15-1 with a pretty bad defense. If the offense is functioning as expected (like a well-oiled machine) the first four games shouldn't be much of an issue defensively.
