General Packer News 2021

[YoHoChecko]

I hope TJ can plug a hole in the run game starting this year...if not we will have another year where we left a season with a weakness, and entered a new season with the same weakness.

I maintain that the run defense was more of a scheme problem than a personnel problem.

We played nickel against base and dime against an extra wideout. We were almost always -1 in the front seven compared to the opponent.

[Drj820]

I hope TJ can plug a hole in the run game starting this year...if not we will have another year where we left a season with a weakness, and entered a new season with the same weakness.

I maintain that the run defense was more of a scheme problem than a personnel problem.

We played nickel against base and dime against an extra wideout. We were almost always -1 in the front seven compared to the opponent.

Good point. I like how your hypothesis will have the opportunity to be tested very soon. I still want to blame Dean Lowry, but I see your point. I often thought presnap that we did not look like we were in a good position to stop the run.

[YoHoChecko]

Good point. I like how your hypothesis will have the opportunity to be tested very soon. I still want to blame Dean Lowry, but I see your point. I often thought presnap that we did not look like we were in a good position to stop the run.

Yeah, to be fair, I also agree that we need a Slaton type and that if Keke doesn't step up and Lowry doesn't improve or get used better (I honestly don't know or care which it is), we still have weakness there.

But the reason it was SO bad is because we just gave them the run far too often.

[Yoop]

Good point. I like how your hypothesis will have the opportunity to be tested very soon. I still want to blame Dean Lowry, but I see your point. I often thought presnap that we did not look like we were in a good position to stop the run.

Yeah, to be fair, I also agree that we need a Slaton type and that if Keke doesn't step up and Lowry doesn't improve or get used better (I honestly don't know or care which it is), we still have weakness there.

But the reason it was SO bad is because we just gave them the run far too often.

true but when we did platoon to stop the run, the opponent would pass, then go no huddle, look us into that run platoon and we'd get torched through the air, we need better coverage inside with our base package, or from the ILB's, or Barry will be forced to play hybrid ILB's.

[BSA]

But the reason it was SO bad is because ....

You can have "a Lowery" OR you can have "a Lancaster"...but you can't hide both. 1000 snaps between them last year, that needs to be cut in half for 2021. TJ and Keke will eat a lot of those snaps and I'm still holding out hope for a Silverback DT like Geno Atkins or Gerald McCoy to round out the DL

[Pckfn23]

I hope TJ can plug a hole in the run game starting this year...if not we will have another year where we left a season with a weakness, and entered a new season with the same weakness.

I maintain that the run defense was more of a scheme problem than a personnel problem.

We played nickel against base and dime against an extra wideout. We were almost always -1 in the front seven compared to the opponent.

Absolutely was more of a scheme issue than a personnel issue. Poor run defense on the personnel side also stemmed more from our edge play than our interior play. We could definitely use better personnel beside Clark for a variety of reasons.

[lupedafiasco]

I can’t remember who but I want to say Nagler was the guy said that Clark was getting too much penetration and was leaving a gap because his running mate inside couldn’t do the same so at times it left a lane to run through. He thought the coaching staff told him to try and stay in his lane and make less plays which is why it appeared he slowed down throughout the season.

Could have just been the injury but the run defense has been bad for as long as I can remember. It sucked under Capers as well.

To me it’s always been a lack of talent. Never had a competent LB duo and we haven’t seen competent interior play probably since prime Pickett and Raji.

It shouldn’t come as a shock that in 2009 we had the #2 run defense and we had a prime Pickett and Raji with Prime Barnett and Hawk.

[go pak go]

2009 was more about Johnny Jolly than it was BJ Raji.

The Packers have never prioritized the ILB or Dlinemen. MN on the other hand completely prioritizes the ILB and DL spots but never did to the Oline.

Not saying one way is better vs the other but you get what you invest in. The Vikings have always had a great run defense the past 20 years whereas the Packers have always had great offensive line protection for the QB.

[BSA]

The Vikings have always had a great run defense the past 20 years

no they haven't
vikings D rank vs run here

2020...27th
2019...17
2018...13
2017...2
2016...19
2015...17
2014...24
2013...16
2012...10
2011...11
Over the last decade, they've averaged out at # 16...that's completely and totally average. Only 1 out of 10 "great" seasons
I think that's enough about the stinking vikes, after all- this is the Green Bay Packers thread.
.

[Yoop]

2009 was more about Johnny Jolly than it was BJ Raji.

The Packers have never prioritized the ILB or Dlinemen. MN on the other hand completely prioritizes the ILB and DL spots but never did to the Oline.

Not saying one way is better vs the other but you get what you invest in. The Vikings have always had a great run defense the past 20 years whereas the Packers have always had great offensive line protection for the QB.

Raji had plenty of competition to get snaps over Jolly, Picket, Jenkins, but still had 6 TFL and 29 tackles, 4 sacks, then was dominate his 2nd year

and Ted took a half doz DT's that didn't amount to much, it's not as though he didn't take DL, he just didn't really hit with his picks.

[go pak go]

Wow.

Hahaha. I was very wrong there. To be fair I wasn't including 2020 in my "head's theory" but still they are just slightly above average.

Nice work.

[go pak go]

2009 was more about Johnny Jolly than it was BJ Raji.

The Packers have never prioritized the ILB or Dlinemen. MN on the other hand completely prioritizes the ILB and DL spots but never did to the Oline.

Not saying one way is better vs the other but you get what you invest in. The Vikings have always had a great run defense the past 20 years whereas the Packers have always had great offensive line protection for the QB.

Raji had plenty of competition to get snaps over Jolly, Picket, Jenkins, but still had 6 TFL and 29 tackles, 4 sacks, then was dominate his 2nd year

and Ted took a half doz DT's that didn't amount to much, it's not as though he didn't take DL, he just didn't really hit with his picks.

Yeah let's see.

Daniels and Clark were hits.

Thornton, Worthy and Adams were misses. Adams was just always injured and Worthy had his major knee injury.

Any other draft pick I am missing after BJ for DTs? (and I'm not meaning Day 3 flyer guys)

[Yoop]

2009 was more about Johnny Jolly than it was BJ Raji.

The Packers have never prioritized the ILB or Dlinemen. MN on the other hand completely prioritizes the ILB and DL spots but never did to the Oline.

Not saying one way is better vs the other but you get what you invest in. The Vikings have always had a great run defense the past 20 years whereas the Packers have always had great offensive line protection for the QB.

Raji had plenty of competition to get snaps over Jolly, Picket, Jenkins, but still had 6 TFL and 29 tackles, 4 sacks, then was dominate his 2nd year

and Ted took a half doz DT's that didn't amount to much, it's not as though he didn't take DL, he just didn't really hit with his picks.

Yeah let's see.

Daniels and Clark were hits.

Thornton, Worthy and Adams were misses. Adams was just always injured and Worthy had his major knee injury.

Any other draft pick I am missing after BJ for DTs? (and I'm not meaning Day 3 flyer guys)

Daniels and Clark where really the only hits, others like D. Jones and Neal where barely servicable as was Adams, Thornton and Worthy where clear misses, the point is Ted did take DT's, most just didn't play up to draft status

[go pak go]

Raji had plenty of competition to get snaps over Jolly, Picket, Jenkins, but still had 6 TFL and 29 tackles, 4 sacks, then was dominate his 2nd year

and Ted took a half doz DT's that didn't amount to much, it's not as though he didn't take DL, he just didn't really hit with his picks.

Yeah let's see.

Daniels and Clark were hits.

Thornton, Worthy and Adams were misses. Adams was just always injured and Worthy had his major knee injury.

Any other draft pick I am missing after BJ for DTs? (and I'm not meaning Day 3 flyer guys)

Daniels and Clark where really the only hits, others like D. Jones and Neal where barely servicable as was Adams, Thornton and Worthy where clear misses, the point is Ted did take DT's, most just didn't play up to draft status

Okay. So you are including Neal and Jones as DT's.

[Yoop]

Yeah let's see.

Daniels and Clark were hits.

Thornton, Worthy and Adams were misses. Adams was just always injured and Worthy had his major knee injury.

Any other draft pick I am missing after BJ for DTs? (and I'm not meaning Day 3 flyer guys)

Daniels and Clark where really the only hits, others like D. Jones and Neal where barely servicable as was Adams, Thornton and Worthy where clear misses, the point is Ted did take DT's, most just didn't play up to draft status

Okay. So you are including Neal and Jones as DT's.

sure, in our d fronts we've used them as such, same with Keke and Lowery, just because we list them as DE's there still considered interior lineman, I forgot Lancaster, another player thats lacked to impress, but is bigger and not a DE.

[go pak go]

Daniels and Clark where really the only hits, others like D. Jones and Neal where barely servicable as was Adams, Thornton and Worthy where clear misses, the point is Ted did take DT's, most just didn't play up to draft status

Okay. So you are including Neal and Jones as DT's.

sure, in our d fronts we've used them as such, same with Keke and Lowery, just because we list them as DE's there still considered interior lineman, I forgot Lancaster, another player thats lacked to impress, but is bigger and not a DE.

I'm pretty certain Mike Neal was used more as a "linebacker" and Lancaster is a UDFA.

[YoHoChecko]

I'm pretty certain Mike Neal was used more as a "linebacker"

Only after he failed at DT. He was, for sure, drafted as a DT to play DT. The massive weight loss and redefinition of his position was an effort to make something out of him.

[NCF]

I'm pretty certain Mike Neal was used more as a "linebacker"

Only after he failed at DT. He was, for sure, drafted as a DT to play DT. The massive weight loss and redefinition of his position was an effort to make something out of him.

Did he fail, though? I thought he kind of flashed early, but hit a bout of injuries. That whole position change thing was a curious case with him. I am not entirely convinced it was done out of necessity because he couldn't play DT. Neal was really the first in a long line of players we drafted who we just didn't know what to do with. Then, to make matters worse, they doubled-down a few years later and took another guy who didn't have a clear position in Dom's defense.

[Yoop]

I'm pretty certain Mike Neal was used more as a "linebacker"

Only after he failed at DT. He was, for sure, drafted as a DT to play DT. The massive weight loss and redefinition of his position was an effort to make something out of him.

Did he fail, though? I thought he kind of flashed early, but hit a bout of injuries. That whole position change thing was a curious case with him. I am not entirely convinced it was done out of necessity because he couldn't play DT. Neal was really the first in a long line of players we drafted who we just didn't know what to do with. Then, to make matters worse, they doubled-down a few years later and took another guy who didn't have a clear position in Dom's defense.

Neal was a work out junkie, but who just didn't play stout enough at DT or even DE, I thought we tried him as a 5 tech to, point is he was 1 of the what ?????? 5 or 6, maybe 7 DL that Ted missed on, it's why I say I hate taking DL late round 1, and please don't mention Clark again,

[go pak go]

Only after he failed at DT. He was, for sure, drafted as a DT to play DT. The massive weight loss and redefinition of his position was an effort to make something out of him.

Did he fail, though? I thought he kind of flashed early, but hit a bout of injuries. That whole position change thing was a curious case with him. I am not entirely convinced it was done out of necessity because he couldn't play DT. Neal was really the first in a long line of players we drafted who we just didn't know what to do with. Then, to make matters worse, they doubled-down a few years later and took another guy who didn't have a clear position in Dom's defense.

Neal was a work out junkie, but who just didn't play stout enough at DT or even DE, I thought we tried him as a 5 tech to, point is he was 1 of the what ?????? 5 or 6, maybe 7 DL that Ted missed on, it's why I say I hate taking DL late round 1, and please don't mention Clark again,

Ted selected 4 DL in the first round. 2 were great. 2 were not great.
Mike Neal and Worthy were 2nd rounders. Both failed.
Thornton and Adams were 3rd rounders. Both failed.

I always liked MN's approach. They draft volume on Day 3 similar to how we draft volume for the Oline on day 3. I wish we did that more on the Dline. All we really need to do is just hit on one more Dlineman and we are good to go.