Packers Huddle

packman114 wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2024 07:29

If we all agree that the Barry defense schematically and in execution was not good, then how can we confidently say our ILBs and Safeties are lacking in skills and need to be upgraded. Maybe they were put in situations to fail.

I'm all for bringing in competition but I'm not ready to say Nixon isn't good enough at slot DB or Owens and Savage aren't good enough at Safety. I'll let the new DC decide which players fit his scheme best.

TheSkeptic wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2024 04:54

What works in the NFL is a combination of 2 things:

First is to be respected (not necessarily liked) by the players. You don't get that respect by trading a good player at a position of need for less than he is worth. Much less for cutting him. You don't get that respect by keeping backups that can never play at starter level and starting players that are less than the backup. And mostly you don't get that respect if you can't understand how the players think and if you force players onto a role they are not physically good at.

Second is to coach in a fundamentally sound but new way. Decades ago D's switched from a 4-3 to a 3-4 and it worked great because it was new and fundamentally sound. Now we see a lot of 2-4 and this is new but it is not fundamentally sound against any team that can run the ball up the middle.

Decades ago the West Coast offense was new and fundamentally sound and worked great until most teams started using it and defenses were built to stop it.

With regard to a new DC, a man who is 2 or more generations older than the players has a tough time relating to today's players or remembering himself 25 years ago. A DC who never played in the NFL has a tougher time too. A guy who never played after high school has a really tough time - not impossible but very tough to relate.

With regard to a DC from a particular "school" or lineage, or someone who has been "around the block" - that is not where you will find the best candidate. The best candidate will create his own school and lineage. Hiring a coach in the established club aka Good Old Boys club may result in a modest upgrade over Barry but it is NEVER going to result in hiring the best candidate. The best candidate is someone who does something new because he IS new.

So how does this fit with the packers roster. The Packers have an abundance of good Dlinemen and pass rushers. They have only 1 competent ILB and a maybe (McDuffie). They have a maybe in Savage and that is all at safety. They have only Alexander and Valentine who should be starting at CB and need an upgrade in the slot and a backup at outside CB. They need a DC that uses a very aggressive front 7 because that is where all the talent except Alexander is. Someone who never ever uses prevent, not because it never works, but because it demoralizes the front 7 that want sacks and tackles for a loss. Someone who uses stunts and blitzes extensively and disguises them effectively and someone who has the personality of a junkyard dog rather than a border collie.

go pak go wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2024 09:35

packman114 wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2024 07:29

If we all agree that the Barry defense schematically and in execution was not good, then how can we confidently say our ILBs and Safeties are lacking in skills and need to be upgraded. Maybe they were put in situations to fail.

I'm all for bringing in competition but I'm not ready to say Nixon isn't good enough at slot DB or Owens and Savage aren't good enough at Safety. I'll let the new DC decide which players fit his scheme best.

I think it's comletely the opposite. I think Barry's scheme does a very good job of hiding the impact of safeties, ILB, and even Slot corners. For this, you can get away with lower level talent. Especially at the safety level.

We had NFL retreads and Day 3 rookies at the safety spot this year and last year and they weren't a liability. It is for this reason that when we do go after a different system, adding talent to the Safety and ILB will be a priority because I expect those positions will be asked of more under a new system.

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2024 11:11

With how much we invested in our front 4 we really shouldn’t have to rush more than 4 on a normal basis. You can send it every now and again but the resources poured into DT and Edge should do the work on their own if they are good players.

paco wrote: ↑

26 Jan 2024 13:13

NM#1Packfan wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2024 13:08

Personally I don't think that the Packers could do any better than to bring in Leonard. At least his top priority is to stop the run. He's proven what he can do in the college ranks with players that are here and gone.

go pak go wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2024 09:35

packman114 wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2024 07:29

If we all agree that the Barry defense schematically and in execution was not good, then how can we confidently say our ILBs and Safeties are lacking in skills and need to be upgraded. Maybe they were put in situations to fail.

I'm all for bringing in competition but I'm not ready to say Nixon isn't good enough at slot DB or Owens and Savage aren't good enough at Safety. I'll let the new DC decide which players fit his scheme best.

I think it's comletely the opposite. I think Barry's scheme does a very good job of hiding the impact of safeties, ILB, and even Slot corners. For this, you can get away with lower level talent. Especially at the safety level.

We had NFL retreads and Day 3 rookies at the safety spot this year and last year and they weren't a liability. It is for this reason that when we do go after a different system, adding talent to the Safety and ILB will be a priority because I expect those positions will be asked of more under a new system.

Chilli wrote: ↑

26 Jan 2024 21:08

I've just did a deep dive on Anthony Weaver and my god he is so incredibly connected to LaFleur and his coaching circles.

Anthony Weaver was at Houston in his final season as a player when LaFleur, Shanahan, McDaniel and Saleh was on staff. Eventually he coached with Pettine and Hackett at the Bills, and again with Pettine, Shanahan, McDaniel at the Browns.

He already knows Vrable, Rebrovich and Downard on our staff.

He got 3-4 defence knowledge. He got knowledge of the current Baltimore defensive schemes and he has experienced Shanahan offensive schemes in training both as a coach and player.

Woah. Guaranteed he's at the very top of LaFleur's defensive coordinator list (and Miami's I bet)

It's about timing, first Baltimore needs to lose. secondly he needs to fall short of landing the Washington HC job then we have a real shot of getting him.

But if Baltimore loses, Seattle can interview McDonald for HC and if he gets it, that opens up the Ravens DC gig so Weaver will have three teams vying for his services, Baltimore, Miami and Green Bay.

packman114 wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2024 09:25

Bears hired Eric Washington as their DC. He's a Bills assistant. Apparently they liked him better than Babich.

NM#1Packfan wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2024 13:08

Personally I don't think that the Packers could do any better than to bring in Leonard. At least his top priority is to stop the run. He's proven what he can do in the college ranks with players that are here and gone.

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2024 13:11

One thing that is a bit concerning, he has never coached in the NFL. There are some good prospective DCs out there.

packman114 wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2024 14:28

Andrew Mertig is reporting that Parker is on his way to Green Bay to accept the job.

Labrev wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2024 14:33

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2024 13:11

One thing that is a bit concerning, he has never coached in the NFL. There are some good prospective DCs out there.

So experience *does* matter! Ohhhhhhhhhhhhh