Packers Huddle

go pak go wrote: ↑

23 Nov 2020 13:21

Here' a thought. Just spit ballin here.

If you only want to draft and sign BIG Outside linebackers. Like 270+....maybe don't have your defense also require the OLBs to be in coverage?

go pak go wrote: ↑

23 Nov 2020 13:20

Crazylegs Starks wrote: ↑

23 Nov 2020 13:13

So if they sit Preston (which they won't 'cause that's not how this team works), who takes his role as coverage OLB? His rush/run snaps can easily go to Gary with Garvin as backup.

How bout we like.....don't put OLB in a coverage role as much as a starter?

I mean the Colts completely baited Preston being the coverage role on their TE TD. That was a specific play design to attack our weakness.

And it was unfortunately one of Preston's best coverage plays he's done. I'm not mad at Preston. He did as good a job as he could.

go pak go wrote: ↑

23 Nov 2020 13:21

Here' a thought. Just spit ballin here.

If you only want to draft and sign BIG Outside linebackers. Like 270+....maybe don't have your defense also require the OLBs to be in coverage?

Crazylegs Starks wrote: ↑

23 Nov 2020 13:39

go pak go wrote: ↑

23 Nov 2020 13:20

Crazylegs Starks wrote: ↑

23 Nov 2020 13:13

So if they sit Preston (which they won't 'cause that's not how this team works), who takes his role as coverage OLB? His rush/run snaps can easily go to Gary with Garvin as backup.

How bout we like.....don't put OLB in a coverage role as much as a starter?

I mean the Colts completely baited Preston being the coverage role on their TE TD. That was a specific play design to attack our weakness.

And it was unfortunately one of Preston's best coverage plays he's done. I'm not mad at Preston. He did as good a job as he could.

go pak go wrote: ↑

23 Nov 2020 13:21

Here' a thought. Just spit ballin here.

If you only want to draft and sign BIG Outside linebackers. Like 270+....maybe don't have your defense also require the OLBs to be in coverage?

Easy to say, but in practice the only way to prevent that is to play dime or have at least one light/quick OLB out there, which they do have available to try, but Pettine never seems to play them.

Edit to add: Really this goes back to Dr.J's point that the coaches are not playing to guy's strengths.

Yoop wrote: ↑

23 Nov 2020 13:12

Christo wrote: ↑

23 Nov 2020 11:03

Yoop wrote: ↑

23 Nov 2020 09:40

just stop, you confuse playing soft with not playing smart or not coached to be able to play better, players do what coaches tell them to do most of the time, we have a shortage of talent at some key positions, namely ILB and DL on defense and slot receiver on offense, and opposing teams know this, and that limits the ability of not only players but also coaches, I didn't see players not giving it there all yesterday, I saw players out played because they aren't or weren't as talented as the competition.

No, I'll keep on calling soft play as soft play. In no way shape or form can anybody call the receiver's on the Colts stars. Yet, the Pack give them more room than Jerry Rice in his prime.
And it's amazing, now the Packers have a shortage of talent. They went from a deep team to a talent shortage team in a Nano second.
Inside LB isn't a problem, the way they're used is. Saw several times yesterday, on the snap, LBs turn and run down the field, leaving a huge open space for the running backs to slip in and catch easy dump offs and get nice chucks of yardage. Happened all game long.

To say it's a talent problem that this happens is silly.

And to say, I saw players " out played " is embarrassing. That right there screams soft.

so you think those lbers just decided to bail on there zones and run down field, abandoning those zones? NO they did that because they where coached to do it, and if that where actually the case then someone else (safety possibly) would have been tasked with that coverage.

go watch as both P Smith and Kirkley are beaten down the seam in the first half by players they where simply no match to cover, however the alternative to cover those guys was Raven Green, faster but to light to defend the run, Pettine started the 2nd half in that hybrid scheme, and the Colts ran over Green for like, ever, (6 plays and a TD), the problem is we can't cover in base and we can't stop the run to well in nickle or a 3 safety scheme, been like this forever because we wont invest big money or resources at ILB.

why you equate poor play with playing soft doesn't even make sense, and off coverage is not something a player decides to do,thats how it's taught, sure some of it is simply a CB respecting the ability of the player he's covering (Jerry Rice, good one ) something our coaches and players saw on film gave them the impression the colts receivers where all Jerry Rice wannabe cloners, and gave them due recognition still thats a coaching thing

go pak go wrote: ↑

23 Nov 2020 13:59

Crazylegs Starks wrote: ↑

23 Nov 2020 13:39

go pak go wrote: ↑

23 Nov 2020 13:20

How bout we like.....don't put OLB in a coverage role as much as a starter?

I mean the Colts completely baited Preston being the coverage role on their TE TD. That was a specific play design to attack our weakness.

And it was unfortunately one of Preston's best coverage plays he's done. I'm not mad at Preston. He did as good a job as he could.

go pak go wrote: ↑

23 Nov 2020 13:21

Here' a thought. Just spit ballin here.

If you only want to draft and sign BIG Outside linebackers. Like 270+....maybe don't have your defense also require the OLBs to be in coverage?

Easy to say, but in practice the only way to prevent that is to play dime or have at least one light/quick OLB out there, which they do have available to try, but Pettine never seems to play them.

Edit to add: Really this goes back to Dr.J's point that the coaches are not playing to guy's strengths.

Then as an organization, don't target players that put you in a bind.

We have discussed at ad nauseum that the type of OLBs that Pettine wants is big pass rushers. Every pass rusher we have targeted has size. Fackrell was the outlier but Fackrell was clearly not a Pettine-esque desire. He was a spill over from Thompson.

So then be smart enough to understand to not play your edge boys in coverage if you are specifically targeting players who suck in coverage.

It's so stupid.

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

23 Nov 2020 15:02

That people are making death threats over social media directed toward MVS is sickening.

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

23 Nov 2020 16:24

How about its just plain wrong to make death threats, period.

Not to mention doing so over social media is about as chicken &%$@ as it comes.

Quote of the year from MVS: "Social media gives cowards the right to say whatever they want with no consequences."

German_Panzer wrote: ↑

23 Nov 2020 16:18

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

23 Nov 2020 15:02

That people are making death threats over social media directed toward MVS is sickening.

Yeah, even from a pure tactical point because you don't wanna scare a receiver and make him "think" more. Of course, threatening a player at all and then for just some in-season game makes no point at all - probably trolls or even Bears/Vikings/...-fans who wanna stir things up.

German_Panzer wrote: ↑

23 Nov 2020 16:58

Just to avoid a misunderstanding: Threatening players is abominable in itself (even opposing players). I just wanted to make the point that even furthermore it doesn't make sense in this case.

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑

23 Nov 2020 17:00

Brandon $%&# though... $%@# that guy and everything he stands for. Lol Bosticks name is banned.

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑

23 Nov 2020 17:00

I got no beef with MVS. Hes not very good but it is what it is.

Brandon $%&# though... $%@# that guy and everything he stands for. Lol Bosticks name is banned.

Drj820 wrote: ↑

23 Nov 2020 19:40

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑

23 Nov 2020 17:00

I got no beef with MVS. Hes not very good but it is what it is.

Brandon $%&# though... $%@# that guy and everything he stands for. Lol Bosticks name is banned.

Really MVS is just a 5th round pick that the team tries to pretend is a day one or two pick. He gives us about what we should expect from the 5th round. It’s just a shame Gutey couldn’t find us say a 2nd rounder that plays like a 2nd rounder to have the ball in those critical spots.

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑

24 Nov 2020 03:06

Drj820 wrote: ↑

23 Nov 2020 19:40

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑

23 Nov 2020 17:00

I got no beef with MVS. Hes not very good but it is what it is.

Brandon $%&# though... $%@# that guy and everything he stands for. Lol Bosticks name is banned.

Really MVS is just a 5th round pick that the team tries to pretend is a day one or two pick. He gives us about what we should expect from the 5th round. It’s just a shame Gutey couldn’t find us say a 2nd rounder that plays like a 2nd rounder to have the ball in those critical spots.

MVS is someone they drafted and hasn’t really worked out. There should have been more progression last season over he course of the year IMO and there just wasn’t. The inconsistencies has followed him into this year as well which kind of means he is what he is.

As for 2nd rounders they wouldn’t have helped us this year. What receivers taken after round 1 are really setting the world in fire right now. It’s Claypool and a bunch of guys.

Getting a receiver in this draft wouldn’t have done much for us this year. One thing I did keep repeating though was they needed to get a receiver somewhere last year to develop. They didn’t do that and we are going to pay for that next year and the following year as well I think.