Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
packfanfb

Packfanfb's "The Packers Aren't Doing Anything So I'm Bored" Mock

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
36 minutes ago, Joe said:

I'm not dismissing what I've omitted from your rather lengthy post and I am NOT disagreeing with the fact that many of his technical issues are coachable. That has never been my argument and let's get that clear because you think he's a HOF'er. However, you forget that I'm actually from TX and follow TCU football closely as stated in another thread; which is why I'm high on Reagor and not on Mims.

Let's go through this line-by-line:

A. Processing skills are crucial when diagnosing power run schemes such as the two losses to the 49ers, the loss to San Diego, and when we couldn't contain Jordan Howard late in the Philly game. Your first reaction needs to be the right reaction and you need to telepath your move knowing what's coming. He's grossly deficient in this area which is backed up by what has been written. This is why you'll understand the argument that he needs to be in a 4-3 front similar to that of Minnesota's and NYG's due to the fact that he needs a true NT next to him to eat up blocks in order for him to get the 1-on-1's he needs in order to succeed. Therefore, this does NOT make him scheme diverse at the next level. Plus, they point out that he's NOT a plug-n-play. We need a plug-n-play guy.

B. What part of "hit-or-miss run defender" do you not understand. If he's hit-or-miss at the collegiate level, he will be PWNED at the pro level. This is insufficient and it's noted in the weaknesses, which you clearly failed to read even though you emboldened a couple for some reason. 

C. The emboldened part says everything you need to know. The TCU defensive scheme is so much different from everyone else's that it's incredibly difficult to project to the next level. That's why you haven't seen DL from TCU succeed in the NFL outside of a couple of pass rushers from a decade ago. Patterson's scheme is so different that his players are befuddled and confused at the next level.

 

Final thoughts:

I'm certainly not questioning his intelligence, but he has mental weaknesses that are not coachable; we saw this with Stephone Anthony at his respective position and we saw this with countless players over the years at other positions. There are things you can't coach: height, size, mentals. You can't do it. Physical things, like technique, are coachable. Molding a guy like Gary who has physical and mental traits, but wasn't coached up at the collegiate level, is another thing. Blacklock is not Gary and benefitted from a scheme that could mask his deficiencies. He's just not a fit in Pettine's scheme and if we draft him, he will be another bust; guaranteed. I know we've talked to him and I wonder why since he's likened to great 4-3 DT's who do not work well in an odd front. He's just not a good fit and he isn't ready for what will be thrown at him - not a 1st round pick.

Why do you take Zuerlein's profile of him as complete gospel but then dismiss TDN when you use TDN for other prospects?  Is it because he tells you what you want to hear?

And please tell how the **** I "clearly failed to read" the hit-n-miss part WHEN I MENTIONED IT RIGHT BELOW ZUERLEIN'S REPORT.

 

EDIT: Look, I'm not saying that Blacklock will be good or bad in the NFL, because I don't know.  I don't know if any of these guys will be good.  All I'm saying is that the only source that really critisizes Blacklock's run defense is Zuerlein, but he's critical of literally everyone.  He also has Blacklock graded higher than Davis, Gallimore, Madubuike, Davidson, Elliott, and Hamilton, if that means anything.

Edited by MaximusGluteus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Joe said:

Again, I tell you: Lance Zierlein and The Draft Network. 

I'm not sure in either of TDN's reports would I read that he's a bad run defender.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We got killed against the 49ers in run defender for a bunch of reasons:

1. Personnel and scheming. On about 2/3 of our plays, we were playing with a light box. That will kill you every time if a team is a smart running team. 

2. We were not at all prepared for their 1 WR set. To counter that 1 WR set, you need to have 9 run gaps filled. We weren't willing to play any more than 7 front-7 players together (In fairness we only had 4 good front 7 players, and Lowry, Lancaster, Goodson are very JAGy before we get into Burks and Adams). Pettine wasn't willing to pull King for Adams or Burks. That means that even with only 1 safety playing high, you have a CB with an assigned run gap. Sometimes that's fine, but the 49ers targeted those DBs with their pulls and shifts and motions and our guys were totally lost as to how to counter. 

3. Fackrell lost containment twice on TD runs. 

4. Lowry had one big screw up, Lancaster had two. Obviously bad, but on percentages (they ran a ton) they weren't apocalyptic. 

5. We didn't get the momentum breakers between the 20s from Clark that we normally get. A few times a game usually, Clark will bust up an interior run with good penetration. That turns a 2nd down into 2nd and 10/11. That takes the other team out of their run sets on 2nd down and lets Pettine play coverage. It's not reasonable to expect him to do that, but that's what Superstars do. Against the 49ers, it only happened a few times and when it did, we failed to capitalize (Gould made a 50+ yard field goal on one, Fackrell blew contain on another, there may have been one more that I'm forgetting) so instead of getting off the field on a few drives due to that second and long, instead we got run on again in 2nd and 3. 

Only number 4 is potentially addressed with a rookie DT. We don't need a run plug. We need to get disastrously outcoached

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Joe said:

I'm not dismissing what I've omitted from your rather lengthy post and I am NOT disagreeing with the fact that many of his technical issues are coachable. That has never been my argument and let's get that clear because you think he's a HOF'er. However, you forget that I'm actually from TX and follow TCU football closely as stated in another thread; which is why I'm high on Reagor and not on Mims.

Let's go through this line-by-line:

A. Processing skills are crucial when diagnosing power run schemes such as the two losses to the 49ers, the loss to San Diego, and when we couldn't contain Jordan Howard late in the Philly game. Your first reaction needs to be the right reaction and you need to telepath your move knowing what's coming. He's grossly deficient in this area which is backed up by what has been written. This is why you'll understand the argument that he needs to be in a 4-3 front similar to that of Minnesota's and NYG's due to the fact that he needs a true NT next to him to eat up blocks in order for him to get the 1-on-1's he needs in order to succeed - He will not get that in Pettine's scheme and will face double teams regularly. Therefore, this does NOT make him scheme diverse at the next level. Plus, they point out that he's NOT a plug-n-play. We need a plug-n-play guy.

B. What part of "hit-or-miss run defender" do you not understand. If he's hit-or-miss at the collegiate level, he will be PWNED at the pro level. This is insufficient and it's noted in the weaknesses, which you clearly failed to read even though you emboldened a couple for some reason. 

C. The emboldened part says everything you need to know. The TCU defensive scheme is so much different from everyone else's that it's incredibly difficult to project to the next level. Also: WE DO NOT STUNT OUR DE'S....EVER...HE NEEDS THAT TO SUCCEED AND THRIVE... 

 

Final thoughts:

I'm certainly not questioning his intelligence, but he has mental weaknesses that are not coachable; we saw this with Stephone Anthony at his respective position and we saw this with countless players over the years at other positions. There are things you can't coach: height, size, mentals. You can't do it. Physical things, like technique, are coachable. Molding a guy like Gary who has physical and mental traits, but wasn't coached up at the collegiate level, is another thing. Blacklock is not Gary and benefitted from a scheme that could mask his deficiencies. He's just not a fit in Pettine's scheme and if we draft him, he will be another bust; guaranteed. I know we've talked to him and I wonder why since he's likened to great 4-3 DT's who do not work well in an odd front. He's just not a good fit and he isn't ready for what will be thrown at him - not a 1st round pick.

No dog in this fight and I do enjoy reading Pros and Cons regarding guys.

But...after reading all of that...it does kind of read like he would be excellent next to Kenny Clark.  Kenny will draw the doubles for sure, so that should free up the guy next to him.  And from the comments, Blacklock appears to be a guy that can whip someone 1:1.

My $.02.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, vegas492 said:

No dog in this fight and I do enjoy reading Pros and Cons regarding guys.

But...after reading all of that...it does kind of read like he would be excellent next to Kenny Clark.  Kenny will draw the doubles for sure, so that should free up the guy next to him.  And from the comments, Blacklock appears to be a guy that can whip someone 1:1.

My $.02.

I'm more on Joe's side of the fence with this one. Got a pretty comfy 2nd on him. They shoot gaps often and when he takes on doubles he's going to get stuck. Pulls a Lancaster and puts his head down. He's promising in the 1v1's though. 

The bolded sounds nice until you're running away from Kenny so you just cut him. It's not a clean fit for me. Wouldn't hate it because that man is ACTIVE and I think he'd immediately be  our most dangerous guy in pass rush.. wouldn't be a huge boon to the run D though, still gotta commit those guys in the box.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, HighCalebR said:

I'm more on Joe's side of the fence with this one. Got a pretty comfy 2nd on him. They shoot gaps often and when he takes on doubles he's going to get stuck. Pulls a Lancaster and puts his head down. He's promising in the 1v1's though. 

The bolded sounds nice until you're running away from Kenny so you just cut him. It's not a clean fit for me. Wouldn't hate it because that man is ACTIVE and I think he'd immediately be  our most dangerous guy in pass rush.. wouldn't be a huge boon to the run D though, still gotta commit those guys in the box.

I wasn't even arguing whether or not he should be our 1st round pick (I'd prefer him in the 2nd as well if we were to draft him).  I was only arguing that the sources he pointed out don't say or imply that he's "terrible against the run".  I don't think Blacklock is going to be a guy blowing up double teams as a rookie, but then who will be?  Maybe Derrick Brown and/or Javon Kinlaw?  Raekwon Davis has that potential, but he has a lot of question marks.

Edited by MaximusGluteus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great job on this mock. If we made the trade with Cleveland I'd think they would want more than that, possibly a 4th or a 5th. It's Njoku's first contract. I think getting Taylor Gabriel at this point in time may not be overly realistic with everything they've done thus far. I like, not love Blaylock to us in the first round. I personally think we need to double down in the draft with IDL. Pittmann in the 2nd would be an incredible pick. Him and Claypool from Notre Dame I think are both 1st round talents. Does anybody have a inside scoop on the Bartch kid the plays OT from St. John. 3rd round I'd be ok with it, but is he gonna be a 3 year raw kid that's never going to be ready even as a backup right away? I love the kids from Miami you nabbed for us. Lastly aren't the Davis twins from Nebraska more worthy than getting picked in 7th round as you have here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  



×