2021 Defensive Thread

[coachbuns]

30 minutes ago, Rainmaker90 said:

We’re still on this Joe Barry is gonna suck because his defenses in Washington and Detroit weren’t good narrative ? 

Appears so and will continue until Barry shows "his" defense can get the job done.  Wasn't thrilled with his choice as the Packers head man on D .. really hope and we'll see soon if it was the correct choice.  The players are there; time to put up or shut up.

[Rainmaker90]

26 minutes ago, coachbuns said:

Appears so and will continue until Barry shows "his" defense can get the job done.  Wasn't thrilled with his choice as the Packers head man on D .. really hope and we'll see soon if it was the correct choice.  The players are there; time to put up or shut up.

I understand that. There’s a lot of unknowns . I’m not putting too much stock into his time in either places . Both Wash and Detroit had such little talent. 
 

Im not as nervous because we have the horses and I trust Matt LaFleur. I trust MLF led a very through interview not only talking about his philosophies but also if he’d fit what Matt’s looking for from a defense situationally.  I also think the bar doesn’t have to be so high because of all the talent on defense. If Barry does the bare minimum and puts these guys in position to succeed then it’s going to be a very good defense. 

[incognito_man]

On 9/7/2021 at 7:07 AM, Rainmaker90 said:

and I trust Matt LaFleur

this is a good point. I do, too. He had a buncha options and picked Barry for reasons. Reasons much better than any of us have access to.

[vegas492]

1 hour ago, incognito_man said:

this is a good point. I do, too. He had a buncha options and picked Barry for reasons. Reasons much better than any of us have access to.

I can't remember how the Barry hiring went down, but didn't Leonard withdraw from the process?  I seem to recall something like that.  But I do not know if Leonard or someone else was MLF's first choice over Barry.

[Shanedorf]

2 hours ago, incognito_man said:

He had a buncha options and picked Barry for reasons. Reasons much better than any of us have access to.

MLF has been around some of the best offensive minds in today's game- and those offensive minds know who gives them trouble on defense.
Shanahan, McVay and others are enamored with some of the stuff Fangio does ( and so is AR)- so that was one of the criteria that MLF used in making his selection.

He also spent time with Barry in LA and watched him coach and interact with players. He also knows that Barry had time with several of the defensive guru's including Wade Phillips earlier in his career. And one part that I think gets missed is that while the Packers have a new DC- they have the same language, much of the same scheme and all of the position coaches from the previous season.

That offers a hint as to where MLF sees the problem...same scheme, same language and same position coaches - but a different guy leading the charge and making the calls on Sunday. Barry clearly has the energy, we're about to find out if he can translate that into defensive success on the field.

[Sasquatch]

firebarry.com

 

 

In before @Norm

[Norm]

32 minutes ago, Sasquatch said:

firebarry.com

 

 

In before @Norm

Lol

This Barry thing kind of reminds me of MLF though. Plenty of people looked at the resume and were like, he sucks. 

I can still hear SAS bitching about him and saying his name all stupid, I wonder if he still does that

[Sasquatch]

5 minutes ago, Norm said:

Lol

This Barry thing kind of reminds me of MLF though. Plenty of people looked at the resume and were like, he sucks. 

I can still hear SAS bitching about him and saying his name all stupid, I wonder if he still does that

Yeah, some folks are gonna hate until they (coach, player, etc) actually produce.  Kinda like you're guilty until proven innocent.  Unless you're coming in a highly proven winner, there's always gonna be a certain level of apprehension I guess.

[Arthur Penske]

23 hours ago, incognito_man said:

this is a good point. I do, too. He had a buncha options and picked Barry for reasons. Reasons much better than any of us have access to.

18 hours ago, Norm said:

Lol

This Barry thing kind of reminds me of MLF though. Plenty of people looked at the resume and were like, he sucks. 

I can still hear SAS bitching about him and saying his name all stupid, I wonder if he still does that

IDK how Barry will work out, but past failure with horrible players dosen't always mean someone won't succeed elsewhere.

We all saw this when MM came from a bad SF offense to GB in 2006. And to a lesser level again when MLF picked Hackett for OC. I seem to remember a lot of hate around here for that hire. And the guy had been fired mid season the year prior. Before that, Hackett led the leagues 29th ranked passing offense in Buffalo before they were all fired.  Now Hackett is loved by Rodgers and helped lead the best offense in the league. Obviously this isn't apples to apples as having Rodgers helped vs Bortels etc and the HC is MLF. Which leads to another example with MLF's offense in Tennessee before pairing with Rodgers ( saw @Norm pointed this out too). MLF also had tremendous success with Matt Ryan. A good deal of people and pundits looked at MLFs offense in Tenn and thought he was a poor pick for GB's HC. Now he led another very talented QB to MVP and the leagues best offense.

It shows what a change in talent level can do and GBs defense has a good deal of talent. ( If talent wasn't a larger separator of performance than coaching in the NFL, coaches would make a lot more than players). 

I will be pleasantly surprised if Barry's defense starts off great, but I think it will improve as the season goes on and let's not forget the continuity in the defensive staff that could help the year 1 DC transition be a littler easier.

Edited September 9, 2021 by Arthur Penske

[{Family Ghost}]

Barry seems like a good position coach with a great attitude, but I am curious to see what kind of a tactician he is.  How quickly can he adjust when the opponent finds flaws?

[incognito_man]

1 hour ago, Arthur Penske said:

past failure with horrible players dosen't always mean someone won't succeed elsewhere

this is true. And this is where complexity arises. We fans are sorta generally familiar with the concept of a coach who brings a "culture" change to an organization. But it's far deeper than that, and coaches have different skillsets that allow them to fail or succeed depending on surroundings.

i.e. a coach might have a BRILLIANT scheme and game-plans, but they are complex and require the right players. If he gets a good group who can process and execute, he looks like a brilliant coach. However, if he has weak links in the group and they do not execute, he looks like a terrible coach.

similarly, a guy with a simpler scheme might look great if he's coaching a buncha athletes with recognition/instincts. But may look crappy if his group is less athletic, but more heady. Essentially, it takes an absolutely ELITE coach to be able to get the best of a wide-range of abilities of which he may be in charge. Other coaches may be ELITE at certain subsets. And some coaches suck at everything.

Edited September 9, 2021 by incognito_man
Ended a sentence with a proposition

[Shanedorf]

1 hour ago, incognito_man said:

Essentially, it takes an absolutely ELITE coach to be able to get the best of a wide-range of abilities he may be in charge of.

1) we don't end sentences with prepositions 

2) excellent post

3) Every single Super Bowl- winning DC...has been fired multiple times for sucking

 

[Joe]

I think we're specifically talking scheme with Barry. We retained everyone else from last year except for Pettine. Ergo, one could consider the fact that our coaching staff is far better than what Barry may have had previously. We all know we have more overall talent than Barry has had as a DC anywhere else he has been so could his previous failures be contributed to a lack of talent?

[Shanedorf]

More on Barry's defense from Packers Talk

https://packerstalk.com/2021/09/10/what-packers-fans-need-to-know-about-the-joe-barry-defense/?

"The Packers will likely start most plays in a two high shell. That means both safeties will be lined up further away from the ball than anyone else. A lot of the time, when the team is playing cover 2, 4, or 6, they’ll stay there in deep coverage. But there will also be a lot of plays where one of them rotates down in the box or one of them takes the tight end in man coverage. The key is that the QB will not know what’s happening until it’s too late.

Additionally, there will be some more noticeable changes. Acme Packing Company’s Justis Mosqueda talked about how the defense will be run from left to right on a recent podcast. Where most defenses shift to the run strength of the offense, part of the Packers’ disguise is that they usually won’t. This means you’ll see some weird stuff. Like Preston Smith lining up over a slot receiver in coverage. By doing this, the defense won’t need as much frantic communication when the offense sends guys in motion or shifts the run strength."

[Shanedorf]

More on Staley's defense from The Athletic - and some of this is part of Joe Barry's defense as well

 

“I don’t think people understand — the quarterback in a lot of play-actions is blind for about a second,” said Cody Alexander, a former Baylor defensive assistant and author of the “Match Quarters” literary series in which he studies and translates the modernization of college and NFL defenses.

“If you have a predetermined pre-snap mental model of what the field looks like, and you kind of have a perception of where safeties are, where they’re moving — but it’s two-high, and the next moment I turn around and I’ve got weak rotation or I turn around and it’s strong rotation or the safety is now completely moved — now I have to re-set my mental model,” Alexander said. “And with the way the front structure and pressure is built, your processing has to be so much faster.”

Because a safety doesn’t have to necessarily account for a gap when a defensive front successfully plays gap-and-a-half, he can continue to play downfield instead of over-committing into the box and opening the opportunity for the ball to be placed behind him, and that marries into the best way for a defensive back to counter the play-action, in Alexander’s mind — which is to play from depth, as Fangio’s safeties traditionally have (and now Staley’s, too).

“(It’s saying), ‘We’re going to leverage play-action against you,” Alexander said.

“But then also, (it’s saying), we’re going to change the picture post-snap so that what you see when you take that ball, when you turn your back to us and then turn back around, you’re going to have to figure it all back out. And I think those two things, in particular, are what is so genius about the system. It changes the picture post-snap, but also it leverages the defense so it’s not going to just get abused by play-action.”