Round 1 Pick 28; Devonte Wyatt, DL Georgia

[mtsportsfan1]

On 1/26/2023 at 4:13 PM, PackFan13 said:

I thought he was coming on strong to end the year? I am still hopeful he's not another wasted first.

 

Thought the same thing ! Hopefully  him and Quay will make a good jump add Stokes who I think suffered from sophomore slump before injury will make this defense way better . To bad our d coordinator is too passive , maybe he learned from it also ! We can only hope.

[vegas492]

On 1/26/2023 at 4:13 PM, PackFan13 said:

I thought he was coming on strong to end the year? I am still hopeful he's not another wasted first.

 

He will be wasted.  Unless we change our DL scheme.

Wyat was pretty pedestrian in the 2 EDGE, 2 DL sets.  (Who isn't??)

He really started popping when we went to 3 DL, 2 EDGE.  

Same with Quay.

We just need more bodies up front and I think Wyatt will take off.  If not?  Another wasted pick, and it won't be on him or his ability.

[Old Guy]

This is the guy who has to step up this year. He's got all the physical tools to be a dominant player. We need him to start realizing that potential starting week 1. 

He's got to be above average to really good both as a run stopper and getting interior pressure. 

Predicting a major year two leap from him. 

[Brat&Beer]

Packers run defense did improve last 3 games quite a bit with Wyatt replacing Lowry. Went from about 148 rushing yards per game to 96. Wyatt is about the same size as Jarran Reed and 20 pounds heavier than Lowry. He should be stout enough while providing more disruptiveness. The development of him and Walker will be huge key for this defense.

[craig]

2 hours ago, Old Guy said:

This is the guy who has to step up this year. He's got all the physical tools to be a dominant player. ....

He's got to be above average to really good both as a run stopper and getting interior pressure. ...

Agree that *IF* the Packers defense is going to hypothetically improve a lot, he "has to step up" and "be above average ... as a run stopper and getting interior pressure."

I think it's fairly safe to assume that he'll step up, to some degree.  He didn't play much, and last year the coaches viewed Lowry as the superior player.  But the window of opportunity is now wide open, and I think he may well end up being as good or better than Lowry.  But, as you suggest, I think we need him to be quite a bit better than Lowry.  

Now sure how likely that is.  And I'm not sure he's really got "all the physical tools to be a dominant player".  He's not really dominant physically.  Seemed like last year o-linemen often stoned him or pushed him around and redirected him to create running lanes.  In short yardage, he was used little, and didn't hold the line when he did.  So I admit some hesitancy whether he can be very good in run defense.    

He kinda gets scouted more for his quickness in pass.  He never got sacks in college, though, so I don't imagine anything "dominant".  In Mike Daniels' prime, he got 4-6.5 sacks in 5 straight years.  If 4.5 was the over/under for Wyatt for Sacks, I'd probably take the under?  Hopefully he can penetrate some and disrupt the pocket.  

Huge wildcard player for the defense, that's for sure.  

[craig]

On 1/30/2023 at 8:53 AM, vegas492 said:

He will be wasted.  Unless we change our DL scheme.

Wyat was pretty pedestrian in the 2 EDGE, 2 DL sets.  (Who isn't??)

He really started popping when we went to 3 DL, 2 EDGE.  

Same with Quay.

We just need more bodies up front and I think Wyatt will take off.  If not?  Another wasted pick, and it won't be on him or his ability.

Vegas, given that we didn't draft any big, strong DL, and they let Lowry and Reed go, do you think they'll play more 5-man line?  I admit I'd kinda like that on some early downs against run-oriented offenses, particularly *IF* Stokes comes back 100%.  

Given the shifts in our DL personnel, what 3DL sets would you recommend?  Slaton in middle, Clark and Wyatt outside, I assume?  Our DL room is so thin, I'm not sure we've got the numbers or talent to play 3DL very many snaps. Certainly having Slaton make a 3rd-year leap in consistency would help, in addition to Wyatt. 

In 3/2 sets, would you play both Campbell and Quay, 3/2/2/4, with only 4 DB?  Or would you imagine more benching Campbell or Quay, and going with 3/2/1/5 nickel packages fairly often?  

Google says NFL played 65% nickel last year; on 1st/2nd downs 9% dime.  The league is not playing a lot of 3/2/2/4, so Barry is no outlier in doing that rarely.  Looks like even on early downs, teams are 7-in-box <1/3 of snaps.  But yeah, doing that situationally and in certain matchups, that might be fun to run some 3/2/2/4 on 30-40% of 1st-downs?

The two DL drafted, Wooden and Brooks, are both tiny, smaller than Jarren Reed and also than Lowry.  After Wooden's selection, the scout talked about the importance of quickness and lateral range, given scrambling QB's, inside/outside run plays, and screen plays.  Lateral range might serve well in 3DL sets.  

Huge DE-sized OLB in Gary and VanNess certainly fits the 2/2/2/5 model.   Will be interesting how they distribute packages this season, and *IF* they make some revisions in their run defense.  

[vegas492]

On 5/30/2023 at 10:04 AM, craig said:

Vegas, given that we didn't draft any big, strong DL, and they let Lowry and Reed go, do you think they'll play more 5-man line?  I admit I'd kinda like that on some early downs against run-oriented offenses, particularly *IF* Stokes comes back 100%.  

Given the shifts in our DL personnel, what 3DL sets would you recommend?  Slaton in middle, Clark and Wyatt outside, I assume?  Our DL room is so thin, I'm not sure we've got the numbers or talent to play 3DL very many snaps. Certainly having Slaton make a 3rd-year leap in consistency would help, in addition to Wyatt. 

In 3/2 sets, would you play both Campbell and Quay, 3/2/2/4, with only 4 DB?  Or would you imagine more benching Campbell or Quay, and going with 3/2/1/5 nickel packages fairly often?  

Google says NFL played 65% nickel last year; on 1st/2nd downs 9% dime.  The league is not playing a lot of 3/2/2/4, so Barry is no outlier in doing that rarely.  Looks like even on early downs, teams are 7-in-box <1/3 of snaps.  But yeah, doing that situationally and in certain matchups, that might be fun to run some 3/2/2/4 on 30-40% of 1st-downs?

The two DL drafted, Wooden and Brooks, are both tiny, smaller than Jarren Reed and also than Lowry.  After Wooden's selection, the scout talked about the importance of quickness and lateral range, given scrambling QB's, inside/outside run plays, and screen plays.  Lateral range might serve well in 3DL sets.  

Huge DE-sized OLB in Gary and VanNess certainly fits the 2/2/2/5 model.   Will be interesting how they distribute packages this season, and *IF* they make some revisions in their run defense.  

I don't know what GB will do or who will play in what role.

I have very little confidence that our DC will learn from his past mistakes and past successes.

He needs to run a DL with 3 guys with their hands in the dirt.  And one DE/OLB standing up.  So, 4 man line.  Which?  Is what we got gashed with last year, if we do not align them correctly.  The key to me is spacing.

If I look at the "tweeners" that we drafted, I hope we drafted them to play DE's with their hands in the dirt.  But I can see where a competent DC would play "games" with LVN in the lineup.  Lots of disguises.

And with our secondary?  I'd like to see 2 EDGE guys in there with 3 DL on early downs.  Force the other team to have to throw against our secondary playing man to man.  I'd live with that, even if it meant giving up possible larger chunk plays.  Because we are going to force turnovers if we dictate what the offense will do versus what they want to do.

But again, I have very little confidence in Barry.

[craig]

1 hour ago, vegas492 said:

...And with our secondary?  I'd like to see 2 EDGE guys in there with 3 DL on early downs.  Force the other team to have to throw against our secondary playing man to man.  I'd live with that, even if it meant giving up possible larger chunk plays.  Because we are going to force turnovers if we dictate what the offense will do versus what they want to do.

But again, I have very little confidence in Barry.

Thanks for your thoughts, vegas.  

I feel the same way, that I'd like a lot of 3DL/2edge on early downs.  Jaire and Stokes man outside.  And accept the risk/reward balance that allows some chunk completions against that.  A lot of times Jaire and Stokes are going to stop those passes, and teams will be looking at 2nd-and-10 if they they try.  

That's my "feeling".  I'm not sure whether data supports that?  

I'm pretty sure that MLF does not.  We often blame Barry for what we do.  But I think a lot of the play-soft-avoid-chunk is the head coach's will.  And I think a lot of the play-soft-avoid-chunk was Jerry Gray's approach, too.  And I think a lot of the play-soft-avoid-chunk is what most teams run, which probably means data tends to support it?  

[vegas492]

1 hour ago, craig said:

Thanks for your thoughts, vegas.  

I feel the same way, that I'd like a lot of 3DL/2edge on early downs.  Jaire and Stokes man outside.  And accept the risk/reward balance that allows some chunk completions against that.  A lot of times Jaire and Stokes are going to stop those passes, and teams will be looking at 2nd-and-10 if they they try.  

That's my "feeling".  I'm not sure whether data supports that?  

I'm pretty sure that MLF does not.  We often blame Barry for what we do.  But I think a lot of the play-soft-avoid-chunk is the head coach's will.  And I think a lot of the play-soft-avoid-chunk was Jerry Gray's approach, too.  And I think a lot of the play-soft-avoid-chunk is what most teams run, which probably means data tends to support it?  

That's where we differ.  I feel like Barry wants to run his stuff, which is the weak run look and zone coverage.  When told by MLF (and some players) then Barry will run a more aggressive style of defense.  I don't feel like it is what he wants to do, rather he is ordered to do it.

 

And...with our secondary, he should be forcing teams to throw against us.  Let's roll with Stokes, JA, Savage and Douglas back there.  Douglas can play a coverage role against a TE or WR as well as offer run support.  Savage can play safety, or even come up and play man to man if he has to.

 

But that is just me.  And I need to remember that we do not have Rodgers under center to get big plays and points back quickly, so maybe the best course is to be a little more conservative on defense.  At least for a while.

 

[Rainmaker90]

1 hour ago, vegas492 said:

That's where we differ.  I feel like Barry wants to run his stuff, which is the weak run look and zone coverage.  When told by MLF (and some players) then Barry will run a more aggressive style of defense.  I don't feel like it is what he wants to do, rather he is ordered to do it.

 

And...with our secondary, he should be forcing teams to throw against us.  Let's roll with Stokes, JA, Savage and Douglas back there.  Douglas can play a coverage role against a TE or WR as well as offer run support.  Savage can play safety, or even come up and play man to man if he has to.

 

But that is just me.  And I need to remember that we do not have Rodgers under center to get big plays and points back quickly, so maybe the best course is to be a little more conservative on defense.  At least for a while.

 

That’s a good point at the end. 
 

i think we need to be fluid. If Joe wants to be more conservative , fine, I get it. But when it’s 3rd and 4 or whatever, I don’t want the CBS to be 10 yards off the ball. That’s when I wanna challenge the offense more. 

[craig]

58 minutes ago, vegas492 said:

That's where we differ.  I feel like Barry wants to run his stuff, which is the weak run look and zone coverage.  When told by MLF (and some players) then Barry will run a more aggressive style of defense.  I don't feel like it is what he wants to do, rather he is ordered to do it...

Hard to know.  I just think if MLF wanted the defense different, he'd have gotten Pettine or Barry to do so? Or not have hired Barry? Or not have retained Barry?  

MLF never talks about wanting the D to be more aggressive, or blitz more, or man-cover more, or run-stuff-more.  The run-D has been soft for years; he's never suggested any priority to improve on that at expense of chunk-risk.

Obviously there are details, adjustments and game-planning that MLF entrusts to Barry's coaches.  But I think in big-picture defensive philosophy, Barry and MLF are in unity.  I'm guessing that with 3, 3, and 4 losses over his first three seasons, MLF has felt vindicated in his approach?  

I'm guessing MLF is NOT the guy prodding Barry to increase usage of man-coverage; or of 5-man lines; or to pinch the cushions other than situationally.