6.179 - Karl Brooks [DL; Bowling Green ]

[Green19]

On 5/2/2023 at 4:06 AM, AlexGreen#20 said:

This isn't going to work. 

Just doesn't have the anchor to play inside. 

it’s funny because they kept saying van ness would be similar to Z in role… but I get the vibe Brooks might be more that. Where he moves inside on third downs, clear passing down.

And just blow up interior guys.

[ThatJerkDave]

7 hours ago, squire12 said:

By Edge are you saying 3-4 OLB/ 4-3 DE?

I don't think he is either of those.  

More Dean Lowry type 3-4 DE

I think he is right.  So far, Brooks plays more like a rush LB than a DE.  But he has more of a DE body than that of a rush LB.  It will be interesting to see what they do with him.  

[R T]

Anyone have a good comp for this guy? Someone who has had some success in the NFL. Mathbomb's 3 best comps are probably Marlon Davidson, Marvin Wilson and Woodrow Hamilton. I would think there has to be better examples out there that I'm not thinking of. 

[packfanfb]

3 hours ago, R T said:

Anyone have a good comp for this guy? Someone who has had some success in the NFL. Mathbomb's 3 best comps are probably Marlon Davidson, Marvin Wilson and Woodrow Hamilton. I would think there has to be better examples out there that I'm not thinking of. 

Saw Ben Fennell compare him to Kerry Hyder. Brooks is heavier, but similar body types. 

[R T]

13 minutes ago, packfanfb said:

Saw Ben Fennell compare him to Kerry Hyder. Brooks is heavier, but similar body types. 

Hyder has so much better agility numbers though and could be a big reason for his success. 

Karl Brooks vs Kerry Hyder (ras.football)

[St Vince]

 

Love Andy's breakdowns. This one has me pumped.

 

[Old Guy]

I think what most are saying is Brooks isn't a finished product. The question is does he have a skill set that can be molded into a player. For me, the fact the kid can get after the QB is a great start. Coaches need to teach him the rest. If he can't anchor because of technique, teach him. If it's strength, get him in the weight room. 

If it's an inability to learn, he's a bust. 

[craig]

Will be interesting to see whether the Packers change anything defensively in terms of line play.  Back in the Super Bowl, they had both Pickett and Raji as run-stop anchor guys, and obviously smaller-model OLB in Matthews.  

Now there is only Clark. 

1. Wyatt lists as 304, and as one of the older guys on the team I'm not sure how much value adding more weight will have been for him. He seemed to get pushed around in run last year, and they seemed reluctant to use him in run-sets for good reason.  Especially in goal-line or short-yardage, did he ever get used or function well in those?  Seemed moe of a pass-set package guy.  I assume that usage will be much expanded this year.  But for a non-young player who the coaches perceived as being less-than-Lowry in run defense, I'm nervous that using him heavily will make the Packers even more run-vulnerable than they've ever been, which was already bad.
2. The big-guy options are Slaton, Slayton, and Ford.  Slaton played a lot, 32% of snaps, but wasn't that good whether in run or pass.  Not sure playing him more will be that helpful for run-contain or short-yardage stuffage. 
3. I wonder if they see any future for Ford as a run-stuff guy?  
4. Maybe adding some heavy run-stuff veteran is still on Gute's to-spend list?  
5. Additions Brooks, Wooden, VanNess, those are more movement guys than run-stuff power guys.  

So I'll be curious to see how they use the guys they have next season.  

 

[Htr]

Makes sense to go 4-3 with Gary and Van Ness at defensive end for sure .

[CWood21]

On 5/10/2023 at 12:24 PM, craig said:

Will be interesting to see whether the Packers change anything defensively in terms of line play.  Back in the Super Bowl, they had both Pickett and Raji as run-stop anchor guys, and obviously smaller-model OLB in Matthews.  

 

I mean, we're a 2-4-5 defense, but it's going to look more like 4-2-5 with the way our EDGE line up.

[spilltray]

3 hours ago, CWood21 said:

I mean, we're a 2-4-5 defense, but it's going to look more like 4-2-5 with the way our EDGE line up.

Right just stand them up leaves the possibility you could drop them in short coverage and blitz somewhere else. You don't need to actually do it very often.

[spilltray]

And base defense should be a 6 man front now.

[Sandy]

16 hours ago, spilltray said:

And base defense should be a 6 man front now.

It pretty much was last year too. I really like our DB depth.

[spilltray]

20 hours ago, Sandy said:

It pretty much was last year too. I really like our DB depth.

I mean for the NFL in general. A base offense isn't 2 RB, 2 WR, 1 TE anymore, it's 1/3/1. NFL defenses should be listed as base nickel instead of pretending that 3rd interior DL or 3rd off ball LB are actually "starters" any more than a FB is.

[MrBobGray]

On 5/8/2023 at 3:40 PM, R T said:

Anyone have a good comp for this guy? Someone who has had some success in the NFL. Mathbomb's 3 best comps are probably Marlon Davidson, Marvin Wilson and Woodrow Hamilton. I would think there has to be better examples out there that I'm not thinking of. 

I'm sure there is one, but man I'm not coming up with it.  Brooks is such a weird prospect as a whole.  Looks like a 3T but played stand-up edge; body looks a year or two out (and the testing numbers agree), but put up a great senior bowl performance all the same.  Man is awfully smooth for his size, certainly seems like he has the physical ability, but I just cannot get a good sense of what he is or should be in the pros.