Boston College Head Coach Jeff Hafley is Packers New DC

[vegas492]

34 minutes ago, HighCalebR said:

No we arent. We're getting another off the ball linebacker. And only in base.  Im actually befuddled by your argument here. wut.

its going to be a 4-2, for 80% of the plays or whatever, just like we were this year.

Thats not semantics. theres literally 3 DL inside the tackles in a 3-4. theres 2 inside the tackles in a 4-3. 2 EDGE guys on both.

Gary-Wyatt-Slaton-Clark-Preston

Gary-Wyatt-Clark-Preston

wut

That also plays nicely into the LVN game.

What I also believe is that the splits between the DL may change as will the responsibilities.

But this change isn't overwhelming at all.  More of a tweak over what we were doing and one that could have very good results.

[HyponGrey]

12 hours ago, HighCalebR said:

But of Olivadotti(ILB)-Downard(DB)-Rebrovich(pass rush)-Williams(pass game coord)-Montgomery(DL/Running game coord)

Who HAS to go?     Think the DBs have always been pretty well coached and ready to go. but Haf specializes in DBs so maybe he wants his own guys there.  Montgomery has the DL in a solid spot when theyre deployed right. I think the pass rush has been solid through a couple styles now, but the way Haf creates pressure is a different beast than Barrys version.

I dont know nearly enough about what goes on behind doors. Obviously I support letting the DC bring in his guys, but who do we think really just isnt getting enough out of the guys? 

I'd think it's Olivadotti and Montgomery are out. for his guys and then Haf just takes an interest more in the DB room. 

I mean he did work with Downard for Pettine's Browns

[Mdpackfan22]

46 minutes ago, HyponGrey said:

We're going to send all four dl whether they're in the dirt, standing up, or upsidedown. 

I see you've never watched a Joe Barry defense on 3rd and 16

Edited February 1 by Mdpackfan22

[HighCalebR]

17 minutes ago, vegas492 said:

That also plays nicely into the LVN game.

What I also believe is that the splits between the DL may change as will the responsibilities.

But this change isn't overwhelming at all.  More of a tweak over what we were doing and one that could have very good results.

Yeah, LVN was hands down already a nice chunk think he fits nicely, but I dont really see anyone that you say is a duck out of water ya know.

We'll see what Haf implements, I think one of the best parts of the hire is he's flexible and multiple. Ill have to go back to thee Ohio State games and dig a little deeper when he has actual talent. He's got like 2 guys who are pretty good on his BC defense.

Edited February 1 by HighCalebR

[Kampfgeist]

1 hour ago, OneTwoSixFive said:

You don't want to be sharp if you are a pea. Rotundity is where it's at.

Yes of course, of course.     You'll have to excuse me, I'm not the sharpest bulb in the box, a few beers short of a bottle of wine

[squire12]

35 minutes ago, HighCalebR said:

Hilarious how Pat really wants to bury the Packers but word is, Hafleys damn good.

Pat trying to make nice with Rodgers??

[HighCalebR]

8 minutes ago, squire12 said:

Pat trying to make nice with Rodgers??

I dont think theres any nice to make, theyre still boys haha.

As much as they ever were boys anyways.

[vegas492]

53 minutes ago, HighCalebR said:

Yeah, LVN was hands down already a nice chunk think he fits nicely, but I dont really see anyone that you say is a duck out of water ya know.

We'll see what Haf implements, I think one of the best parts of the hire is he's flexible and multiple. Ill have to go back to thee Ohio State games and dig a little deeper when he has actual talent. He's got like 2 guys who are pretty good on his BC defense.

Wooden is the one that immediately came to mind as someone that could be a duck out of water.

And to me he's a pretty insignificant piece.  But, he could get heavier to play inside, or lighter and quicker to play a DE role.  But last year I saw him as too small to be very good inside and no where near quick enough to play outside.  So he was kind of a duck out of water last year, too.

[MacReady]

1 hour ago, HyponGrey said:

Oh. I disagree with you philosophically on principle then. Function over form 100%. 

But I do also believe the function of the 4-3 is better as well. Purely from a spacing perspective. You’ve got extremely well-coached 3-4 defenses that understand and are capable of closing space. The Ravens. They’ve always had extremely good and extremely well-coached ILBs and DL.

Take away the extremely great coaching, take away the talent of a defense and just looking at it from a philosophical approach, clear cut way of looking at it, you want less space for an offense to be able to move. Kind of the same principle of deep coverage or soft zone. Offenses right now love space and if you give them space they’re going to take it. Brady and Brees and now Mahomes… If you give them that space to get those quick screens, outs, dump off to the RB to give them 4-5 yards a pop, they’ll take it all day and then beat you deep when you’re finally forced to change.

Take that approach with the 3-4 and 4-3 alignments and there’s just so much more green between the DL and that second level. You’ve got your EDGE standing up flirting with dropping back or rushing and you’ve got two guys spread way the hell out on the line and.

I’ve just never liked that approach philosophically. Especially in short yardage situations.

[Zycho32]

1 hour ago, vegas492 said:

Wooden is the one that immediately came to mind as someone that could be a duck out of water.

And to me he's a pretty insignificant piece.  But, he could get heavier to play inside, or lighter and quicker to play a DE role.  But last year I saw him as too small to be very good inside and no where near quick enough to play outside.  So he was kind of a duck out of water last year, too.

If we're playing a more traditional '40' Front, then Wooden probably has depth value at both DE and DT. He kind of fits the tweener mold that you want for a relief DL, someone who can fill in as a run-stopper at DE or as a lighter pass rusher at DT.

If we're talking potential Ducks out of Water(again, traditional '40' and not Edge Rushing 3-4 '40'), the biggest candidates I can think of would be Preston and Enegbare. Preston because I have no clue how much true experience he has as a three-point rusher(to say nothing of his CB#1 skills), and Enegbare because his size would traditionally limit him to a 3rd down speed rusher(think Keith McKenzie from the '96 team).

Edited February 1 by Zycho32

[craig]

2 hours ago, HighCalebR said:

..Its going to be a 4-2, for 80% of the plays or whatever, just like we were this year.

Thats not semantics. theres literally 3 DL inside the tackles in a 3-4. theres 2 inside the tackles in a 4-3. 2 EDGE guys on both.

Gary-Wyatt-Slaton-Clark-Preston

Gary-Wyatt-Clark-Preston...

I just skimmed through snaps for weeks 10-13.  Your numbers are exactly ight. 

Averaged 6.2 DL/OLB/ILB per snap.  4.8 secondary average, i.e. 80%.  So 80% nickel was obviously the dominant base.  

Used 2.2 DL/snap in 3 of those games.  So the 3-4 was only 20% usage.  80% was 4-2.  

[vegas492]

13 minutes ago, Zycho32 said:

If we're playing a more traditional '40' Front, then Wooden probably has depth value at both DE and DT. He kind of fits the tweener mold that you want for a relief DL, someone who can fill in as a run-stopper at DE or as a lighter pass rusher at DT.

If we're talking potential Ducks out of Water(again, traditional '40' and not Edge Rushing 3-4 '40'), the biggest candidates I can think of would be Preston and Enegbare. Preston because I have no clue how much true experience he has as a three-point rusher(to say nothing of his CB#1 skills), and Enegbare because his size would traditionally limit him to a 3rd down speed rusher(think Keith McKenzie from the '96 team).

Personally I feel like 3/4 versus 4/3 is way overblown. 

We are going to continue to be in a ton of nickle sets.  The difference is one edge may have a hand in the dirt while the other truly stands up.  

Preston is an easy one to figure out.  I don't care if his hand is in the dirt or not, the responsibility should be the same and he is a good power end.

Engbare is a backup, probably at "viper" or "elephant".  2 point stance. 

LVN is the hand in the dirt DE, and he should thrive in that role.

Much like in our scheme last year, Wooden isn't heavy enough to anchor inside and not quick enough outside.  So by default he's probably a DE.  But we shall see.  A year in the NFL strength program could do wonders for him.

At least that is how I see it.

[HyponGrey]

Man... I went to Boston College podcasts and started reading the comments... It's podcast comments, so take it for what it is, but everyone says this dude has no clue how to call plays. 

[HyponGrey]

1 hour ago, MacReady said:

But I do also believe the function of the 4-3 is better as well. Purely from a spacing perspective. You’ve got extremely well-coached 3-4 defenses that understand and are capable of closing space. The Ravens. They’ve always had extremely good and extremely well-coached ILBs and DL.

Take away the extremely great coaching, take away the talent of a defense and just looking at it from a philosophical approach, clear cut way of looking at it, you want less space for an offense to be able to move. Kind of the same principle of deep coverage or soft zone. Offenses right now love space and if you give them space they’re going to take it. Brady and Brees and now Mahomes… If you give them that space to get those quick screens, outs, dump off to the RB to give them 4-5 yards a pop, they’ll take it all day and then beat you deep when you’re finally forced to change.

Take that approach with the 3-4 and 4-3 alignments and there’s just so much more green between the DL and that second level. You’ve got your EDGE standing up flirting with dropping back or rushing and you’ve got two guys spread way the hell out on the line and.

I’ve just never liked that approach philosophically. Especially in short yardage situations.

Oh, no worries. It has nothing to do with your philosophy on the system. 

[fattlipp]

1 hour ago, vegas492 said:

Wooden is the one that immediately came to mind as someone that could be a duck out of water.

And to me he's a pretty insignificant piece.  But, he could get heavier to play inside, or lighter and quicker to play a DE role.  But last year I saw him as too small to be very good inside and no where near quick enough to play outside.  So he was kind of a duck out of water last year, too.

He can be a 3T