Packerraymond Posted September 7, 2018 Share Posted September 7, 2018 1 minute ago, Cheech said: Save for injury. Id rather ignore Matthews and Perry's injury history too. So adding another crappy 4th OLB to replace ours will save the season? This is the roster we have, save for Simon nothing out there is any better than Fackrell. We're just as screwed with Nate Orchard as our starting OLB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheech Posted September 7, 2018 Share Posted September 7, 2018 2 minutes ago, Packerraymond said: So adding another crappy 4th OLB to replace ours will save the season? This is the roster we have, save for Simon nothing out there is any better than Fackrell. We're just as screwed with Nate Orchard as our starting OLB. I'd rather have a 4th guy that we can trust to throw out there for 20 to 30 plays a game to keep Matthews and Perry fresh. The hell John Simon is the only guy better than KF on the street. That's some rich bull ****. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasquatch Posted September 7, 2018 Author Share Posted September 7, 2018 10 minutes ago, Packerraymond said: So adding another crappy 4th OLB to replace ours will save the season? This is the roster we have, save for Simon nothing out there is any better than Fackrell. We're just as screwed with Nate Orchard as our starting OLB. Could have been addressed weeks/months ago. Therein lies the rub. That being said, as you said, it’s nearly too late now - we got what we got, for better or worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheOnlyThing Posted September 7, 2018 Share Posted September 7, 2018 33 minutes ago, Packerraymond said: We're comparing one scheme that doesn't exist in GB anymore to one that does, we're also comparing a player in Datone who was a good player to one who's mediocre. I'd be shocked if Fackrell played that much save for injury. The change in scheme is my hope as well. Only way I don't see Fackrell getting on the field that much. I'd feel better about the "save for injury" Fackrell won't play part of your post if the 2 starters at OLB did not have such extensive injury histories. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ragnar Danneskjold Posted September 7, 2018 Share Posted September 7, 2018 12 minutes ago, Cheech said: I'd rather have a 4th guy that we can trust to throw out there for 20 to 30 plays a game to keep Matthews and Perry fresh. The hell John Simon is the only guy better than KF on the street. That's some rich bull ****. While I think there is value in turning over the bottom of position groups when a ceiling becomes apparent, when I look at the list from your post yesterday I see a bunch of guys that get a sack about every 100-110 snaps. Even Simon with his 6.5 sacks in the last two years needed about 1000 snaps to do it. In essence they are all Kyler Fackrell level players, and I bet someone could find gifs of their bad plays too. The idea that the Packers have signed three ILB's and cut two OLB's without replacement makes me think there is a big change in mindset there, and they just don't feel the need. I don't understand why that is the case, so I feel like we need to see the scheme play to understand what is going on right now, and what additions/subtractions would make sense. We need more information. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted September 7, 2018 Share Posted September 7, 2018 37 minutes ago, Cheech said: I'd rather have a 4th guy that we can trust to throw out there for 20 to 30 plays a game to keep Matthews and Perry fresh. The hell John Simon is the only guy better than KF on the street. That's some rich bull ****. Short of being a team that throws a TON at the position, i.e. Denver. How many teams have a guy that you believe can play 20-30 snaps a game as their #4 pass rusher? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packfanfb Posted September 7, 2018 Share Posted September 7, 2018 1 hour ago, Packerraymond said: He's the freaking 4th LB on the team. Everyone else realizes if we're relying on our 4th OLB for more than 10 snaps a game we're in trouble. The "he was an early pick so we have to continually crap on him and Spriggs, Rollins and eventually Jones" crowd is the only one who cares. Fackrell is a mediocre player who we're relying on for a couple snaps a game. I'm more concerned about Brice, Morrison, McCray, Allison, etc. Players who actually will have extensive roles. Keep whining about Fackrell though. You just said the other day during cuts that going into the season with 4 OLBs including Fack would be "irresponsible." Why the change of heart now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheech Posted September 7, 2018 Share Posted September 7, 2018 10 minutes ago, CWood21 said: Short of being a team that throws a TON at the position, i.e. Denver. How many teams have a guy that you believe can play 20-30 snaps a game as their #4 pass rusher? Last year Fackrell played 447 defensive snaps. He's going to play as many or more this year if they want to keep the starters healthy. I just don't find that acceptable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packfanfb Posted September 7, 2018 Share Posted September 7, 2018 55 minutes ago, Packerraymond said: So adding another crappy 4th OLB to replace ours will save the season? This is the roster we have, save for Simon nothing out there is any better than Fackrell. We're just as screwed with Nate Orchard as our starting OLB. Why does everything have to be exaggerated? Who said anything about "saving the season?" If the move makes our roster better by 2%, its an easy decision. It's not like these guys are going to cost much... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted September 7, 2018 Share Posted September 7, 2018 1 hour ago, TheOnlyThing said: But If not, as of now the #4 OLBer is Kyler Fackrell and he is likely to get a significant number of snaps at one of the critical positions on the defense. And why did Fackrell get so many snaps last year? Clay missed 2 games, Nick Perry and Ahmad Brooks both missed 4 games. That means Fackrell was the #3 pass rusher in 10 of the 16 games. He might have been the 4th OLB on the original depth chart, he was realistically more the #3 OLB. IF you believe that the Packers are going to struggle to stay healthy there again, I don't have an issue with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packerraymond Posted September 7, 2018 Share Posted September 7, 2018 7 minutes ago, packfanfb said: You just said the other day during cuts that going into the season with 4 OLBs including Fack would be "irresponsible." Why the change of heart now? I still want a 5th. Doesn't mean I expect the guy we bring in to be better than Fackrell. I just want the depth for when we'll probably need it. We'll be screwed if we do, not a lot out there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted September 7, 2018 Share Posted September 7, 2018 1 minute ago, Cheech said: Last year Fackrell played 447 defensive snaps. He's going to play as many or more this year if they want to keep the starters healthy. I just don't find that acceptable. Because Clay, Brooks, and Perry all dealt with injuries last year. Historically speaking, your 4th pass rusher doesn't play nearly as much as Fackrell did last year. I posted the numbers a while back, but your 4th pass rusher doesn't play in nearly 43% of the defensive snaps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packfanfb Posted September 7, 2018 Share Posted September 7, 2018 Just now, CWood21 said: And why did Fackrell get so many snaps last year? Clay missed 2 games, Nick Perry and Ahmad Brooks both missed 4 games. That means Fackrell was the #3 pass rusher in 10 of the 16 games. He might have been the 4th OLB on the original depth chart, he was realistically more the #3 OLB. IF you believe that the Packers are going to struggle to stay healthy there again, I don't have an issue with that. Pretty good odds of this lol. That's the problem. You'd like to be a little deeper at this position than just 3 guys capable of actually playing EDGE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted September 7, 2018 Share Posted September 7, 2018 Just now, packfanfb said: Pretty good odds of this lol. That's the problem. You'd like to be a little deeper at this position than just 3 guys capable of actually playing EDGE. Ok. Now let's move onto the next step, start making a list of #4 pass rushers you feel comfortable playing starter-level snaps. The list isn't very long, and the ones you're probably included are guys on teams who invest heavily in the position, i.e. Denver. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packerraymond Posted September 7, 2018 Share Posted September 7, 2018 Just now, packfanfb said: Pretty good odds of this lol. That's the problem. You'd like to be a little deeper at this position than just 3 guys capable of actually playing EDGE. Unless it's a trade there's nothing out there that moves the needle. Even Simon is just OK. I imagine if injuries hit we become a blitze heavy team and see a lot more Lowry and Adams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.