2018 Free Agency - Prospects for GB

[Cheech]

7 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

Looney is a year away from playing 3, 5, or 7. 

Doesn't matter what he is right now

I completely agree.  I'm just curious if he's even played on the edge in college or training camp.  6-3, 287... Doesn't seem to have the length.

[CWood21]

1 hour ago, Cheech said:

I gave multiple suggestions of players on the street that could fill in that #4 position adequately enough.  

Then I was told how much of an idiot I was for making such claims - even though Fackrell's teammates had absolutely nothing positive to say about him when asked directly.

Today we learned that one of the players I listed (all of them are supposedly trash) was actually claimed by Gute 2 days ago.

 

So what am I missing?

The ability to comprehend what Packerraymond and others have presented to you.  PR made a list of players are the teams' 4th EDGE, and you made the implication that Fackrell was clearly worse than them.  And when someone disagreed, you wanted others to do you work for you.  There was no counter to that point.  As I mentioned, Chickillo was the only one of the list he presented that had similar (or better) production than Fackrell over that same time period.  You were never told you were an idiot, you were told that your stance was unfounded and lacked the support of logic.  Let's not mix the two up.

As for Anthony Zettel, there was enough questions about what kind of fit he had in the league.  He wasn't stout enough to be an interior DL, but he wasn't twitchy enough to be a pass rusher.  Obviously, the Packers felt they could reasonably gamble on him, and they had the lower waiver claim.

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

1 hour ago, Cheech said:

I've never suggested he be cut.  He's good on special teams.  He can move extremely well for his size.  He's an ideal SAM backer in the 4-3 under.  He simply doesn't have the functional strength to play on the edge.

 

 

So what am I missing?

 

 

 

I think your first line is the answer to your question.  

I may be wrong, and frequently am, but I don't think we are a 3-4 team with bookend OLB's anymore, and that is throwing fans off.

I believe that we will be a 4-3 under, or at least a hybrid defense with a bunch of 4-3 concepts.

So you summed it up when you said Fackrell is the ideal SAM for the 4-3 under-  Perry and Gilbert as the rush, Matthews/ Fackrell as the SAM, with Matthews moving around.  I really think that is where we are at.  

 

[Cheech]

PR's comment about other teams' OLB depth is completely irrelevant to the only thing that matters in a thread like this one. 

Are there free agents at OLB that can do the job better than Kyler Fackrell?

 

The answer in at least one case, is yes.  Gute wasn't going after Zettel to play special teams.  

[Cheech]

7 minutes ago, Ragnar Danneskjold said:

I think your first line is the answer to your question.  

I may be wrong, and frequently am, but I don't think we are a 3-4 team with bookend OLB's anymore, and that is throwing fans off.

I believe that we will be a 4-3 under, or at least a hybrid defense with a bunch of 4-3 concepts.

So you summed it up when you said Fackrell is the ideal SAM for the 4-3 under-  Perry and Gilbert as the rush, Matthews/ Fackrell as the SAM, with Matthews moving around.  I really think that is where we are at.  

 

I really hope you're right.  I think that claiming (and not being rewarded) a traditional 4-3 DE like Zettel would indicate that anything at this point is possible.  We saw mostly 3-4 in the preseason but that doesn't really mean anything either.  

Edit: I'll also say this.  Multiple people have stated that Pettine simply puts his best players in their best position to help the team.  I'm more than willing to wait and see - but I'll maintain that adding a 4th EDGE that can take pressure off of 52 and 53 is still very important.  Clearly Gute hasn't stopped trying to add talent to that group either.  Hopefully he finds the right guy next week.  

[beekay414]

[AlexGreen#20]

I think the assumption that a claim on Zettel means that Fackrell is cut is overly presumptuous. There's a list of guys on this team that are borderline NFL guys. Any of them could be cut. 

Going into the year with only 9 first level guys seems a little crazy to me, especially because we're going to be playing 5 a good amount of the time and the LB bodies are good ST fits. 

[Cheech]

12 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

I think the assumption that a claim on Zettel means that Fackrell is cut is overly presumptuous. There's a list of guys on this team that are borderline NFL guys. Any of them could be cut. 

Going into the year with only 9 first level guys seems a little crazy to me, especially because we're going to be playing 5 a good amount of the time and the LB bodies are good ST fits. 

I didn't mean it to come off that way (that 51 would be cut).  I'd really like to see him used in a way that his skill set could be maximized off the LOS.  He's still obviously valuable on ST as you said as well.  

[AlexGreen#20]

Just now, Cheech said:

I didn't mean it to come off that way (that 51 would be cut).  I'd really like to see him used in a way that his skill set could be maximized off the LOS.  He's still obviously valuable on ST as you said as well.  

I'll be honest. I'm not even entirely ready to write Fackrell off as a guy that can get pressure. I don't think he will, but stranger things have happened than a guy having the light go on in his third year. I know he's practically ancient, but he does offer you something and I do think you move him into that Inside/Outside hybrid role, if (when) Clay goes down. He's a decent enough backup in that spot. 

[Donzo]

3 hours ago, Cheech said:

1- He's an ideal SAM backer in the 4-3 under.  He simply doesn't have the functional strength to play on the edge.

2- I made the suggestion that the 4th OLB should be someone that can handle both the edge setting and pass rushing aspects of playing that position.  Fackrell is consistently pushed around in the run game.  Vs. the Raiders this pre-season he lost contain because a wide receiver blocked him out of the play. 

3- Fackrell's teammates had absolutely nothing positive to say about him when asked directly.

 

Do you have anything to backup these three claims (links would be great), or are you just regurgitating more hate?

In the last seven games in 2017, Fackrell had 17 T, 4 Pr, 3 SCKs and a blocked punt... How do the players you listed compare to that?

 

[Donzo]

1 hour ago, Cheech said:

Are there free agents at OLB that can do the job better than Kyler Fackrell? The answer in at least one case, is yes.    

 

Link to Packer's claim of Zettel to replace Fackrell as the 4th OLB?... I've seen nothing from the Packers concerning their claim of Zettel.

[Cheech]

 

 

[Norm]

lol and Kyler's there

[Sasquatch]

29 minutes ago, Donzo said:

 

Link to Packer's claim of Zettel to replace Fackrell as the 4th OLB?... I've seen nothing from the Packers concerning their claim of Zettel.

That’s because he was picked by Cleveland ahead of the Packers, who did put in a claim, along with the Vikings and one other team.

[Sasquatch]

2 minutes ago, Norm said:

lol and Kyler's there

At least he didn’t say, “and Kyler’s there, unfortunately.”