Mike Pettine Defense

[Norm]

Just now, TheBitzMan said:

House is definitely the best of the bunch. It was more in reference to him leaving GB and not getting better because of coaching. 

Oh true. Yeah that's fair. I like that list though. We often forget those names so easily and always remember the others

[Gopackgonerd]

23 minutes ago, NormSizedMidget said:

With the frames per second on that gif he looks like he runs a 4.2 though

The silverlining

[Gopher Trace]

 Evidently an unpopular opinion, but I don't think Fack is a lost cause.

He had a few flashes last season. I'd have liked to see more from him, mind you, but I felt he was two seasons away as a rookie anyway.

It's definitely "sh*t or get off the pot"-time for him now, but you won't know unless you put him out there.

[Joe]

14 minutes ago, Gopher Trace said:

 Evidently an unpopular opinion, but I don't think Fack is a lost cause.

He had a few flashes last season. I'd have liked to see more from him, mind you, but I felt he was two seasons away as a rookie anyway.

It's definitely "sh*t or get off the pot"-time for him now, but you won't know unless you put him out there.

If it's an unpopular opinion, I share such an opinion with you actually.

[spilltray]

22 minutes ago, Gopher Trace said:

 Evidently an unpopular opinion, but I don't think Fack is a lost cause.

He had a few flashes last season. I'd have liked to see more from him, mind you, but I felt he was two seasons away as a rookie anyway.

It's definitely "sh*t or get off the pot"-time for him now, but you won't know unless you put him out there.

If he had been a later pick, people would probably be ok with him. He's a bottom of the roster LB that can be ok, but hasn't shown much more than could be ok. Not a lost cause but clearly on the bubble. As a 3 it's a clear miss.

[TheBitzMan]

7 minutes ago, Joe said:

If it's an unpopular opinion, I share such an opinion with you actually.

So you guys are willing to continue along this Fackrell path and get him on the field over guys like Biegel/Gilbert who have actually showed promise and a potential draft pick? 

Let's say this all works out, what is Fackrell's ceiling? 

[Beast]

8 minutes ago, TheBitzMan said:

So you guys are willing to continue along this Fackrell path and get him on the field over guys like Biegel/Gilbert who have actually showed promise and a potential draft pick? 

Let's say this all works out, what is Fackrell's ceiling? 

 

I think all those paths need to be explored... though I thought Fackrell was a horrible fit in Capers defense (he just has no power in his game)... but might be better suited for this new defense. I think Fackrell is a player that can't effectively pass rush every play, but needs to catch the offense off guard when he does and doesn't blitz. Basically use him to cover some TEs and at times blitz him off the edge like a huge DB.

[TheBitzMan]

1 minute ago, Beast said:

 

I think all those paths need to be explored... though I thought Fackrell was a horrible fit in Capers defense (he just has no power in his game)... but might be better suited for this new defense. I think Fackrell is a player that can't effectively pass rush every play, but needs to catch the offense off guard when he does and doesn't blitz. Basically use him to cover some TEs and at times blitz him off the edge like a huge DB.

So you are converting him to SS/ILB essentially? 

Who are you taking off the field to give Fackrell snaps?

All of this sounds great in a vacuum but there is opportunity cost in all of this. I would rather allocate snaps to players who have an actual ceiling, who aren't 26 and have looked completely outmatched for 2 years now. 

[Beast]

6 minutes ago, TheBitzMan said:

So you are converting him to SS/ILB essentially? 

Who are you taking off the field to give Fackrell snaps?

All of this sounds great in a vacuum but there is opportunity cost in all of this. I would rather allocate snaps to players who have an actual ceiling, who aren't 26 and have looked completely outmatched for 2 years now. 

No, I'm not converting him. In different schemes, OLBers are asked to cover TEs, which is what I said... and the scheme is already changing.

And no one said I was talking anyone off the field. You're making your own stuff up here.

You don't need to take anyone off the field, players have to rotate in different packages... you put the best player for that package. You make them earn on the practice field.

 

Yes what you're saying sound great in a vacuum and on paper... but in real life you can give them shots to earn opportunities in practice.... if they earn them, then you give them opportunities in games. If they don't earn the opportunities, then you don't give them to them... and besides... odds suggest that sooner or later Matthews and Perry will get injured and give the back-ups more chances to get on the field.

[TheBitzMan]

4 minutes ago, Beast said:

No, I'm not converting him. In different schemes, OLBers are asked to cover TEs, which is what I said... and the scheme is already changing.

And no one said I was talking anyone off the field. You're making your own stuff up here.

You don't need to take anyone off the field, players have to rotate in different packages... you put the best player for that package. You make them earn on the practice field.

Yes what you're saying sound great in a vacuum and on paper... but in real life you can give them shots to earn opportunities in practice.... if they earn them, then you give them opportunities in games. If they don't earn the opportunities, then you don't give them to them... and besides... odds suggest that sooner or later Matthews and Perry will get injured and give the back-ups more chances to get on the field.

If you put Fackrell on the field that takes snaps away from someone else. Whether in practice or in the game. You can only have 11 guys on the field at one time. This doesn't matter the package or anything else. You put Fackrell on the field that is a detriment to another player on the roster. One who is guaranteed to have more upside that Fackrell. That is not making anything up that is simple math. 

Fackrell has two years of development and played 43% of the defensive snaps last year. He got worse throughout the year. If you think Pettine is going to come in and scheme up things for him, that's fine. I would personally rather have a player who isn't solely dependent on scheme to make him look average in the league. You yourself said he can't rush the passer. I would argue he would be toast against TE's in coverage. You want to blitz him as a "huge DB". We are grasping at straws to make something out of him at this point. 

This roster needs turnover and competition; wasting practice or game snaps on Fackrell is a waste of resources IMO. 

 

[TheOnlyThing]

22 minutes ago, Beast said:

odds suggest that sooner or later Matthews and Perry will get injured and give the back-ups more chances to get on the field.

Yes, based upon their extensive, respective injury histories, the odds are overwhelming that Matthews or Perry (if not Matthews AND Perry) will miss time in 2018 just like they have the previous several seasons.

And just like last year at this time, given the strong likelihood that the 2 OLB starters will miss some time, it is absolutely imperative that a non-performer like Kyler Fackrell not be counted on to play the 3rd (or even 4th) most snaps at OLB during the upcoming season.

Thinking that Fackrell was a capable OLBer going into 2017 was no doubt one of the head-scratching decisions that led Murphy to move on from the previous GM and McCarthy to move on from the previous Defensive Coordinator.

I am optimistic that Gut and Pettine will not gift Fackrell a prominent role on the D like their predecessors did.

[PackFan4Life]

I think Biegel is going to get more opportunities this year compared to Fackrell. Will have to see how these two and Gilbert fit into the new scheme, who flourishes and who finds themselves off the roster.

 

 

[Beast]

39 minutes ago, TheBitzMan said:

If you put Fackrell on the field that takes snaps away from someone else. Whether in practice or in the game. You can only have 11 guys on the field at one time. This doesn't matter the package or anything else. You put Fackrell on the field that is a detriment to another player on the roster. One who is guaranteed to have more upside that Fackrell. That is not making anything up that is simple math.

And your simple math fails to understand the game of football has a human element to it, making it stupid math.

No OLB has played 65% of the defensive snaps in the last two years... not a single one... OLBers need breathers, they get injured, their is a human element to the football game.

Since none of them get play 65%... that means you need at least 4 different OLBers to take snaps... so yes only 11 on the field at the time, but it's not the same 11 guys. 

 

If Matthews gets the wind knocked out of him, he comes off the field... you're not taking snaps away from Matthews, he's recovering... and needs someone to take some snaps for him.

It's a team game, and a human game... this is not madden video game football! Guys need to rotate in and out, and they use different packages... one player can be better in certain packages than another package.

 

It's simple, back-ups often have to rotate in at times or if they're better suited for certain packages. Mike Petitine (who know the guy in control of the defense) has said the OLBers will be asked to drop into coverage more often this year... which better suits Fackrell than in years past, when they were basically just asked to play 4-3 DE that stood up and called themselves 3-4 OLBers. Petitine is getting back to a more true 3-4 defense than Capers has been running the last two years (or at least that's what is expected.

[Beast]

16 minutes ago, PackFan4Life said:

I think Biegel is going to get more opportunities this year compared to Fackrell. Will have to see how these two and Gilbert fit into the new scheme, who flourishes and who finds themselves off the roster.

 

 

Yes and he probably would of gotten more opportunities last year, if not for him being injured.

 

But really it's not an either or... all the better players that come into camp will get opportunities to show what they got... all of them... and they'll go from there.

[Gopher Trace]

1 hour ago, TheBitzMan said:

So you guys are willing to continue along this Fackrell path and get him on the field over guys like Biegel/Gilbert who have actually showed promise and a potential draft pick? 

Let's say this all works out, what is Fackrell's ceiling? 

1

Let me put it this way: I'm not counting him out just yet. As for who gets on the field, their performance in camp will determine that part. I didn't see significantly more promise from those other two last season than I did from Fack, myself. He did make some plays for us last year, more than I remember of Biegel or Gilbert.

Also worth noting that he played a lot of (like, the most of any, if I'm not mistaken) ST snaps for us this past season, so he may have value even if he does not pan out as an EDGE.

I doubt he has the ceiling of a truly standout player, but realistically, not every player will be. Good teams have guys that do the little things well and are dependable. Think ~Koa Misi, maybe Rob Ninkovich if we're being really optimistic.