Submitted Without Comment

This sensational post from Greg Bedard over at the JSOnline Packer Blog regarding Ted Thompson's role in the defensive coordinator search.

 

PLEASE SUBSCRIBE TO OUR CHEESEHEAD NATION WEEKLY NEWSLETTER HERE.

__________________________

0 points
 

Comments (26)

Fan-Friendly This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.
Keith's picture

January 08, 2009 at 01:29 pm

Here's my main issue with the article and what's been discussed recently. Why does this belief exist that it would take forever to retool the roster and implement the 3-4? The Ravens did it in one year and so did the Jets. I think too much is being made about the "transition" from a 4-3 to a 3-4. I think we should bring in the guy who we believe will be the best DC.

Obviously, with if all things are equal between Williams and Nolan, then you go with the coach whose scheme you believe will best fit your personnel.

And isn't that part of the interviewing process? Aren't these guys expected to comment on personnel and how they would get the most out of the roster as currently constructed?

0 points
0
0
PackerAaron's picture

January 08, 2009 at 01:34 pm

Agree for the most part Keith, but Bedard is correct when he points out that Thompson and the scouts have been looking for certain types of players all year. A lot of that work will be, if not exactly wasted, negated. And while there is talent on the roster, you have to admit there would be some major holes (a true NT, both outside LB positions, etc)

I def agree about interviewing and hiring the best guy for the job, regardless of personnel. But the point of Bedard's post is that people are crazy if they think Thompson isn't right there with McCarthy on this choice. I think Thompson let McCarthy have free-reign when he hired his staff initially. That has all changed.

0 points
0
0
IPBprez's picture

January 08, 2009 at 01:35 pm

Personnel is the key, my friend. Personnel!

The Packers switching over would seriously take two seasons at least. And, that's pending we're able to grab what's needed when our turn to pick comes up.

No one likes Sean McDermott (and his success with LB's & Safeties)...? Really?

0 points
0
0
PackerAaron's picture

January 08, 2009 at 01:36 pm

IPB - see my post right below this one. I really like McDermott. ;)

0 points
0
0
PackerAaron's picture

January 08, 2009 at 01:39 pm

Keith, I would also point out that

a) The Ravens had many more of the pieces in place

b) The Jets are Exhibit A on why it would take at least two years. Anyone remember Vilma in the 3-4? Ugly.

0 points
0
0
Keith's picture

January 08, 2009 at 01:40 pm

Two years? Really? Come on.

0 points
0
0
Keith's picture

January 08, 2009 at 01:48 pm

I remember Vilma in the 3-4, but Vilma was a big baby. Plus, I think Hawk and Barnett, or even Bishop would be fine Mike backers in the 3-4. The main issue would be finding a NT and OLB. You don't think this could be addressed through the draft or free agency?

0 points
0
0
Keith's picture

January 08, 2009 at 01:49 pm

And why is it that the Steelers and Pats seem to be able to find guys to step in and make their 3-4 schemes work? Also, the Dolphins made it work this year as well.

0 points
0
0
Keith's picture

January 08, 2009 at 01:50 pm

Ok, one more... the Jets have Mike Tannenbaum as their GM. He's a cap guy. I have faith that Thompson, a talent guy, would be able to bring in the players to allow GB to run the 3-4.

0 points
0
0
PackerAaron's picture

January 08, 2009 at 02:02 pm

I hear you on all of these. But it's not as easy as "You don't think they can find a OLB and NT?" Um, well, I sure hope so, but those are the two toughest, most important positions to find in the 3-4. Its why those big guys are in such high demand and teams like the Jets and the Browns are willing to trade for guys like Rodgers and Jenkins even though there's a possibility they may not be able to play anymore (of course it turns out both can)but make no mistake - finding that NT will be one of the most important things Thompson does this offseason, if the Packers do indeed end up employing a 3-4.

0 points
0
0
IPBprez's picture

January 08, 2009 at 02:09 pm

The debate seems moot, for the tme being, as no one knows who may have already been given at least a phone call, let alone an Interview. Whereas, New Orleans is moving very quickly (Gregg Williams). I would say the List is shrinking right before our eyes.

Has anyone looked at potential Gilbert Brown types out there? The List isn't all that long, people!

0 points
0
0
Ron La Canne's picture

January 08, 2009 at 02:35 pm

Terrance Cody - Alabama (6-5 365). If he comes out early. He's a Sophmore JC Transfer. Projected at 1st round (15-25)

The discussion breaks down into an old philosophic question, "Which came first the Chicken or the Egg?"

Do we try to find a coach who can hopefully make our crappy D Line and LB's betterr in roughly the same system. Or, do we find an innovative coach who will radically change the current unsuccessful system to a more aggressive and potentailly much better defense? Put another way, do I want a coach who might be able to teach the incompetents I already have? Or do I want the coach that will bring me the best defense at the cost of getting 4 or 5 veterans to replace the same losers we'd be lossing anyway (i.e. Cole, Montgomery, Harrell, Malone, etc.)

0 points
0
0
IPBprez's picture

January 08, 2009 at 03:09 pm

I do not count Colin Cole a bust, whatsoever!
I do look at the Coaching Staff for poor use of him on the field.

0 points
0
0
PackerAaron's picture

January 08, 2009 at 03:11 pm

Cole is interesting in that, yes, he has improved every year he's been with Green Bay and had by far his best season yet in 2008. On the other hand, he would not even be a third string DT on most clubs. The Packers can and should try to do better.

0 points
0
0
Keith's picture

January 08, 2009 at 07:47 pm

IMO, it became painfully obvious that the Pack was sorely deficient on both the offensive and defensive lines. Maybe I am being a bit harsh, but I'm sorry, both lines got pushed around this year. Thompson needs to focus on drafting a bunch of lineman this year to try and build depth and athleticism. Also, it would be nice if they had a mean streak in them. The best lineman who aren't naturally gifted seem to be the ones who are willing to mix it up.

0 points
0
0
IndyPackerBacker's picture

January 08, 2009 at 08:54 pm

i think we might run some schemes of the 3-4 but not totally overhaul just yet

0 points
0
0
IndyPackerBacker's picture

January 08, 2009 at 08:57 pm

what about jonny jolley? will he even be with the team by next season? with all is legal problems? he would be a good fit for the 3-4 along with pickett, cole, and jenkins

0 points
0
0
Ron La Canne's picture

January 08, 2009 at 10:48 pm

Cole had 49 tackles this year. Jolly surprised and had 82. Cole is a facade, big talk, little action. He is not an NFL starter, at best a backup. If Jolly can get his personal issues straightened out, he does have some potential. It is likely that Jolly will get some suspension time next year. Hopefully, not too many games, maybe one or two.

0 points
0
0
Ron La Canne's picture

January 08, 2009 at 10:55 pm

Malone, Hunter, Harrell, and Thompson had a combined 53 tackles in 2008. Awful, just awful. Of that bunch, Thompson showed some improvement, but was injured most of the year.

4-3, 3-4 still need to add 5 maybe 6 new linemen. At least 2 should be FA's.

0 points
0
0
PackerAaron's picture

January 09, 2009 at 09:15 am

Indy - Jolly will be with the team. Depending on the outcome of his court case, he may miss a game or two due to suspension.

0 points
0
0
PackerAaron's picture

January 09, 2009 at 09:18 am

Keith - I don't think you're being overly harsh at all. The lines got pushed around - no real argument can be made to counter that. As far as getting o-line guys with a 'mean streak' - that was the line on both Sitton and Giacomini. Hopefully we'll see some of it next season...

0 points
0
0
DaveK's picture

January 09, 2009 at 09:41 am

Tank Johnson will be a free agent. It seems he has kept out of trouble for year plus now. But, I honestly do not know how effective he has been in Dallas. Anyone know? Just throwing a name out there.....

0 points
0
0
PackerAaron's picture

January 09, 2009 at 10:12 am

He was effective in spurts. He certainly played well earlier in the year, esp against the Packers. He looked horrible later in the year against the likes of Pittsburgh and the Giants. He definatley has the tools. I worry about his commitment and conditioning.

0 points
0
0
IndyPackerBacker's picture

January 09, 2009 at 10:33 am

albert haynesworth will also be a RFA, but the question is will tennessee slap the franchise tag on him

0 points
0
0
PackerAaron's picture

January 09, 2009 at 11:10 am

Indy - Haynesworth is actually a FA. He met incentives in his contract that triggered a clause that stated the Titans could not franchise him again (they did so last year) However, his agent is currently in talks with Tennessee about returning. I'll be shocked if he makes it to market.

0 points
0
0
Kasppaypedoca's picture

January 30, 2009 at 02:50 am

yo, cheeseheadtv.com great name for site)))

0 points
0
0