Content
X

Create Account

Or log in with Facebook

X

Log in

Or log in with Facebook

Can Packers' Defense Pass Pettine's Intelligence Test?

By Category

Can Packers' Defense Pass Pettine's Intelligence Test?

Green Bay Packers new defensive coordinator Mike Pettine is already creating plenty of buzz.  Known for his hard-knock approach and grizzled appearance, he looks to be quite a departure from Dom Capers.

Our own Chris Peterson wrote about the task Pettine faces in getting the most out of the current stable of players on the Packers’ defense.

As has been widely reported by now, Pettine has led some very successful NFL defenses over the past decade. 

He had a stint with the Baltimore Ravens shortly after their Super Bowl win in 2000 that featured the likes of Ray Lewis, Terrell Suggs and Ed Reed.  Some consider those defenses to be among some of the best in NFL history.

After that and with the New York Jets, Pettine’s defenses helped them reach the AFC conference championship in his first two seasons.  That included a win at New England following the 2010 season and with Mark Sanchez at quarterback.

That Jets team also had some prominent players at the time: Darrelle Revis, Bart Scott, Jim Leonhard and Kris Jenkins.

The key is the players.  The talent.  Pettine talked with Sports Illustrated’s Greg Bedard when he took the Cleveland Browns head coaching job about the “sponge theory”, which relates directly to the type of players on the roster.

The theory is essentially based on the idea that you keep introducing more information to your players until you get feedback.  Feedback, in this case, is a sign that they may be getting overloaded or burdened with the complexity of that information.

With some of the top-notch players that Pettine has had to work with in the past, the sponge has theoretically absorbed a lot.  Having smart (and Pro Bowl-caliber) players helps.

A glance at the current Packers defense yields a fair amount of young talent that also has some time and experience to offer. 

Clay Matthews, Mike Daniels, Nick Perry, Ha Ha Clinton-Dix, Blake Martinez, Jake Ryan, Kenny Clark, Damarious Randall and Dean Lowry all have at least two years in.

Regardless of how well or not-so-well those guys have performed recently, they all have shown a capacity to learn and may benefit from a new approach that Pettine brings.

Some argued that Green Bay’s issues on defense were because the players were burdened with a scheme that was too complex.  Players seemed to echo that in interviews, at times.

If Pettine’s concepts are going to be complex, are the Packers in for more of the same problems they’ve have had in the past?

We don’t yet know who the Packers might pursue in free agency or via the draft.  Former Packers General Manager Ted Thompson took a defensive player with his first pick in the last six drafts and yet, the Packers are still in need of defensive play makers.

New GM Brian Gutekunst will try to pick up where Thompson left off and hit in some of the areas that have been in need for several seasons.  Areas like cornerback and linebacker.

Surely the intelligence level of those players will continue to be a priority when evaluating who to add to the Packers’ roster.

But while intelligence is important, we know that it doesn't always translate onto the field.  Very loosely correlated, there are players who are book smart and those who are game smart.

Hopefully with some new eyes looking for defensive talent, Green Bay can elevate that side of the ball to be among the top half in the NFL in 2018.

Head Coach Mike McCarthy recently stated that the defense needs to be better than the offense.  I don’t know where that idea comes from other than McCarthy really buys into the adage that “defense wins championships”.

But if that is, in fact, the Packers’ approach to putting more talent around a team led by quarterback Aaron Rodgers, they need a fresh approach.  Seven years since the last Super Bowl appearance tells us that couldn't be more true.

-- Jason is a freelance writer and has been on staff since 2012.  You can follow him on Twitter here

NFL Categories: 
  • Like Like
  • 0 points

Fan friendly comments only: off Comments (160) This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.

Nick Perry's picture

"New GM Brian Gutekunst will try to pick up where Thompson left off and hit in some of the areas that have been in need for several seasons."

Sorry Jason but lets hope Brian Gutekunst actually "HITS" on some of the areas of need the Packers have. That word "Hit" was something that Thompson didn't do a whole hell of a lot of.

Coldworld's picture

To hit, you typically have to swing first. I would argue that TT hit at a decent rate when he swung, but that he only really swung at a couple of types of pitch and then only if right over the center of the plate.

dobber's picture

I like this analogy.

Rossonero's picture

Ditto.

Nick Perry's picture

Excellent point, and it's a question I asked more than once. He signed Pickett, Woodson, and Peppers for example and all of them were excellent in Green Bay. That was one of the reasons Thompson drove me so fricken crazy. With the success he did have in Free Agency you'd think he'd dive in more often.

To take it a step further remember the trade for Ryan Grant just before the 2007 season? It just never made any sense to me why he didn't do more of it with the success he did have hen he did actually "Swing".

RCPackerFan's picture

That to me is what was his downfall.

I really don't get why he didn't go out into FA more then he did.

For example to Trevathan. He was available didn't sing for a monsterous deal. They could have used him, and they never contacted him. Now there maybe other issues there, but he would have been a player that could have helped.
From the way Gutekunst made it sound, is that they are going to be more active in FA. Not necessarily bringing guys in, but simply talking more to guys. Guys like Trevathan. Just even talking to a guy maybe you can work out a decent deal with them. Thompson never even talked to the guy.
Hopefully that will change now.

WKUPackFan's picture

Calais Campbell. He's the guy who could have changed the defensive front.

Trevathan is a very good player, but until he admits to and apologizes for headhunting Davante...well, I'd rather not have that type of person in GB.

dobber's picture

Calais Campbell...man, he's a dude. He has some high-end talent playing around him in Jax, but he still elevates that defensive front. It boggles the mind what he could have done in GB....and for anyone who says, "get hurt", piss off!! ;)

RCPackerFan's picture

Campbell would have been great. I heard that many in the organization wanted Bouye. Even having him would have made a difference.

Think about this. If Thompson would have signed Trevathan, that hit on Adams wouldn't have happened.

WKUPackFan's picture

So true! :)

fastmoving's picture

you may be right with that point. but if thats the case, why is it so bad that he is still around? maybe he has still something to offer, together with other opinions could the result be pretty good. or at least has the chance to be great.
have no idea why TT is treated like poison and everyone who was around him is infested too????

if we won in SEA (99 procent chance) and beat NE (50 procent chance), all the guys here would remember him total different.

The TKstinator's picture

Another thought:
Dom’s schemes have been criticized for being both “too complicated” AND “stale and predictable”.

Can BOTH of those be true??

I also think fans totally overestimate the value of “trickery” in the NFL. Give me a bunch of fundamentally sound, kick ass defenders and we’ll beat you. We won’t fool you, we’ll just beat you.

Coldworld's picture

If I have understood what I have read correctly, Pettine seems to believe that the coach should tailor the defense to the ability of the weakest players to absorb it rather than apply a playbook and hope that they get it.

jeremyjjbrown's picture

He also pairs up the players who are behind with the ones who are progressing. It's a great strategy for learning.

Jason Perone's picture

That’s an interesting interpretation. Unless you’ve read something somewhere else, I don’t believe that’s the approach at all. He ADDS to his playbook/scheme according to the determined max his players on the field can process effectively

WKUPackFan's picture

Unfortunately GB lost two of their most intelligent and game smart players in Hayward and Hyde (one of my very few criticisms of TT).

Richard Smith's picture

Honestly,

20/20 hindsight is how a lot of fans view the Hayward and Hyde situations. Hyde, with GB, made some plays. However, I remember all too many times him getting burned, over and again, by running backs out of the backfield. Maybe that was Capers then, but I wasn't upset to see him go. We didn't know Dix would regress the way he did. In regards to Hayward, in his FA year, Rollins was looking like a good draft pick and we wouldn't skip a beat with him in the slot. Unfortunately, he had a second year slump and Hayward was missed a lot more. I would have let both of them go too. You have to try to save money where you can. Why pay someone a huge contract when you have someone behind them close to as good. Again, unfortunately, it didn't work out. I think we all got duped, especially by Rollins. Hopefully he comes back to his rookie form where he showed us some things.

WKUPackFan's picture

Agreed regarding the hindsight. There are also some people praising Hayward and Hyde now that bashed them for years, solely because that current praise fits into their anti-Capers agenda.

I was simply commenting on my perception of Hayward's and Hyde's intelligence and game smarts, not necessarily their physical abilities.

Coldworld's picture

Hindsight shows us that Hyde should have been playing safety. Rather sad that it took another team to figure it out. With Hayward it shows that he is a boundary corner and, again, that an ex Packer GM saw that while we did not.

The indictment of hindsight on the Packers is far more searing than it is on the folks here. Hayward was OK as a nickel corner in year 3. Hyde was slow as a corner and did get burned. Wrong lesson learned I fear, this was a massive indictment of Capers and TT at a minimum. I would say they were doing the same with Rollins last season.

For the record I wanted to keep Hayward and thought Hyde was paid way too much for us to match. I also record that many here thought Hyde should have been a safety well before his contract expired. I was not one who pushed that.

The TKstinator's picture

Does “defense must be better than the offense” mean GB’s defense must be better than its offense?
Or does it mean that the defense must be better than the offense it faces in any given week?

Clearly, I for one am not a sponge.

jeremyjjbrown's picture

Jason just got feedback. So maybe you are a sponge...

Jason Perone's picture

**Bomb drop**. TK, this is an outstanding question. I never considered option 2 and thinking about it, maybe that was MM’s intent. Thoughts everyone?

WKUPackFan's picture

It could mean both.

dobber's picture

A defense better than GB's offense would be better than 95% of the opposing offenses it could face. I can't fathom a defense better than an ARod-led offense in GB...it's been too long.

The TKstinator's picture

Or possibly neither.

Jersey Al's picture

I think he totally meant option 1, but option 2 should always be the goal as well.

Tundraboy's picture

I see the mad disliker is around. How does one dislike this.

Barnacle's picture

MM is not a “sponge”. He probably does not know what he meant about the defense being better than the offense. Maybe he meant at bowling or softball or some other important training camp learning experience?

Remember we must focus on versatility and complexity.......not mundane things like “pad levels”. MM can straighten basics out after the losses. Then he has reasons to fire all the bad coaches that he hired and managed? Duhhhhh

Coldworld's picture

I think it is a new addition to the pantheon of philosophically circular conundrums.

I vote for better than the offense it plays.

Rebecca's picture

That would apply to most of the expert blog discussions.

marpag1's picture

Ah, who cares. I believe the operative words are "The defense must be better."

Nobody actually heard what McCarthy said after that, since the entire state of Wisconsin immediately burst out shouting, "YOU'RE DAMN RIGHT IT DOES, YOU SONOFABITCH!"

Rossonero's picture

I wonder if Gutekunst would consider trading Clay Matthews either before or during the draft for a 1st rd pick, or perhaps a 2nd and a 3rd rounder.

Matthews has a $10.4M salary and $11.3M cap hit in 2018. I appreciate everything he's done, but why not cash in now? He turns 32 in May.

dobber's picture

I don't think they'll be able to replace him effectively on that kind of deal. I suspect their best bet is to renegotiate him and keep him for a couple years.

I wouldn't be surprised if he plays well in the new system...

Nick Perry's picture

I wouldn't either dobber. I thought Matthews played alright this season. Obviously the problem is he's not playing at a $11.4 million level, but he played well enough to hopefully renegotiate his contract and stay in GB for another couple of years.

"I wouldn't be surprised if he plays well in the new system..."

I wouldn't be surprised if a few other players played well in this system. Nick Perry playing with his hand in the dirt when in a 4-3 front comes to mind.

RCPackerFan's picture

I agree Dobber.

What I find funny, is so many people want to get rid of Mathews. While he isn't the rusher he was years ago, he is still our best rusher. Why would getting rid of our best rusher make sense?

Also I think he will play better in a new scheme. The new scheme will do a lot more to confuse QB's and blocking assignments. Having a guy like Mathews will allow Pettine to move him around causing even more confusion.
My biggest complaint about Capers was he used the 2-4 Nickel almost as base. The problem with that is Mathews essentially became a DE. Mathews is not made to play DE. Whatever reason Capers ran that same 2-4 look down after down. About the biggest thing he did scheming wise was to run stunts. Usually having Mathews going inside or starting inside and going outside. Well that became predictable to.

Unpredictability will be a huge difference for this defense.

dobber's picture

I agree: Matthews just can't hold up when he's being leaned on by 320-lb OTs snap after snap after snap. He needs space. The guy can still run, and he's still a freakish athlete--for those who don't think so, watch him chase. He's still got it (IT does not necessarily equal age 23 CMIII 'it'), when he's healthy.

RCPackerFan's picture

Thats where I don't think Capers did enough for him schematically. 2014 he had him playing a hybrid position and it worked well. 2015 he had him playing the normal ILB role and took away his best abilities.
I don't think Pettine will do that.

Tundraboy's picture

Yah. Who would be that dumb?

Coldworld's picture

By the end Capers was running the whole defence’s careers through a blender, excepting the line perhaps. Misusing players and rolling out confusion. Matthews still showed up.

Rossonero's picture

It's not that i hate Matthews, but you've got to sell high while he's still playing well. He did play well this season and has been arguably our best defensive player for a long time.

I agree about seeing what he can do in the new scheme. Let's give it a chance.

dobber's picture

"It's not that i hate Matthews, but you've got to sell high while he's still playing well. "

I get what you're saying, and it's tempting if you've got a buyer, but I think the thing that needs to be determined is whether the return you could get on him in selling will allow you to replace him. If they had a suitable guy waiting in the wings, then it's a no-brainer. If they were going to get a high enough pick, sure. I don't think they're close on either count, and selling on CMIII right now digs an already-deep hole a couple notches deeper. I think you're right: it's gotta be wait-and-see, and hopefully at a meaningfully lower cap number.

Tundraboy's picture

A dozen thumbs up, err, Cookies for you.

CAG123's picture

Couldn’t get more than a 4 path rounder for Clay and with a new DC in town they can’t afford to let a veteran like him go and put more responsibility on younger and possibly less talented players like Vince (I said possibly because we don’t know) I hope he pans out. Also they should consider reducing his snaps a bit to help keep him fresh and squeeze possibly another 4-5 years out of him, CM3 goes all out every play and I would rather see him go out in green and yellow he’s earned it.

WKUPackFan's picture

Agree with CAG's comment. CM3 adds a lot production beyond sacks. At the same time, unless Ryan Grigson miraculously gets another GM position, no one is going to trade a high draft pick to take on his salary.

Razer's picture

A large problem with this defense has been the lack of veteran presence. Clay Matthews is a good player by any measure. And, as you point out - Matthews goes all out on every play, even the last game in Detroit. I think people are misspelling Clinton Dix.

4zone's picture

I think we may extend CM3s contract but lower his average salary a couple million per year. He may take the pay cut for the longevity factor. Same for Jordy and Randall. Extend them all to say 3 years, Jordy maybe two, but lower theeir annual salaries. They are all solid contributors, just not top end anymore. They also are veterans who we need to balance the locker room.

dobber's picture

I just don't think the Packers have all that much leverage with Cobb. The ball's really in his court given that he's not nearly over the hill and, personally, I don't think his athleticism has slipped as much as others say. He knows the cap hit is still there if the Packers cut him, and there might not be much advantage to him extending only a year or two and losing out on a shot in FA after the 2018 season. If it's a "pay-cut-or-hit-the-road" ultimatum, I think he forces the Packers to pay his current deal or to cut him.

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

At least by some pretty well known guys, CM3 had a nice year statistically. For instance, Justin Mosqueda has CM3 at 16th among edge guys (so OLBs and DEs) in penetration per snap. settingedge.com has CM3 28th in TFL + Sacks among edge players, which includes ILBs, OLBs, and some DL.

I might still think CM3 is roughly an average starting OLB or a tick or two better than that: it seems debatable to me. Just hard to imagine what our D would look like w/o CM3. Therefore, it seems like he shouldn't be cut, and probably we aren't going to see a big cut in his salary any time soon. The only possibility is if the cap wiz finds a way to give CM3 a 2 year deal, with lower cap hits and AAV in exchange for some guaranteed money.

I suppose a case might be made for cutting CM3 and buying a top DE type (Demarcus Lawrence, Ansah, Clayborn, Peppers), perhaps in a 4-3 under type scheme, figuring Ryan, Martinez, Josh Jones, Thomas can be the LBs. I don't think that would work even if their teams let them go, but....

Coldworld's picture

I agree on Cobb. My concern with him is that he has rarely made a big impact in the last two seasons (and I ignore the Hundley games).

I would consider trading him if I could get value, move Nelson into the slot or even Monty. Spend the money on a veteran with some speed.

OldTimer's picture

I don't see a team giving up anything for Matthews without a different contract in place that is longer term, less money and team friendly. If that were to happen, we still need him as much as any other team.

dobber's picture

I agree! We posted about the same time...

dobber's picture

derp!

dobber's picture

I suspect (read: I HOPE) that the players who can make the defense go will play a lot and the ones who can't, won't. In essence you're trading cohesiveness and execution for athleticism in some cases, but the whole defense will function better. This was a failing under Dom in recent years.

Coldworld's picture

I agree completely. That failing just made all the players look worse than they are. A case of the whole being less than the sum of its parts.

CAG123's picture

The good thing is the Packers have quality veterans at every level in Daniels, CM3, and Burnett to help these young guys along. Bring back Burnett and try to get CM3 to reduce his contract and they’ll be in business not having both will spell doom for these young players.

RCPackerFan's picture

I think bringing in Pettine was a good choice. From Jim Leonard's interview on Wilde and Tauch the other day he said he will bring 2 things. Flexibility and Creativity.

Meaning that he will adjust his scheme to the players he has. He will also be creative in ways to attack offenses. That is something that with the current group of players would help them immediately.

While they do need upgrades and new players I think the current group of players would benefit a ton simply from having a creative DC. Capers became predictable and offenses knew exactly how to attack them.

Tundraboy's picture

Flexibility and Creativity.

Haven't heard that associated with this team in awhile.

RCPackerFan's picture

Exactly!
Haven't heard that on either side of the ball in a long time.

Coldworld's picture

Bend and not break is not a form of flexibility? Finding ways to be 15 feet from the ball in the middle of the field every time dies not require creativity?

nostradanus's picture

A fresh approach to this discombobulated Defensive unit will be welcomed by all I'm sure. These guys have been playing football since they were kids, I'm sure its not rocket science.
There is established talent:
Daniels
Clark
Martinez
Dix
King
Randall
Perry
Mathews

and then a bunch of promising guys that need to be developed and put into a position to make plays like: Ryan
Fackrell
M. Adams
Lowery
Biegel
Jones

Mix in a free agent or two, plus hit on a few draft choices, a new attitude and there is no reason to think this can be a pretty good group in 2018.

Even if this Defense can make it to the top 15 and mix in Rodgers return with an improved running game, bring it on boys!

Super Bowl

Razer's picture

True enough. I would like to see another stud added to the secondary (Joshua Jackson) and a disruptor on the Dline or Edge. But getting them to play as a unit will be the biggest improvement.

Also, thumbs up for the use of "discombobulated".

nostradanus's picture

Im a Josh Jackson fan too, in fact I was at the Indiana-Wisconsin game where he took two picks to the house against Bucky, he would be a great bookend corner with King and Randall in the Star

Razer's picture

...Head Coach Mike McCarthy recently stated that the defense needs to be better than the offense. I don’t know where that idea comes from other than McCarthy really buys into the adage that “defense wins championships”...

Nothing that McCarthy has ever done points to an emphasis on defense. It may be his biggest single failing as a HC. The one year he tried to be a HC and devote time to all aspects of the game was a mess. It is at least 5 years and counting for sub par defensive play. Talk about wasting Rodger's years.

Tundraboy's picture

Absolutely correct. But not for much longer or he's gone. Put up or shut up season ahead. No more excuses or lame statements

dobber's picture

People keep calling this a "prove-it" season for MM. I agree that this team will need to be better than it was in 2018 for him to stay off the hot seat. However, with Murphy calling the shots on the coach, I suspect MM's in a protected place.

Tundraboy's picture

I fear your right, but there has to be significant improvement on D or the seat will be very hot for MM and Murphy too.

Finwiz's picture

I think I'm going to LOVE this guy!

"Blunt force trauma".

Wake - these - people - up!

Start playing some GD football.

Allan Murphy's picture

Pettine is the best Defence C in the nfl hope the Packers give him control of it or it could be same old thing .

The TKstinator's picture

Polamalu, is that you?

Since '61's picture

Not that it matters but as of this morning Packers.com has yet to report on the signings of either Philbin or Pettine.

As for the defense, I will be interested to see who Pettine hires to fill out his defensive staff. The position coaches will be critical in having whoever the players are execute Pettine's schemes.

In the past we have usually had question marks for particular position groups on the defense. Safety, then CB, ILB forever, OLB more recently. Now the whole defense and how it will respond to Pettine has become a question mark.

We may see defensive improvement and/or it may require 2 seasons for Pettine's approach to take hold. Hopefully, the defense will get progressively better over the course of 2018 and hit a peak at playoff time assuming that we get that far, which we should with a healthy Rodgers.

Regardless, we need to add a pass rusher, preferably 2 (one FA and one draft pick) for 2018. We need another CB opposite King, again we should sign an FA and draft another CB. At ILB we need a viable partner for Martinez either a FA or a solid draft pick and we will need some help at Safety if Burnett is lost to FA which I think is likely. I think we're OK on the DL although it never hurts to have extra depth at that position group.

Pettine has a pretty big job to do to get this defense ready to be effective in 2018. Too much draft capital has been wasted on that side of the ball, but it looks like more will need to be spent to get it corrected.

With about 5 or 6 coaches dismissed from their positions so far this offseason has is it that the captain has not gone down with his ship? Thanks, Since '61

4zone's picture

I think we keep Burnett. I think Gute is too smart to let what little talent we have left in the secondary to walk.

Wonder new DC moves Rollins to Safety this year to see if he can succeed there.

Since '61's picture

4zone - I'm sure that Gute would like to keep Burnett but the price might be too high. Who knows what Burnett will do, but I'm sure that his agent knows this will likely be Burnett's last shot at a big $$$, long term deal. As we know there is always some owner out there who is willing to overpay for overvalued abilities. Thanks, Since '61

Razer's picture

...Not that it matters but as of this morning Packers.com has yet to report on the signings of either Philbin or Pettine...

Packers.com just removed Luke Getsy otherwise it has been very slow to update info. Edgar Bennett is still the OC. I don't know what the hold up is?

...As for the defense, I will be interested to see who Pettine hires to fill out his defensive staff. The position coaches will be critical in having whoever the players are execute Pettine's schemes...

I would like Pettine to have a bigger hand in picking his defensive staff but it seems that McCarthy is filling in the blanks with his own selections. He just added Patrick Graham as Dline or linebackers coach. He promoted Joe Whitt. I am hoping that they let Moss and Perry go so that Pettine can get some new blood into the staff.

Since '61's picture

Razer - I don't go to Packers.com very much any longer but sometimes I like to get their latest propaganda spin. They picked up the Packerrs signing the RB from the Bears but nothing on Pettine or Philbin is a little strange to me. Maybe neither hire is officially done yet.

I agree that I would prefer Pettine be allowed to hire his own people.
Thanks, Since'61

Coldworld's picture

Nothing will show there until the final contract is completed and signed and registered with the league.

dobber's picture

My understanding was that Graham was a Pettine choice...

Since '61's picture

Dobber - if that's true, that would be a good sign for Pettine. Thanks, Since '61

mrtundra's picture

Not that it matters but as of this morning Packers.com has yet to report on the signings of either Philbin or Pettine.

Packers.com feels like it is almost in off-season, shut down mode. Timely reporting seems to be something that can wait until OTAs begin, IMO. That website doesn't like to rock the boat, so it's no wonder reporting on the new OC or the new DC is slow in coming. About the only thing I go there for, anymore, is to find out when the Packers play and to see Larry McCarren's "Rock Report" or to get the link to the Packers Pro Shop. If you have a problem with the site, as I have had, there is no way to let the site administrator(s) know about it.

Chris Scoggins's picture

It can't be assumed that if players were confused it was the fault of the players. It is equally as possible that the coaching was at fault.

I've seen time and time again really, really, really smart people get confused by instructions given by poor communicators.

Razer's picture

There is definitely disconnect and miscommunications between the secondary and the rest of the defense. Of course, we kept the two coaches in charge of the coverage. Still, with the lack of seasoned talent in the secondary you have to keep giving these guys a pass. Hasn't that been the same scenario across this defense. Let's hope these problems go away with new leadership.

Coldworld's picture

Often directly conflicting I suspect

Gforcetrivers's picture

I don't know about this hire. I don't like the idea of hiring a Loser Coach. I get that he did some good things a long time ago but the Browns...really???

RCPackerFan's picture

Pretty sure he should get a medal for coaching the Browns to a 7-4 record. Winning 7 games in a season is normally 3 seasons of winning for them.

They had a winning record until the the Johnny Manziel mess took over.

Razer's picture

Pettine's time in Cleveland was less about the coach and more about the front office and the players being brought in. Ownership and the GM were messing with the team so bad that it was near impossible to field a serious team. When management is telling you to play Johnny Manziel - you know you have a short ride.

If Dorsey can keep the ownership idiots away from the team, he will field a very good team within the next 3-4 years.

WinUSA's picture

"Can the defense pass the Intelligence Test?"
Well it best be asked if the backfield which resembled the Keystone cops, could perform brain surgery! For Christ sake I was so sick of 3rd and 10 and every team we faced new all they had to do was have their receivers run a slant 11 yards down the middle of the field 11 for an easy lst down pick up...while our db's looked at each other in bewilderment while shrugging their shoulders and facing their palms toward the sun in bewilderment....good luck on that one. Maybe I'm a little harsh on them...Caper's ingenious defensive plan of having the db's 20 yards from the line of scrimmage certainly wouldn't be compared to Rommel's mastermind strategy in Africa!

fastmoving's picture

You wont know much about it....but Rommel was kicked in his ass pretty bad.
but when total loosing means mastermind to you......

that explains your strange post

WKUPackFan's picture

He also thinks that the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor.

dobber's picture

HELL NO!!!

WinUSA's picture

WTF do you know FM... "loosing", at least I can write English. Nothing strange about that post what so ever. Did you watch our DB"s get burned week in week out? Blow it!
As far as Rommel is concerned...he was called the Desert Fox until Hitler put his hand into and pulled his support of his efforts to try to shore up Europe. So don't tell me what I know or don't know about history..just go ahead and troll someone else!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

WKUPackFan's picture

It makes perfect sense that a commenter who just denigrated the intelligence of the defensive backs (all of whom are African-Americans) is also a Nazi sympathizer. Perhaps a name change to WinNaziGermany would better suit you.

Finwiz's picture

Blow it out your backside sporto - the DB's stunk this year.
I guess you didn't watch any games....so why post on a Pack message board?
Coverage breakdowns with guys running free in zones indicates lack of intelligence executing a schematic plan.
Most of them sure looked dumb to me, white, red, or black, I don't care what color, I call a spade a spade. They sucked.
Watch a couple of the games and get back to me.

WKUPackFan's picture

"a spade a spade". Sure, a person's color means nothing to you.

You just can't keep from using racially insensitive phrases. Not surprising coming from someone who posted a slur against the LGBT community just two days ago.

Finwiz's picture

Peace...Love...Dope!

Jason Perone's picture

Finwiz, your phrase about a spade is racist and should be avoided in our comments please. That goes for anyone else who uses it too

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

It just isn't racist in the least, Jason. It might be for hyper-sensitive and under-educated folks though. We had long discussions on APC on this phrase, thug, a few others. Happy to comply with your edict though, as it costs nothing, language does evolve, after all, and there is no point to offending others when it is not necessary.

WKUPackFan's picture

It is without question racist. The phrase is a derived from "calling a ("n" word) a ("n" word)" and stems from African-Americans being referred to as "Spades".

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

Marked as read, WKU.

fastmoving's picture

Sorry that I have to use your words....but Im over-educated (but no plane at all) and I dont like it either

Jason Perone's picture

TGR, I hear you and before I respond, please hear me out. To me, you diminished any good you intended in educating and informing on this subject by assuming that those who think it's racist are, your words, hyper-sensitive and under-educated folks. Yes, I see "might be", to remove the semantics of this, but you're still generalizing. Did some not know the history of the phrase? Probably. Does that make them uneducated and hyper-sensitive? Debatable. I'm not arguing it any further.

Now, to what your point actually WAS: OK, fair. The phrase as evolved to mean something other than its original intent and now carries a racist and negative undertone to many. I'm not here to censor but the wide-spread objection to the phrase makes it something we should avoid. Thank you for understanding.

fastmoving's picture

......and Im not sure if there a whole lot under-educated folks who are hyper-sensitive........
so dont bother you with that......

Finwiz's picture

Oh no it's not young man, it's you who have made it into something it's not.
It's a reference to a card game, or a shovel - you choose to attach the connotation, not I. Are you a millennial, because it's likely you are a product of a educational system that brain-washed you into speaking a certain way.
You need to prove to me that I intended to use it in a racist fashion.
If you can do so, I will of course quit using the phrase.
I'll be waiting here for you to read my thoughts and tell me what I was thinking in the context I used it.

Jason Perone's picture

Fin..where do I begin?

1. I don’t care what context you used the phrase. That’s not a defense and you’re done using it here. It has morphed over MANY years into something that now has things connected to it that we don’t need in our comment section.

The term “gay” is a similar situation. Clearly at its foundation it meant and still means happy. It also now carries a negative connotation towards those who prefer the same sex. “That play call by McCarthy was gay”. The defense of “I meant it as ‘lame’ not the ‘bad way’ is not a justification. Original meaning, history and context aside, not a word we need in our comment section.

I’m well aware of the history of the spade phrase and...still no. Done.

2. I’m not a millennial but way to make a lame assumption and throw that crowd into a bucket of being “brainwashed” and somehow less informed and aware of the history of the phrase. I’m just calling it as it is, son

Finwiz's picture

Not even a good effort.
Just more of the same.
You didn't prove anything to me regarding the intent of my post.
All you did was attempt, (ineffectively) to justify your bullying attempt at self-censorship, and hyper sensitivity.
You'll have to choose how far you take this.
You can of course censor my original post, as I'm sure you have the capability.
The fact you've let it stand for this long only indicates you want the conflict and nothing more, as most of your "ilk" do.
Obviously nobody has been harmed or psychologically damaged, or you would have removed it by now.
Thanks for playing!

WKUPackFan's picture

Interestingly, you already censored/deleted some of your own earlier posts on this thread, including the one referring to the LGBT community as "deviants" who should seek "medical help" in order to "assimilate" into society.

Jason Perone's picture

Oh wait, you don’t understand the context in which I meant any of that!

I’m not the deleter of posts, that’s Al. You’re good unless he hits the eject button. That doesn’t usually happen unless someone is being a jack wagon and disrespecting others. I laid out the expectation and I’m sure I won’t see any more of that from you so let’s call it good

Finwiz's picture

Negative, man.

Brian's picture

Wow. You rip people for making stupid bad toupe comments about football coaches that are intended to be a joke and you have the audacity to make an asinine comment like this??? Seriously? Growup and park your politics. I doubt your conclusion that the poster is a white supremacist from this comment is valid.

fastmoving's picture

wow.......how can you joke about stuff like that?
But its just fitting for the guy who put it out.

WKUPackFan's picture

Brian - I refuse to repeat the LGBT slur that the subject commenter posted, you can check it out for yourself (Wednesday, 5:15pm on the Grading TT's Drafts articles). "Spade" is a derogatory term for African-Americans.

Decency is the issue. Politics has nothing to do with it.

Finwiz's picture

Peace....Love...Dope

fastmoving's picture

I dont understand a single word from your post.........but you are normal, healthy and American??
congratulations but that means something different for everyone. so it would fun for you to assimilate in the next 20 years. good luck, you will need it.

Brian's picture

Wkup, I didn't realize I stepped into a running feud. I would cite what I have found doing some research regarding the origin of the phrase " a spade is a spade" but some here would definitely disagree. From what I can tell, it has been racially sensitive for the past 50 years. Much like the word "gay".
That being said, I am not a young man and have experienced or witnessed numerous "word re-definitions" and it is unfortunate that people twist/redefine words that were never intended to be inflammatory or derogatory. Frankly, when I "learned" this phrase, it was not derogatory and simply implied "it is what it is".
What I was appalled by was the association of what was stated by the author leading you to call him/her a Nazi coupled with another poster's politically charged commentary about "right wingers", etc. At face value, I could not sit idly and have one person call another person a Nazi based on referring to Rommel. I didn't get what was behind the firestorm. I have learned my lesson. I thought this site was an escape to the sports world but I have learned differently.
I look forward to your continued insight into the Packers.

WKUPackFan's picture

Thanks Brian, we're cool! I'm getting up there also (a few days from 58).

Your point about labeling someone a Nazi is well taken. And I think I erroneously criticized one of your comments a few days ago when that criticism was intended for someone else. Sorry about that!

WinUSA's picture

WKUP.....You made the issue of race. I didn't. Rommel was given death for assisting the plotting of the assassination of Hitler. You ignorant. I guarantee you you wouldn't stand on your feet if you uttered the WinNaziGermany comment to my face. Book IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I fought for our country in Vietnam and I won't stand for some punk behind a computer putting slurs on me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Ahole!

Finwiz's picture

Thanks for your service.
No disrespect around here from me, particularly Vietnam vets.

Since '61's picture

Win - whenever Rommel faced an enemy who was prepared or who had equal or better forces he lost badly. Even in France in 1940 he outran his logistics and ended up with over half his tanks in need of repair which prevented him from advancing on Dunkirk and allowing the British to escape. At El Alamein in North Africa he again outran his supply lines and stayed in the battle too long losing nearly all his tanks when he could have retreated to more defensible positions and shorter supply lines.

Finally in Normandy 1944 his troops were chopped up piece meal and ultimately eliminated by the Allies. Again he lost badly to an equal or superior force. So much for the Desert Fox. Thanks, Since '61

Finwiz's picture

Yet our best, most aggressive general at the time, Patton, held him in high esteem and measured his success in relation to how he fared against him.
They lost because 3 of the major superpowers of the world, allied against them. That had little to do with how Rommel fared in the individual battles.
By the mere fact that Germany lost the war, one could argue non of their commanders were worth a lick.

Oh, and might I add....we didn't do too well in Vietnam in the end, did we? I wouldn't necessarily say we had bad commanders, and Westmoreland was an idiot, simply because a bunch of politicians made them fight a war of attrition, as opposed to a fight to win.

fastmoving's picture

Yeah you are as smart as your boss.

As far as the desert looooser is concerned.....what has such an idiot to do on a packers side???
an when its a proof how rightwing idiots call themself then good night. he was nothing as another moron who thought he was something special, like all this blind rightwingers.
and by the way, Im German.
Sure you know a lot about everything, I can see it on your posts and the words you choose and the names you are refering too.
But on the other side, It explains a lot

Finwiz's picture

X

fastmoving's picture

thats a good quote for a guy like you..........
would guess you only got 5%.......

on the other side, I dont understand 100% of your posts.....and thats a good quote for me

fastmoving's picture

and by the way...............guys like you always lose, even when they dont play

Brian's picture

History begs to differ from biography.com:

"Field Marshal Erwin Rommel was one of German's most popular generals during World War II, and gained his enemies' respect with his victories as commander of the Afrika Korps. Implicated in a plot to overthrow Hitler, Rommel took his life in 1944."

fastmoving's picture

ohhhhh a valide source............now we know...........the truth.com

most popular at the time is already a shame and means nothing at all. he had some success at the begining, than he lost everything besides a couple of solid advantages........

Since '61's picture

Yes, Rommel was popular, that is true. But his men still got wiped out when they met equal or superior forces. He was a good strategist to a point, but WW2 was a war of logistics. In the end he and all the Nazis got what they deserved, thank goodness. Just a bunch of psychotic idiots who caused the deaths of millions of innocent people for no valid reason. And now back to football and Green Bay Packers. Thanks, Since '61

WKUPackFan's picture

'61, A tour of the Holocaust Museum in DC might enlighten a couple of commenters above.

fastmoving's picture

Thanks 61, I could not said it any better.
I agree with every letter you wrote here.

Back to the Pack

PETER MAIZ's picture

No doubt Rommel was a great general. If anyone saw the movie "Patton" Patton was in fact dismayed that one of his victories against the Africa Corps. had been led by another German general and not against Rommel (who had been under medical care in Germany) as a great affront. Hitler was under the influence of amphetamines and opiates at the time of D-Day and had given orders not to wake him under any circumstances, Rommel left the Western Front for his wife's birthday. Had the Nazi's moved their tanks in time for D-Day invasion, they might have moved their tanks to the Normandy area and kept the Allies on the beaches. Hitler and his political group (not the Weimar) caused the deaths of 50 million people, both civilians, and military personnel during WWII. For a person who has been brought up by the ideas of the English and French Enlightenment, and, therefore the ideas of democracy, the death camps that Hitler developed, stand as the greatest atrocities of world history. Hitler thought he was a military genius for having conquered most of Europe at the start of WWII, was actually an ignoramus who injected himself on the rest of the war and was destroyed (thank goodness), But to debunk Rommel as an important tactician and strategist would be nonsense. It's the equivalent of saying Patton was mediocre, despite his faults.

Coldworld's picture

Rommel nearly won after Italians collapsed. Allies were saved by Hitler diverting resources, fuel shortages and massive influx of forces. It is generally accepted that his leadership of the Africa Korps was a lesson in desert warfare tactics.

Chuck Farley's picture

Wow and I thought I was the only one saying wtf over our pass coverage scheme. Petine will be shocked over the lack of speed and quickness on the team.

Since '61's picture

Chuck - I've been saying that we need more speed in the secondary for a few seasons now. In any case, once Pettine realizes that if he hasn't already he will certainly understand that you can't coach speed. How he addresses that issue with scheme or new and better players will be interesting to see. The bottom line, with a few exceptions, like Daniels, Clark, King and HHCD, if someone can find him, we need better players at every level of the defense and better depth as well. Thanks, Since '61

Coldworld's picture

We have speed but much of it resides in players that are inexperienced. However, where there is uncertainty there is hesitation. Where there is hesitation players inevitably play slower. I believe we may be surprised by some on our roster.

DD's picture

I agree with you. Played way off, unsure, confused, lost in coverage. I also believe the DB's have some physical skills, but perhaps their football IQ is bad? I believe they should draft for skill, IQ, and motors with no fear of losing. May have athletic ability, but dumber then a pile of rocks communicating! Of the names mentioned in the article of former players, they were fairly football intelligent.

Coldworld's picture

It is posdible DD, but football IQ shows best in a scheme that is settled for players for whom the game has slowed down. Between Capers changes, multiple positions to learn for some, injuries and inexperience I think it is hard to tell.

JohnnyLogan's picture

When hearing about Pettine's defenses there were always superstars, All-Pros, even Hall of Famers. Daniels, Matthews and Perry are our best vets, Clark and Martinez the best young players. None are superstars. The rest?... no superstars and even more likely no Hall of Famers. You need at least one or two. A Woodson or a White. How many Hall of Famers did Lombardi have? Gutekunst is the key. He has to use FA to fill holes, but his drafting will make the difference. He has to find that Hall of Fame caliber "guy" ... in this draft or the next. Two would be better.

Doug Niemczynski's picture

I still like Demaryius randall, clinton dix, kevin king, dean lowry and we still havent seen a healty Demotravious Adams.

Doug Niemczynski's picture

And, get josh jones a little more experience.

Coldworld's picture

Collins took 3 years to master one position. Shields was similar. Jones was a rookie and played how many last year? Give the guy a break. Cover players take a while to gel.

Chuck Farley's picture

Good art. Jason but five words of yours really says it all for Petine " the key is the talent".
My take, if we had a lot of talent, Capers would not have been fired. No pro bowlers, the potential is injury prone.
He has his work cut out. Last if mm has his nose all over this and pulls, Mathews is our pass rusher, you got Dom capers in another suit.

Doug Niemczynski's picture

Please Explain the Patriots always going to the super bowl please with the 32nd pick every year.

Coldworld's picture

Better use of low level FAs to support and bolster starters. They have had a very good pro scouting performance that they have used to identify gaps that can be filled by existing nfl players with limitations but who fit the need. On top of that the AFC lack of depth has helped them get to the big game more often.

Tundraboy's picture

I like this sponge approach. From my perspective it possibly will accelerate the development of some of the younger players. Start with simple and then get their feet wet and get some experience on the field and game action. sort of like baptism by fire. See what talent you have by seeing what they can do. But at the end of the day this D needs more talent. Pass rushers to begin with.

Doug Niemczynski's picture

Should have given capers an intelligence test 7 years ago

jww061356's picture

Josh Jackson......can you say "sticky coverage?"

wimiller's picture

what are the wonderlic scores on our guys on D? good luck with not very absorbent sponges.

Since '61's picture

More like stones than sponges. Thanks, Since '61

Brian's picture

That same question should be asked of many of the posters on this thread :).

Qoojo's picture

In answer to the question, yes, the D can pass the intelligence test. There was nothing special intelligence-wise about the past defenses he coached. Talent-wise, there might be a difference.

If one says that the packers defense lacks the intelligence, then you are either saying this defense is dumber than average or his past defenses were smarter than average. I don't see that. I see probably about the same level of intelligence, and the homer in me says packers' players are probably smarter.

There are different levels of complexity, and it all depends on if the coach can teach the concepts. Track history for Pettine says yes, and it says no for Capers. History shows Capers Defenses spike early, then fall off after a couple years. I at least expect a spike in performance with Pettine, and whether he can sustain and improve, we shall see.

But I think that spike should enable the packers to win at least one more superbowl before Rodgers retires.

Since '61's picture

Qoojo - I think that we desperately need your last sentence to be correct.
Thanks, Since '61

Coldworld's picture

Capers D has always performed better with a high veteran percentage. TT always stocked it with rookies of whom a number were typically UDFAs. Not a good fit.

This is not to excuse Capers. His misuse of players and continual inability to tailor to what he had after 2010 were the reasons he is no longer, but TT did not help and increasingly helped less and less.

Fordham Ram's picture

I suspect Gute's is looking at guys who have played in Pettine's system when looking for veteran help. One who comes to mind for me and no one has mentioned him yet is the DL Sheldon Richardson. He played in Pettine's system for years during his Jet years. Don't know what he has left in the tank but I think he would make a great addition.

holmesmd's picture

That dude will be an a** kicker when he’s a grandpa! Dude is savage! Him, Daniels, Clark, Lowery/Adams?! Good luck running the ball against that front!! Yikes!

carlos's picture

Myles Jack said the key to the Jaguars defense was communication.

The TKstinator's picture

Having Jalen Ramsey and AJ Bouye at corner doesn’t hurt either.

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

The elbows have gotten quite sharp on CHTV.

Coldworld's picture

Well, at least something is sharp here then

Ferrari Driver's picture

I am unsure current defense backs have an adequate mental aptitude to effectively play in a complicated scheme. Until personnel changes are made to accommodate the desired scheme of the new DC, he may have to use more of a vanilla approach.

Clinton-Dix is no mental giant, scoring only 15 on the Wonderlic test which is well below average, and regressed in a year when most would anticipate a jump in the opposite direction. I do think Burnette will fit nicely if he is retained.

Coldworld's picture

There aren’t many Woodson’s in the nfl. Truly smart players that have the physical ability aren’t that easy to find. To show through, they also need some experience as a base on which to make in field determinations and confidence others at least know their roles well enough to be predictable. We had that in Woodson’s greatest years.

No NFL coach can succeed for long if their scheme requires a number of truly mentally acute players.

Archie's picture

I know we all want to be excited about the Gute hiring but I have read that his contributions at the top of the draft have been HHCD and Spriggs. Hardly comforting. Both look like busts from where I sit. God help us all if Gute sucks at finding talent. Still no explanation why we didn't go after Dorsey when he was available. He's the guy that seems most like Ron Wolf to me. He did a helluva job in KC.

Archie's picture

btw - Mike Pettine alone is a great pick, IMHO. However, keeping MM's flunkies around to learn-teach his system seems like a flawed way to proceed.

offense - Keeping MM's offensive scheme is a disaster waiting to happen. OL and WR have regressed in recent years. Davante lost 20# in his contract year and was much quicker. Now that he has his contract and is set for life, will he put lbs back on and look mediocre again? Offense needs to find a top WR and TE to be dangerous again. If Gute is able to right the ship here, he deserves lots of credit but my money says he will be shopping for a new HC in 10-11 months.

dobber's picture

"Davante lost 20# in his contract year and was much quicker. Now that he has his contract and is set for life, will he put lbs back on and look mediocre again? "

Adams supposedly added some unreported amount of weight (the article points to upper body strength) prior to 2016...and scored 12 TDs and led the Packers in ypc.

http://www.packers.com/news-and-events/article-player-feature/article-1/...

He dropped some weight this last offseason (NOT 20 lbs)...and still scored 10 TDs on an abbreviated schedule. And led the team in ypc (partly because he was the only one catching the ball).

In the end, I haven't found a credible source anywhere that indicates that his play weight has changed more than about 8 lbs (up to 220 lb) since his rookie year when his Combine weight was 212lb, and the Packer website always seems to list him at 215 lbs. If you can find a place where it says he was playing around 230 lbs (212+20 and he never looked that big), I'd like to see it.

Log in to comment, upload your game day photos and more!

Not a member yet? Join free.

If you have already commented on Cheesehead TV in the past, we've created an account for you. Just verify your email, set a password and you're golden.

Or log in with Facebook

 
 
 

Quote

"I firmly believe that any man’s finest hour, the greatest fulfillment of all that he holds dear, is that moment when he has worked his heart out in a good cause and lies exhausted on the field of battle – victorious."
"The Bears still suck!"
"A school without football is in danger of deteriorating into a medieval study hall. "