Create Account

Or log in with Facebook


Log in

Or log in with Facebook

Green and Bold: Packers Rookie Minicamp Highlights

By Category

Green and Bold: Packers Rookie Minicamp Highlights

On Friday, May 5 and Saturday, May 6, the Green Bay Packers held their rookie minicamp for their 10 draft selections and additional undrafted free agents and tryouts.

Since the conclusion of the orientation camp, the Packers have signed five of the tryout players—linebackers Josh Letuligasenoa (Cal Poly) and David Talley (Grand Valley State), cornerback Raysean Pringle (Southern Utah), safety Aaron Taylor (Ball State) and running back William Stanback (Virginia Union). They cut two players, wide receiver Antwan Goodley and long snapper Taybor Pepper, to get the roster to 90 players.

Of the Packers' draft selections, defensive tackle Montravius Adams, linebacker Vince Biegel, safety Josh Jones, cornerback Kevin King and running back Jamaal Williams remain unsigned.

But back to the action at minicamp. 

One of the biggest headlines to come out of Green Bay over the weekend was that fourth-round draft selection and Wisconsin native, Biegel, had injured his hand during practice. However, the linebacker insisted he wasn't worried, and head coach Mike McCarthy said the injury was "minor."

Biegel will be an important piece for the Packers this season. With the losses of Julius Peppers and Datone Jones in free agency, the Packers, who often use linebacker-heavy sets such as the "Psycho" and the NASCAR, will need more bodies. 

Green Bay can still rely on Nick Perry and Clay Matthews to start and can rotate in Jayrone Elliott, but if Biegel is ready to make an impact early on, he could prove vital for maintaining depth and turning up the heat on those pass-rushing packages. 

Meanwhile, those who were surprised that the Packers selected a safety in Round 2 have gotten a glimpse of the plans the team has in store for Josh Jones. A physical playmaker at 6'1" and 220 pounds, Jones' aggressive hitting style and size make him naturally suited to being a box safety, and the Packers appear to be taking that a step further, playing him at linebacker in minicamp practices.

"Jones has the appetite for hitting that teams will want around the box,"'s Lance Zierlein had written in Jones' draft profile. Indeed, the Packers saw something they liked and, in this one selection, have gone a long way toward shoring up their leaky run defense. 

As for non-draft selections competing for a roster spot out of camp, Cal Poly edge rusher Josh Letuligasenoa signed with the team on Monday after an impressive minicamp. 

Letuligasenoa had three sacks and nine tackles in his senior season at Cal Poly, where he played a hybrid edge rusher role. That makes him a good candidate for the Packers' Elephant position that Datone Jones moved into and that Dom Capers likes to use so much. 

Another player of note during the minicamp was rookie offensive lineman Kofi Amichia. Now that Don Barclay, who has the ability to sub in all over the line when the occasion calls for it, might have to occupy a starting role at right guard, the Packers will need another jack of all trades on the line. 

Amichia played at guard, left tackle, and center during minicamp, proving that he can be versatile for a line that is in need of depth. 

NFL Categories: 
  • Like Like
  • 0 points

Fan friendly comments only: off Comments (72) This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.

Nick Perry's picture

I'm excited about the Packers rookie class this season and will be the first to admit I might have some unrealistic expectations. Most of the time rookies struggle to make much of an impact on Capers Defense yet I'm hoping at least 3 of the first 4 picks can lift the Packers Defense to respectable. Opinions vary but King is already the #1 CB in many people's mind. Josh Jones is finally going to give us a player to match up against RB's and TE's. and Beigel is being compared to Matthews, at least in spandex.

Last season the Falcons started 4 rookies on defense in the SB. Early in the season the struggled and were actually ranked pretty poorly defensively, but by the time the playoffs rolled around they were playing much, much better. I could see a similar thing happening in GB this year, at least I hope so.

Bearmeat's picture


The difference between the Falcons system and the Packers system is the vast complexity of the Packers system vs. the complete simplicity of the Falcons. Rooks can play fast in ATL because they only play man under cover 3 and man under cover 1. We all know the playbook for Dom's defense is a tome.

I'd love to share your optimism. I too am very pleased by the draft. But I think it's going to take 2-3 years for these players to get up to snuff. I think D'Amato nails it here:

How many of our last 7 seasons have been ended by a rookie on defense making a boneheaded play again?

Look, I hate to be negative Nancy over and over again. I really do. But jeez, how many times do we have to see this movie to know that it's probably groundhog day again until TT retires?

cuervo's picture Ted also coaches and is part of the team that installs the concepts and game plans? Guess I learned something today.

So your solution is that we never again have a rookie playing on the defense or offense..... who thought it was that simple?

RCPackerFan's picture

'But jeez, how many times do we have to see this movie to know that it's probably groundhog day again until TT retires?'

So the NFC Championship game 2 of the last 3 years and not winning that is Thompsons fault?

2014 - The team blew it in about a dozen ways. If any one of those things change, the Packers win the game. Not Thompsons fault.
2015 - I think they finished the game with 2 healthy WR's? McCarthy has stated that after they tied the game he would have went for 2 and the win if it wasn't for Janis getting hurt on the TD catch. He had 2 WR's that could play.
2016 - Everyone wants to talk about how poor the defense was to end their season. It was bad and injured, no question. But lets not forget the offense was shredded in the last game. 3 of their top 4 WR's should not have been playing. They lost their top RB. By the end of the game they had to have Guion play OG. The injuries more then anything ruined the season.
Had the offense been able to play to its abilities it could have been a different game.

Blaming Thompson is the simple way out. Everyone wants to blame someone. (Thompson, Munn, Joe Blow...) The truth is, shit happens and its no ones fault. We can sit here and bitch about Thompson, or we can be happy that we have a team that is the only team with the Patriots to make the playoffs each of the last 8 years. Now everyone will want to say 'yeah, but the Patriots won 2 superbowls in that stretch'. The truth is, the Patriots were 1 play in each superbowl away from losing them. Its how close these games/teams are. Sometimes the football just bounces the right or wrong way.

Savage57's picture

Now here's a guy who thinks they should change the nickname of Green Bay to "MadeThePlayoffsTown". Brett Favre.

RCPackerFan's picture

Ok, lets just blame Thompson for it then... Its much easier.

Bearmeat's picture


Please don't hand me the "we made the playoffs again so that's good enough" line. With a top 10 QB in history, it's just not good enough. The playoffs is where it starts. I remember reading a Bob McGinn article 2 decades ago in the paper Journal Sentinal. This was of course when BLF was at the height of his game. And Bob's source said: "With a HOF QB, you start at 8-8. (Therefore) A 10-6 team is really the quality of a 2-6 team without that QB."

Now I don't think that it's that cut and dry of course. If you have a QB like that, you're going to set up your team differently than if you were a defense and ground/pound team. But it's a really solid point.... I am NOT satisfied with winning the division. That's just the first goal. It's not where the road ends. And I am NOT going to cease calling our defense shitty, (sorry for the cursing), when it's been shitty for the last bloody decade! I'm SICK of it! Sorry, I'm riled up now....(pant, gasp, wheeze...) ok I feel more under control. ;)

Basically, I think it's just the case that TT and Dom are a BAD match for each other. Dom's D is one of the most complex Defensive playbooks in the NFL. TT, as we all know, will always have a young team. 2009 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 (HHCD on 2pt conversion - although that was a team-wide thing as you said), 2015 (Randall - Yikes) and 2016. YUCK. All defensive collapses at critical junctures of games. Or worse, just straight up UGLY defense throughout.

Sometimes, the answer really is that simple.

Ben Pearson's picture

Bearmeat I love it.

Ben Pearson's picture

Bearmeat I love it. I couldn't agree more. All you have to do is take a look around the league. Look at the pats (I know it's comparing apples to oranges) but look at their off-season. They're coming off a super bowl and look at all the moves they made because they knew they had to get better if they wanted to keep winning.

It's not that TT is a bad GM I don't think he is at all. It's all comes down to how badly you want something. And are you willing to change the way you do things, even if it's out of your comfort zone to get what you want.

This might be a strange comparison so bare with me. I'm a big NBA guy. The Cleveland Cavilers have made 47 transactions since Lebron came to Cleveland. They've made the Finals every year but they continue to add more talent and do more to keep getting there. Look at the warriors. They make the finals 2 straight years and then what do they do...? Bring in Kevin Durant. The Cavs, Warriors and Pats are examples of teams who want it badly and want it badly right now. I just wish Packers management had that same urgency.

The organizations that separate themselves across the sports world are the ones who just want it that much worse. Who are never content, who are always changing and trying to make their teams better any way they can.

Also, I'm very very very aware of the additions TT has made this year (again I don't hate him as a GM at all) but please don't tell me his moves made our defense any better THIS YEAR. I get building through the draft is nice and the development process takes a few years for any player really. But are we all okay with 2-3 more years of getting waxed in the play offs while our defense "develops" (which isn't a guarantee either). That's 2-3 more years of A-Rod we don't get back.

Finwiz's picture

Bearmeat - thanks for that post. Most fans are just fine with making it to the playoffs and giving up 185 yards rushing to Colin Kapernick in a national embarrassment. Everybodys all about the flash of a couple of great players from the QB to whatever receiver, and fat Eddie running over a DB, but there's nothing sexy about a great D, so nobody SHIVES A GET.
Oh well - more of the same in 2017 - I'm relatively sure of it, because the old antique D-coordinator is still around. Get used to it, he has a job for life as long as the Pillsbury Dough Boy is around.

RCPackerFan's picture

Bearmeat - I see you changed your post from what I typed below.

That part I can agree with. That Thompson and Capers are not a good pairing for each other. I will say though that Capers has done a pretty decent job of changing his schemes lately to fit his players. I'd like to see him do more though.
But basically Capers systems are more made for veteran players, and Thompson likes young players.

I'm not saying Thompson doesn't deserve blame. I just get tired of people saying he is the problem. And they will never win a super bowl with him as GM. Maybe they won't win another, but they may also be in a lot worse shape as a team without him too...
2014 was probably 80-90% on the players, 10-20% on the coaches. How they allowed a fake FG to go for a TD is beyond me. The 2 pt conversion. Burnett intercepting the pass and Peppers telling him to take a knee... Bostick, Clinton-Dix.. So many things happened in that game.

2015 ultimately they lost on the Randall mess up play. But like I said earlier, had they not been down to 2 WR's McCarthy said he was going to go for 2. Maybe they lose, but it wouldn't have went to OT. And as it turned out they lost anyways.

2016 the defense was bad. The injuries to the CB's were a major reason why. While most will say the defense was the reason why they lost to Atlanta, I still say that the offense is what really cost them. Who knows what would have happened had they been able to keep pace with Atlanta. I mean look at what happened in the Super Bowl. The injuries to the WR's and Montgomery and OL were to much to overcome.

Bearmeat's picture

Yeah. I edited because I wanted to say more. :)

RCPackerFan's picture

lol, completely threw me off...

Seriously thought i was losing my mind... lol

Bearmeat's picture

haha. Sorry.

RCPackerFan's picture

no worries. lol

RCPackerFan's picture

Yeah, i want more SB wins. But I'm being realistic. If winning SB's was so easy, why haven't the Patriots won more? Why haven't the Seahawks? The Patriots won 2 SB's, and in reality should have lost both. Credit them for finding ways to win, but the reality is they were 1 play away from losing each game.
The Packers have been one of the top teams in the league every year. There is something to be said for that. I get it. I want to win the SB as bad as anyone. But I am being realistic.

Packers simply let 2014 get away from them. That was their year that they should have won it. NOT Thompson's fault.

The last 2 years they were to injured to realistically compete when the game was on the line.

Against Atlanta if the Packers have a healthy Nelson, Adams, Allison, Montgomery and OL, don't you think their chances of winning goes a lot higher?

Finwiz's picture

God you are so wrong. There is nothing about the offense that needed to be improved for them to beat Atlanta in the playoffs. It was all about the fact we stopped them ONCE on downs the entire game. Why can't you get the importance of a much improved defense through your thick skull?

RCPackerFan's picture

So Nelson playing with Broken ribs. Adams hobbling with a gimpy ankle and Allison not being able to play with a pulled hamstring didn't affect the offense?
How about losing Montgomery early in the game and 3/5ths of the OL during the game?

My whole point was that going into that game we knew our offense was going to have to put up a lot of points. Cuz our defense was bad. We knew that... The offense didn't score a point until the 3rd Quarter. The offense let us down and the majority of that was due to the injuries.

All I was trying to say was that had the offense been at full strength the game would have been completely different. I'm not saying they would have won, but they would have been a lot better then they were.

OBVIOUSLY the defense needs improving. Trust me, my skull isn't that thick...

Don't be sorry.

Bearmeat's picture


You're absolutely right. It seems we're mostly agreeing here. With the QB and the offense we had by the end of the season, all we'd need is to be slightly above average (say 12th in points and 17th in yards allowed) to be a true SB threat. Outiside of 8 games in 2014, we haven't been since 2010.

That ticks me off. And ultimately, it falls on the combination of defensive coaching, training staff (injuries) and personnel departments. I'd like some accountability at this point, because I'm getting more than a little sick of groundhog day.

RCPackerFan's picture

For the most part I think we are on the same page.

Finwiz's picture

Those are excuses - we didn't beat any good offensive teams all year, even when our offense was firing on all cylinders. If you can't stop anybody, you won't win in the playoffs. NE was able to do that, and I don't think they have that many all-pro's on their D, but they definitely have a better scheme. It's all about the defense - know it, learn it, live it.

RCPackerFan's picture

'we didn't beat any good offensive teams all year'

Packers beat the Cowboys in the playoffs. Cowboys were the 5th ranked scoring offense, 5th ranked total yards on offense.

I'd say being top 5 in both categories is a good offense...

Finwiz's picture

They got extremely lucky in the Dallas game - but Atlanta's defense shut us down, and our DB's couldn't handle Julio or Sanu. It took a miracle play by Rodgers and Cook to even have a chance at that win. I loved it, but it was as lucky as it was good.

dobber's picture

I'm right an awful lot, too, when I can lay on qualifiers after the fact...

Finwiz's picture

They aren't qualifiers - they are facts. Nobody I know refers to that sideline catch as anything more than a miracle play, and that's what it took to win.
I wouldn't delude myself into thinking they had control of that game at any point. You'd be the one pulling the anomaly as the one instance where the defense didn't completely fold up under pressure. And even then they allowed over 30 points.

RCPackerFan's picture

Packers were winning 28-13 going into the 4th quarter.

So the Cowboys had them right where they wanted them? Losing 28-13 going into the 4th quarter.

Finwiz's picture

OK right - you win...the Packers defense was fine because they had 3 quarters of a good performance, against one very good team in the playoffs. I'm very comforted after this conversation.

Can you spell FLUKE, or ANOMALY, or statistical deviation from the norm.
Never mind. Carry on.

RCPackerFan's picture

I love how you keep twisting what your saying to try and make yourself correct.

First you said they didn't beat any good teams with good offenses. I provided proof that they infact did... Then you said they didn't have control of the game, which again I provided facts that they were leading by 15 going into the 4th quarter,.. Then it turned into them being lucky, followed by it was a fluke...

Finwiz's picture

They lost to more good teams because of bad defense than they won. The one exception being the Dallas game, which being an honest, objective fan, and not some hyped up, green and gold millenial , I grade on a curve and throw out the one anomaly.

Like I said - you win. The defense will be fine because we drafted a bunch of rookies and filled holes. Nothing to worry about. Carry on with the delusion, it's what being a G&G pom-pom wavers all about. LOL

RCPackerFan's picture

'They got extremely lucky in the Dallas game'

Obviously this won't be a rational conversation...

Finwiz's picture

Defensive collapse in the 4th quarter, and a miracle sideline catch on 4th and long. Nothing lucky about any of that . Played over their heads on D for 3 quarters and came back to earth, and relied on the most unbelievable play to put them in position to win. No luck involved. Like I said - you win, believe what you want.

I'd be jacked if we had a new D coordinator with this draft, but we don't, so I'm not.

Bearmeat's picture

Would they have been higher? Yes. Would they have been the favorite? No way.

You know why? Because their defense was awful. Ok, injured CBs were the biggest reason. But name me one difference maker on that team other than Daniels? HHCD? Maybe.

Our defense does not dictate play against good offenses. They basically just hope to hold the dam up until ARod does something amazing.

I'm relatively sure even if we were completely healthy (without Shields of course) going into that game, we'd still have lost in a shoot out. Their D was solid. Ours was laughable.

I'm really sick of writing that statement every offseason.

RCPackerFan's picture

Difference makers from last year's defense. Daniels, Mathews (when healthy), Clinton-Dix, Sam Shields was...

We may have lost in a shootout. But the fact we never got a chance to see it with the injuries the offense had.

Bearmeat's picture

Come on RC.

Matthews hasn't been a difference maker since 2013. Even when healthy. He's routinely getting single blocked by average OTs. And don't hand me the Vikings game last year as evidence either. That guy was not an NFL player.

I agree on Shields, and Daniels. HHCD too - if he can start making 1-2 more splash plays a month. He's not there yet.

RCPackerFan's picture

Mathews was in 2014. The year he switched to the hybrid ILB position. 2015 they took his strengths away from him by having him playing exclusively ILB. Then early in the year before Mathews got hurt he was a playmaking player. He had 3 sacks in his first 3 games he played. Then got hurt and had 2 sacks the rest of the year.

lets not forget about his play in the playoffs... His strip sack/forced fumble then running over and blowing up Perkins for the football.
I tried to attach the link but it won't let me.

Just youtube Clay Mathews Fumble recovery...

Bearmeat's picture

1 fumble recovery and 3 good games does not a premiere player make.

Look, dude is ALWAYS hurt. He was elite for the latter half of 2014. That's it. And he STILL wasn't on the field much in the 4th quarter of that awful NFC CG either. Availability is part of the equation too. He is no longer a blue chip player. I think that's pretty much incontrovertible at this point.

Finwiz's picture

I still remember 52 standing on the sidelines while Wilson rammed it down our throats with the game slipping away. Because he was "TIRED". Multi-million dollar player, and he can't play because he's tired. Think Ray Nitschke ever got tired and took himself out of the game. Guy returned an INT for a TD on one leg with a pulled hamstring. Ah shit - why bother.

RCPackerFan's picture

He started out really good until he got hurt. After he got hurt, it took him a few games to get back then he got hurt again. Playing the rest of the year basically on one arm.

IMO, he needs to go back to the hybrid ILB position he played. Where he can be moved around and not go up against 300+ lb OT's all game long. His body simply doesn't hold up.

He still has the ability to make plays. The problem is him holding up for a long stretch of games.

Moving him to the hybrid ILB kills both birds with Mathews.

Finwiz's picture

Problem is, you have arguably your best player who has stated he doesn't want to play ILB. So then he's unhappy, and where does that leave GB, with his fragile ego? Think about it - it was an issue before, and it will be again if they move him back inside.

Finwiz's picture

YES - to this.
It's all about the D.

dobber's picture

"Our defense does not dictate play against good offenses. They basically just hope to hold the dam up until ARod does something amazing."

But realistically, a "good" NFL unit is one that has the ability to dictate play to its opponent. So in order to dictate play against a "good" offense, doesn't your defense need to be "great"?

Ben Pearson's picture


There is so much truth in that article, people just don't want to hear it. Love it though and it's spot on.

Thanks for sharing!

Nick Perry's picture

@ BM...Obviously I might be a bit overly optimistic but I truly hope Capers is capable of making some changes to his defense. The guys playbook is said to be 4 inches thick, tone it down! Realistic? Doubtful but something does need to change.

I said this after the draft...The Packers have invested a s*** load of draft picks on defense the last several seasons. The Packers need to hold SOMEONE responsible, either TT or Capers but if there's no turnaround this year ONE of them needs to go. No more excuses!!

Bearmeat's picture

Yes NP,

And how many years have you and I been saying that? Since at least 2013. TT getting Marty and Kendricks this year was the most he's done in UDFA since 2006. So that's promising. I just wish he'd do the same on D.

DThomas's picture

Like many of you, I've complained about Thompson's reluctance to supplement the roster with free agents in the past. But I think you underestimate what he's done this offseason. He not only signed Bennett and Kendricks, he also signed Jahri Evans, Ricky Jean Francois, and Davon House. That's precisely the kind of action I advocated in the past: Not signing the biggest name, biggest dollar free agent, but supplement the roster with vets who can contribute on a rotational basis or step in when injuries occur. I think it's very likely all five will contribute significantly. IMO both Bennett and Evans will start. House may start in base but almost certainly will "start" in nickel and dime which they play about 80% of the time. Both Francois and Kendricks should see significant snaps.

In the past I think it would have been likely for Thompson to allow the youngsters on the roster to vie for the starting RG spot. This year he signed what I view as a likely one-year stop gap in Evans - and a good one if he stays healthy. That will allow Murphy, Patrick, Amichia and others to gain the experience at OG so one will be ready to start next season.

PackEyedOptimist's picture

Youth and injuries CAN scuttle a successful season, but I am hopeful that we won't experience another rash of injuries at one position. We have gone into the last several seasons with excellent depth at almost every position--it seemed. But when you're down to your third and fourth string at any one position in the NFL, it's going to be a problem.
IF we stay healthy, the "worst" results would be that we should have a FANTASTIC set of players on the special teams. The roster has added obvious speed and athleticism. Guys like Biegl, King, Josh and Aaron Jones, Amichia, Mays, etc. should add tremendously to our coverage AND our return blocking.
I'd also like to see A Jones as a punt returner (he has great hands and quickness) and J Williams as a kick returner (great jump cuts, balance, and tackle-breaking).

Handsback's picture

Right now, everything looks good. Can't wait until TC begins. I think this is where we will see who can play and who are the pretenders. I don't see a lot of pretenders in this class......I hope I'm right.

RCPackerFan's picture

Like Nick said I'm very excited about this rookie class.
Not all will be immediate impact players, but I really think we will see 4 players playing a pretty big role early and getting more playing time as the season wears on.

I think King, Jones, Williams and Aaron Jones will all play a lot early.
While none of them may actually start, they should at the very least be in the rotation and play in subpackages.

I am looking forward to the preseason to see how the rookies look. I am also looking forward to seeing how the UDFA's look as well. Packers keep at least 1 every year. The positions they seem to keep the most are LB and DB. I will definitely be keeping an eye on those positions.

L's picture

Lots to be excited about regarding the draft picks, but I also have some particular UDFA's I'm very intrigued by due to their raw athleticism:

QB Taysom Hill (pSPARQ = 129.4) - He's more athletic than 96.8% of all the Quarterbacks within the NFL; his z-score is +1.9 which is an indication of just how much more athletic he is over the average player at his position. Given how athletic he is, his advanced age, and the uncertainty regarding his ability to be an NFL QB I wonder if a position switch or a type of utility role is in his future with the team?

WR Montay Crockett (pSPARQ = 129.2) - He's more athletic than 88.0% of all the Wide Receivers within the NFL; his z-score is +1.2.

OLB-ILB David Talley (pSPARQ = 136.2) - He's more athletic than 87.3% of all the off-the-line-of-scrimmage Linebackers within the NFL; his z-score is also +1.1.

ILB Cody Heiman (pSPARQ = 134.1) - He's more athletic than 87.2% of all the off-the-line-of-scrimmage Linebackers within the NFL; his z-score is +1.1.

OG Thomas Evans (pSPARQ = 111.6) - He's more athletic than 76.8% of all the Offensive Linemen within the NFL; his z-score is +0.7.

OG Geoff Gray (pSPARQ = 106.8) - He's more athletic than 63.4% of all the Offensive Linemen within the NFL; his z-score is +0.3.

Now, of course just having tremendous athleticism doesn't automatically make you a good NFL player and certainly won't assure you of a spot on a team. A player has to be able to demonstrate that they have the capability and mindset to play the game at this high of a level. For most of these guys it'll mean being extremely coach-able, solid in the fundamentals, and (perhaps most importantly) showing a humble dedication towards the need to improve while (hopefully) proving their capabilities to the team. Nevertheless, I will say that tremendously athletic players often present higher potential ceilings if they're able to put things together. I really like these types of high reward aspects of low risk player investments -- it's often how you can find a true diamond in the rough.

dobber's picture

"As for non-draft selections competing for a roster spot out of camp, Cal Poly edge rusher Josh Letuligasenoa signed with the team on Monday after an impressive minicamp. "

I'm pulling for this guy for two reasons...
1. ...they need edge prospects.
2. ...I want to hear Cutler and Aikman try to pronounce this one.

Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

He runs a 4.9. Somehow, I don't like his chances.

dobber's picture

Oh, I know. Slow on the edge is not a good thing, but his measurables are in the same ballpark as Ejuan Price (if it's a pretty big ballpark). He just doesn't appear to have to collegiate production. He's a flier...still, you gotta love the name.

Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

Sure. Love the name.

tm_inter's picture

It would be better all around if he shortens his name to Josh Letuli.

Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

I'm hoping for a pretty dramatic shift in defensive style this season. This draft class makes it possible.

Jones is far better suited for the hybrid Safety/ILB role than Burnett. Adams adds serious explosion to our DL rotation. King will make mistakes, but his #1 Corner role will free up Ha Ha to stop spending his time doubling WR's.

We need less 2-4-5 and more 3-4-4, with one of the 4 LB's being a hybrid (Jones). These 2-man fronts invite a pummeling from rushing attacks, causing us to over-commit safeties in the box and get gashed by the passing game.

Daniels, Clark, Lowry, Adams, Francois, Ringo or Price--we've got plenty of big guys for a rotation up front. And thanks to Jones and King, we won't be helpless on the back end while maintaining adequate beef against the run game.

Please Dom...less 2-4-5...more 3-4-4...

dobber's picture

Play fast. If you're going to make mistakes, so be it. Just make them at 100 mph. That's all I want.

Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

I agree, but it's hard to play fast when you're terrified of being run over because you're facing 5 O-Lineman and a TE up front with 2 D-Linemen and 5 little guys.

Once the league figured out our 2-4-5 scheme, we were thinking far more than reacting. We were spending all our time trying to compensate for being too small in the trenches.

It just isn't sustainable.

Tundraboy's picture

I agree. 2 man line is like a prevent D. 2 token lineman backed by a wider but smaller fence. Has its moments, but against fast powerful runners who have built up a head if steam?

RCPackerFan's picture

I agree.
Lets face it. Simply adding King and House allows Gunter to go back to the 4/5th CB role where he should be. Not the number 1 CB.
I'm not saying the King will be the number 1 CB, but he will help improve the position.

The 2-4-5 is essentially our base defense now. I do wonder if we may see some 3-3-5 this year. With our DL being so deep. Getting more on the field might be something we see this year.

Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

I hope so. The 2-4-5 became a complete sieve, as we were constantly trying to cover all the issues from being overpowered up front.

Every offense has 5 O-Linemen and a TE. Putting only 2 D-Linemen out there is an invitation to get worked.

Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

As for Gunther, don't be surprised if he's cut. I'm not saying it will happen, but it's 50-50 with all these young, faster players developing their skills.

PackEyedOptimist's picture

I've been wondering that as well. If he was quicker, I'd see him as a perfect slot defender; if he was faster, he'd be great on the boundary. Sadly, he is neither. :( He really plays the ball well; it's a shame.

PackEyedOptimist's picture

In the traditional 3-4, the lineman "eat up blockers." Looking at the players that have been added over the past few years, it looks like the Packers have decided to turn their 3 lineman into penetrators. I approve. The opponent will get more "gashes," but that is offset, in my opinion, by the sacks and TFLs that penetration creates. It's hard to defend in the NFL these days--turnovers and TFLs are the way to win. It flips the old standards on its ear, but I really think it's the way to go, with the rules changes.

dobber's picture

It's just the difference between a one-gap and a two-gap scheme, that's all.

Since '61's picture

There's a long way to go and everyone looks good at this point. More reliable evaluations can take place once we get to TC. Priorities for now are signing our draft picks and let's not have any non-football injuries or off the field stupidity resulting in suspensions. Otherwise, snore until Week 1. Thanks, Since '61

Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

Hmmmm...I don't think I want to go silent until Training Camp...that's even more boring.

Since '61's picture

Andrew - I'm not going silent. I live in the NYC area and I have plenty to do until the football season. Until last night I had the NY Rangers but they were eliminated in game 6. And for those who think the Packers are a frustrating team to follow try being a Rangers fan. With that I still have the NY Yankees and the entire baseball season. As for the Packers all that matters is who will be playing in Week One of the regular season. Until then it's just speculation and window dressing and hoping that our starting players remain healthy for the games that actually mean something. Thanks, Since '61

GBPack's picture

I hope I don't have unrealistic expectations for Montravius, but with his quickness and ability to win 1 on 1 he better be lining up next to Daniels on 3rd downs. Been lacking an interior pass rush for a LONG time.

PackEyedOptimist's picture

I think Montravious Adams is being overlooked as well. On tape, he often has a high motor and obvious athleticism and quickness. Teams double-teamed him a LOT. Defensive line rookies rarely make an impact, but hey, here's to hoping he's the exception.

RCPackerFan's picture

I will be honest. I'm not expecting as much out of Adams early. With the players ahead of him already, I think it might take him a bit of time to crack the rotation. Also like you said rookie DL usually don't make an impact early. That being said Clark did play a lot early and improved as the season went on.
Right now Daniels, Clark, Francois and Lowry are all ahead of Adams. Guion would be if not for his suspension.

If Adams does earn time early though that could be really, really good for our defense. The better our DL is, the better our defense will be.

L's picture

Side note: I, personally, am expecting big things out of Dean Lowry this year.

RCPackerFan's picture

Me too. Along with Kenny Clark.

Clark really was playing good at the end of the season.

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



"A school without football is in danger of deteriorating into a medieval study hall. "
"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!"