Sacks: Where Is Aaron Kampman?

the Kampman experiment has failed

Harrison rushes every time for the steelers
why not Kampman?

Or if Peterson's "troublesome" back gives out. Because he's, you know, carrying the team. And some of those guys are heavy.

Mitchell M

by blackoutsox on Oct 9, 2009 10:24 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Exactly

I hear so much about what a defensive genius Capers is so I have to think there would be something Capers could do, so that Kampman can rush pretty much every play and our coverage won’t get burned because of it.

by packallday555 on Oct 9, 2009 11:09 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Harrison does not rush the passer every time

He just doesn’t. I’m not arguing that Kampman is being used to the best of his abilities but he doesn’t need to rush the passer every down. And Harrison certainly doesn’t rush on every play.

I don’t think he needs to rush on every down, but I would like to see him get a chance to put his hand down and rush the passer at least some of the time.

On the plus side, Jenkins is playing well :)

Frye is honestly gotta be one of the top 10 3rd Stringers in all of the NFL right now--colbyb

by verno329 on Oct 11, 2009 5:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Damn close

Did you watch them against the Lions today?? He probably rushes 80-90% of the time. But having him play back in coverage isn’t necessarily a bad thing either. He is a lot faster and more athletic then Kampman is. Now I’m not saying Kampman isn’t athletic, because he is, and I’m also not saying he does a poor job dropping back into coverage. He actually has looked good doing it so far, but he is so much better rushing the passer then he is dropping into coverage.

I would like to see Capers put his hand in the dirt as well. Maybe even line him up at LE in the 3-4 on passing downs and just shift the line to the left so he can line up with the RT or on the outside shoulder of the RT. And maybe line up in the 2-4-5 more allowing him to line up in something similar to the 4-3 which is what he used to do.

We just need to get him isolated with the T more then we have been doing. I feel like I heard so much about how he was going to bring blitzes to isolate Kampman vs. Loadholt (which would have been a sack fest for Kampman) and I didn’t ever see that happen. There was one time that Kampman was somewhat isolated against Loadholt but he had inside help from the G, and he still managed to pressure Favre.

We went to this new defense so we could have a more uptempo defense that brought a lot of pressure. This is what our defense looked like against the Bears in the 1st half until Bigby went down, and since then we’ve looked like our old defense of 08’, except we’re in a 3-4 as opposed to 4-3, and we’re playing more zone coverage as opposed to man-man.

I like the 3-4 I really do, but it doesn’t look like this defense will utilize Kampman’s strengths so far, and ultimately you want to have a system in which your best guys thrive in. Kampman has arguably been our best player on defense (maybe Woodson has been but you get my point). The last 3 years Kampman has the 3rd most sacks in the league. I can’t help but think about what our defense would look like with Jenkins, Raji, Pickett, and him on the line.

I think next week will really be telling in determining how effective we’ll be able to be in our 3-4. We’ll get Bigby back, which should eliminate some of the mental mistakes made in coverage for us and our dline just managed to shut down the best back in football. I just hope we do something to get Kampman more involved, because a player of his ability has to be utilized.

by packallday555 on Oct 11, 2009 10:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Just saw this

I agree with what you said

by blackoutsox on Oct 11, 2009 11:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I've seen every Steelers game for the last bunch of years

The Steelers are my second favorite team so I watch them every week. Harrison does rush a bunch, maybe not 80%, but he does rush a lot. His pass coverage is definitely better than Kampman’s but that’s to be expected.

As I said, I don’t think Kampman needs to rush on every single down, but I wish he was given the chance to put his hand down and rush on occasion. When Harrison is rushing he sometimes gets in a 3 point stance, so its not a requirement that Kampman can only be in a 2 point stance.

Frye is honestly gotta be one of the top 10 3rd Stringers in all of the NFL right now--colbyb

by verno329 on Oct 13, 2009 9:39 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

that is true

but regardless, he most certainly rushes more than Kampman, and he is a more complete linebacker than Kampman is.

I’d just not rather watch YOU KNOW WHO waltz aroudnd the pocket for seven seconds when Kampman is shuffling his feet twenty yards away in coverage

by blackoutsox on Oct 11, 2009 11:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Dom Capers isn't a blitzing coach, unfortunately.

by Thaddeus? on Oct 9, 2009 10:46 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

What?

Yes, he is. That was the sole reason MM brought him in. Because he brought with him a scheme that brings a lot of pressure, and hurries the QB. We saw him do that in our week 1 game but not since then (which is probably because Bigby is hurt).

by packallday555 on Oct 9, 2009 11:07 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

injuries can hurt any scheme

It is hard to blitz when your secondary is banged up (safeties). Still, in a conventional 4-3 defense, there are 4 linemen moving towards the QB. I can’t see why Kampman can’t be used more often to attack towards the line in the 3-4. He simply is not made to be a traditional LB. Let him rush the QB nearly every down. I may not know much, but this seems like his role in football. Let him have at it.

by starmark on Oct 9, 2009 11:19 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

geez.

The first three games he blitzed over 40% of the time. Just cause he makes a change for ONE game doesn’t mean he changed his entire scheme.

by TrevorR on Oct 9, 2009 10:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Kampman is one of my favorite players on the team

but I think we should trade him to a team that can better utilize his talents. Besides, he’s a free agent after this season and I’m guessing he’ll go for a 4-3 team (Which could be Minnesota seeing as how they seem to like picking up former Packers and could use another DE opposite Allen)

by Charlie Kelly on Oct 9, 2009 11:47 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I said that months ago and almost got Boo’d out of APC

"I agree but dont agree"

by juggernaut400 on Oct 9, 2009 1:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Money...

they aren’t going to have the money to keep signing guys like this without losing their own…He is going to command TOP dollar, I can’t see MN having the money to pay for another top guy there…and they don’t NEED him. It would be a waste of money with needs at other positions.

by TrevorR on Oct 9, 2009 10:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I agree

We need to trade him. I don’t think Kampmann is in favor of resigning with Green Bay due to the change to the 3-4 defense. I would not want to see Kampmann in Minesota, that would be devastating to the Packers who already have enough issues with their OL against Minnesota. On top of that, we would get the best trade value out of him compared to anyone else on the roster for consideration.

by Jabooty on Oct 9, 2009 12:35 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Well, the Pack could keep him, franchise tag him,

and then trade him in the off-season, ala’ Corey Williams. Regardless of how Kampman’s season goes, he’ll have a lot of trade value since it’s obvious his production is down this year due to the Packers switch to the 3-4.

Frankly, I think a trade now during the season is far more likely to not realise Kampman’s actual value since it reeks of desperation.

by 400metres on Oct 9, 2009 12:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

why is everything about the stat?

First off the we all know the injuries at Safety has put a big clamp on our blitzing. So for 3 1/2 of the first 4 games are… i dont want to say excusable but we have ran a different scheme than what we would be doing if everyone was healthy. With Bigby coming back the secondary should be able to step up and shut down all those open holes we have seen.. moving Collins back and having Bigby up.

But the thing is who cares how many sacks he gets? If he hits the QB 20 times and forces bad throws on say 10 of those and we get INTs which is better having the ball or the opponent moving back 7 yards? Exactly… a sack yeah its a good stat to have but having consistent pressure would be better even if they dont get to the QB .. I think the Bears game speaks as my biggest argument.. We only had 2 sacks but we had 4 AB hits and i cant find anything about pressured. But I am assuming that is higher as well.. the result 4 ints!!!!

by bizzle4 on Oct 9, 2009 4:00 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

A marvelous question

You wouldn’t expect a sports writer in Green Bay to forget that this is a team sport. But they do it all the time. I’m more surprised that Brandon quoted him. Simply looking at the stat tells you nothing about how the defense is playing. If you say we’re not getting pressure on the quarterback, I agree. But the sack count for one player is only a small piece of the puzzle.

What I would like to know is where is the 3-4 breaking down? We should be able to zone blitz even with Bigby out. The Packers brought six on several plays Monday night. Why didn’t they get to Favre? How does Kampman’s play figure in all of this? Quoting Gruden does not constitute reporting much less analysis.

by 50 years and Counting on Oct 9, 2009 7:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Vikings fan here so feel free to take all this with a grain of salt and is just my educated (but not expert) opinion.

The 3-4 scheme has come into vogue into the NFL for its ability to be more versatile between pass/rush with the same personnel on the field WHILE at the same time be more effective at disguising who actually is blitzing (if anyone). On top of that, you have likely, one more faster player covering more area so you cover more sideline to sideline at the mid-level range and are therefore more effective at taking away the mid-range routes and slot reciever route combos that have gained popularity.

The downsides to the 3-4 scheme though are 1. it requires very specific tweener personnel to be effective (think Dumervil, Terrell Suggs, Demarcus Ware, etc) and 1 REALLY GOOD Safety; 2. it has a nasty tendency to be weak against big mauler Front lines loaded with either an unbalanced line or a two TE set to one side; and 3. it mandates you have the biggest, baddest most fattest NT you can find to cover both A gaps effectively and challenge the interior linemen.

The problem i’ve seen personally though, is that it just falls apart when either the faster or more athletic OLB goes down OR the aforementioned stud safety goes down. Without either, generating QB pressure and the covering more field advantage go away. Ed Reed and Troy Polumalu MAKE those D’s work. Troy goes down, Pittsburgh’s D starts to be easier to beat. Atari Bigby goes out, and there goes your best safety and you are left with the backup who just doesnt have the closing speed, smarts or skills to be up to task. 3-4 safeties are often called on to drop down and play as an 8th man in the box, then drop back and bracket cover. You gotta be good to do that well.

Aaron Kampman is supposed to be the athletic OLB. Problem is that he’s simply NOT FAST ENOUGH or physically dominating enough to fill the bill. Take 1 or 2 steps off the line – he’s too slow. Have him stand upright at the line and he’s unable to get lower than the lineman at the right moment to generate leverage. Dumervil and Ware succeed because they are faster AND they are either short (Dumervil) to get under the lineman OR they are physically dominating (ware) and can push the OL as much as they push him.

Ngata, Richard Seymour, etc fit the bill as a 3-4 NT. Your Rookie NT just isnt experienced enough to dominate as well as needed.

Bottom line: Between injuries and a lack of adequate talent, your 3-4 defense is just not ready to be good yet and will take a few years to solidify. If it ever does. You shouldnt be suprised it isnt working. Kampman is the wrong type of guy to play 3-4, Atari Bigby is injured and is arguably not good enough to give your defense the flexibility it needs to be truly effective and your NT is not experience or big enough to dominate the interior at the NFL yet. The result is that they either have to sell out to pressure, sell out to stuff the run or sell out to stop the pass instead of being able to play disguised base coverages.

We are the vikings.......resistance is futile.

by Hoss-Drone on Oct 9, 2009 4:46 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs

You're Right and Wrong

Everything you say about the ways the 3-4 defense can be successful are correct, but like most Vikings fans, your wrong about the Packers personnel in some areas because you just don’t know enough about them, no offense. Number one, Bigby is not the best safety, Nick Collins is. The problem the Packers have is after Collins and Bigby there is no one, so with Bigby out Collins has to play more of the SS role instead of being back and stopping that long Brett Favre TD on Monday. Bigby is actually a perfect fit in the 3-4 zone blitz scheme Capers runs and you could tell by how well the defense did against Chicago when he was healthy. He’s a great in the box safety just not a great cover safety.

Aaron Kampman definitely does not fit this scheme but it isn’t because he lacks physicality. He’s more physical than Ware and Dumervill, he just isn’t use to rushing standing up and dropping back into coverage. He needs to be in a 3 or 4 point stance, but your notion that he isn’t physically dominating is just false. The guy at DE is a top 5 player against the run, at OLB he’s still good against the run because of his physicality that you think he doesn’t have, but he can’t cover or rush like he traditionally did.

Ryan Pickett isn’t a pure 3-4 NT but he can definitely do it. He just needs time. Capers compared him to Keith Traylor so that’s pretty good company. As you could see on Monday, Pickett absolutely smothered the inside and AP had his worst game in a year. Is he Ngata? No way, but he’s solid and will improve imo. In regards to Seymour, he isn’t even a NT, he’s a DE in a 3-4 and 4-3 if need be so I don’t get the comparison. You also talk about Raji not being ready as I’ve heard other Vikings fans say before. Raji has pretty much only played DE and DT on nickel because of his holdout and sprained ankle so there is really no way you can claim he can’t play NT. You also say Raji isn’t big enough to play NT. The guy is 340lbs. of stoutness. He’s only played in two games and he isn’t even playing NT cause the NT is only needed for about 35 plays a game and those plays all go to Pickett so wait until next year to say Raji can’t play NT, but to say he isn’t big enough is hilarious. The guy overtakes and pushes back every lineman he comes across.

Bottom line: You’re right that the Packers aren’t ready to be a dominant 3-4 defense but you’re wrong about why in regards to most of the personnel. Bigby fits this defense perfectly, he just needs to get healthy. Kampman is a fish out of water so you have that. Pickett is solid and will only get better and Raji is the biggest strongest DT to come out in a while. The only thing that will stop Raji is himself eventually. If the Packers are fully healthy, they would be a pretty good defense but no one is ever healthy in the NFL so that is where they problem’s at. But to say Bigby and Raji don’t fit, and Kampman isn’t physical isn’t true. The defense will become much better when Bigby is healthy and I have full confidence that Raji will become a beast.

by GGGamer on Oct 9, 2009 6:15 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs

You nailed it Hoss

The Packers do not have the personnel to play 3 – 4. You can’t force a scheme onto the personnel you have. I’d gladly have the Vikings take Kampman into their 4 – 3 as a DL, but he is not a 3 – 4 LB. Raji may be 340, but that doesn’t make him a good NT and capable of anchoring a 3 – 4 defense now, or for several seasons. Packer fans, why do you think Capers is running to the big okie alignment so quickly? And when you have 8 DL/LBs on the field is it any wonder why the Pack is suseptible to giving up the passing yardage. I have said it before. I there are wannabe teams that don’t have the right personnel but go to the 3 – 4 just because Baltimore and Pittsburgh can make it work. Well look at what happened to Pitt this season when they lost Polamulo. Even they can’t make the scheme work great without the right personnel.

by Belarus on Oct 9, 2009 8:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Belarus

You always have something to say about Raji. Who cares if he’s 340 that doesn’t make him capable? You’re right, the weight alone doesn’t make him capable but your Viking friend made a comment that he isn’t big or strong enought to be a NT. False and False.

You’ve now commented several times on this board about Raji not being this or not being that (as well as Matthews, nice TD huh?). I realize that it is hard to swallow that the Packers got him with the 9th pick and that doesn’t bode well for the Vikings in the future so quit ripping the guy. He’s played in two games and doesn’t get any base NT snaps because Pickett takes all of them so why do you keep coming on here saying that he won’t be able to do it for several seasons?

I’ve stated numerous times (and you can find the quotes for yourself if you don’t believe me) that every teammate, coach, and personnel man has said that Raji is a 340lb. NT version of Warren Sapp. So enough with your criticisms, you’ve never even seen him play because if you did, you would see the offensive lineman being shoved back 4 yards on his initial push. I think weve all established that you know your stuff when it comes to the Vikings but you definitely don’t know your stuff when it comes to the Packers so quit making these pretty close to absolute comments you always make.

Plus the big okie was primarily ran against the Rams because with Bigby out there is only one good safety on the field. Chillar is a better option against a running team than Martin as you could see on Monday. The big okie was only used for like 3 plays against the Vikings. That has nothing to do with the 3-4 scheme and everything to do with Bigby being out.

by GGGamer on Oct 10, 2009 11:20 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

And you can come on here and say whatever you want, that’s your right and it makes for good converstation, but please please please quit coming on here saying that Raji (or Matthews) isn’t good/ or ready to be good. I’ve looked back on at least 5 of your posts that have said Raji and Matthews aren’t good (or ready).

Most of us Packer fans on here have seen Raji in a couple of pre-season games, a couple of regular season games, and at practice and we know that the guy is an absolute beast. He’s had a bad sprained ankle and he still controls the offensive lineman in front of him on just about every play. You, on the other hand, have not seen Raji or Matthews play like we have so quit making concrete absolute statements that he won’t be ready for several seasons. That’s ridiculous.

You guys got a great pick up in the first round with Percy Harvin, I’m a Packer fan and I realize that. Well the Packers got two great pickups in Raji and Matthews so take out the bias and realize that those are two really nice pickups for the Packers just like Harvin is for the Vikings. It’s as simple as that. You guys come on here and make pointed statements about our team when you might see them play a few times a year. I’ve watched 3 of the Vikings games this season and I don’t even go on the Vikings board and post concrete statements because I expect most people over there know more about the Vikings than I do.

by GGGamer on Oct 10, 2009 11:37 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

He never will

Those Favre fans want to try and find anything they can that might be questionable about the Packers and exploit it. Obviously he doesn’t know much or hasn’t been watching the games like all of us have, if he truly feels Raji and Matthews aren’t good or aren’t gonna be good. We have all seen what they have done in their limited time, and they both look legit.

by packallday555 on Oct 10, 2009 1:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

You obviously missed my statement about Matthews

in my post “Comments on the Game”. I don’t imagine that means a thing to you now, but I thought I’d correct your misquote anyhow. It is true that I have consistently said neither Raji nor Matthews are ready to make a huge contribution this season. One strip doesn’t change that, but I do think more highly of Matthews now after watching him on Monday night.

Raji is full of potential. So were Vince Young and Reggie Bush when they came into the league. I hope he works out better for you than those guys did for their teams. But right now I don’t see it. The biggest justification offered for his promise, other than quotes by so called experts, was his dominate preseason play. Preseason stats are relatively meaningless. Didn’t the Pack play all preseason without giving up a Rodgers sack?

I expect Raji to improve steadily for the rest of this season. Maybe I’ll be proven wrong and he’ll become a monster this year. Time will tell.

by Belarus on Oct 10, 2009 5:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hmm

So what are these reasons that Raji can’t be a dominant NT. It’s kind of telling that you say that, and then procede to not explain any of those so-called reasons..Haha no being 340 lbs. doesn’t make you good and that’s not what we based picking him off of. You couldn’t have watched him play at all Monday night if you really feel he isn’t good. The guy is athletic. He is 340 lbs. and playing a DE position. Typically DEs in the 3-4 system are 305 lbs., like Jenkins. He will start getting reps at NT and if his play so far this season is an indication of what is to come, then he will be a damn good one.

We may not have all the personnel but we have most of it, and we have the parts that are most crucial. Dline and safties. The ILBs are questionable, but Hawk and Barnett looked pretty good against the Vikes so who knows. Kampman could get pressure on the QB, and for the most part has when he has rushed, the problem is we’re only rushing him like 60-70% of the time. I guess we’ll see because the coaching staff will definitely be doing something to get Kampman more involved. I’m not excited to see us week 5 against the Lions. Bigby will be back. Raji will be 100%, and will play much more. We’ll see how the defense does then I guess.

by packallday555 on Oct 10, 2009 1:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Exactly

Belarus comes on here all the time and states that Raji and Matthews aren’t anything. He won’t answer how many Packer games he’s actually watched though. He comes on here and bashes the 3-4 defense and Raji repeatedly and it’s getting ridiculous. The funny thing is that he said I was lying when I said the 3-4 defense is harder to read than the 4-3. Go read any Vikings players comment on the 3-4 or Cutler or whoever and they’ll tell you that it brings more looks. Don’t let the facts get in the way though I guess. I don’t go on the Vikings board and say the Vikings shouldn’t be playing the 4-3 so I find it funny how he loves to come on here and say how the Packers don’t fit this and that and Raji can’t be a good NT. I can’t wait to see what Raji and Matthews do in the future. Like you said, they both look like players.

by GGGamer on Oct 10, 2009 1:55 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Responses in order

3 – That’s the number of Packers games I have watched this year. Chicago, Cincinnati, and the Vikings.

Raji got pushed all over the field when he got in on Monday. Usually # 90 was laying on his belly under Hutchinson. But he was also muscled around by John Sullivan (1st year as a starter) and Phil Loadholt (rookie). He had one tackle in the first half about 7 yards downfield on a AD run to the 2 yard line. Raji also had a tackle in the second half, but I can’t remember the play right now. He doesn’t get penetration to the passer, and he doesn’t seem exceptionally good going laterally down the line of scrimmage, although I haven’t seen enough of him to tell. He is plenty strong to play the position. Remember, I have never said he won’t eventually be very good. He will. Raji is just not ready right now to be dominate.

The 3 – 4 is no harder to read than the 4 – 3. It’s just different. The media loves to hype games, so comments like the 3 – 4 is tough make the news. The biggest difference is you know where one more pass rusher is coming from. So what? That didn’t seem to help the Pack on Monday. The Vikings have played against three different 3 – 4s this year and won all three games. That is a fact that you seem not to let get in the way. The toughest defense we have played so far was the 49ers. They have an outstanding front 7, especially their LBs. That is a game on the Packers schedule that should concern you.

by Belarus on Oct 11, 2009 9:53 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

“Raji got pushed all over the field when he got in on Monday. Usually # 90 was laying on his belly under Hutchinson. But he was also muscled around by John Sullivan (1st year as a starter) and Phil Loadholt (rookie). He had one tackle in the first half about 7 yards downfield on a AD run to the 2 yard line.”

Well, I’m just not sure what you were watching…Raji lined up at RE once, and that was in a short yardage situation. He ended up on his belly because he plunged under trying to creat a big pile up. He never lined up at NT in the game Monday night. And when he did go against Sullivan when we lined up in the 2-5-4, he was certainly not pushed around. Sullivan was pushed around by him the whole game, and Pickett for that matter.

Raji went up against Loadholt and Herrea pretty much the whole game, and was double teamed by those 2 pretty much the whole game. He got around Loadholt pretty much everytime (and Loadholt hooked him pretty much every time as a result of this, unfortunately it was never called.) I think it also says a lot that the Vikes felt the need to double team him nearly every play.

I’m not trying to be an ass, but your evaluation of Raji was pretty off. He wasn’t “pushed around” really by anybody. Our dline actually dominated the battle at the line on Monday. Now I know you might say, not on passing plays, but I would blame Capers for that. He consistently only brought 3 guys on passing plays, and 90% of the time 5 guys are going to be able to block 3 guys. Especially when our best pass rushing dlineman, Jenkins is being doubled by McKinnie and Hutchinson.

You guys have played against 3 3-4 defenses, but before our game when you actually played against a good one you struggled. Ours is much better then Cleveland’s, and a lot of Packer fans and football minds thought our defense might pose somewhat of a problem for you guys. And we did exactly what we wanted to do on defense. Stop AP and make Favre beat us. Unfortunately, Harris picked a bad night to play like shit, and we were again without Bigby.

by packallday555 on Oct 11, 2009 4:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

oh yeah, the team that stuffed the best running back in the NFL the whole game

was getting pushed around

go back to your own site

by blackoutsox on Oct 11, 2009 5:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

The Pack sold out to stop the run

and lost the game. It wasn’t nearly as close as the final score.

by Belarus on Oct 11, 2009 7:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Not really though

We had 7 in the box pretty much the whole game. Whether you want to admit it or not, our dline really did a great job against the Vikes run game. Jenkins handled Hutch pretty well, and Pickett, Raji, Jolly did the same to the guys they went up against.

Most of the game we actually only rushed 3-4 guys and dropped the rest of our players back. If we had been selling out to stop the run, then we would have gotten gashed much more on play-action passes then we did. Favre did pretty much all his damage from the shotgun on 3rd down and 7+’s.

by packallday555 on Oct 11, 2009 10:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I wouldn't say that either

The pass defense didn’t struggle to overcompensate the run defense. The pass defense really struggled with the failed SS Derrick Martin experience.

Also, the score was as close as the game. If the Vikings really dominated, then they could have managed better than one first down in the 4th quarter, and ran out the clock. Instead they left the door open, the Packers made a run, and were one possession from tying the game. You’ve still got to play all 4 quarters.

Sign up for a free account on Acme Packing Company.

by Brandon on Oct 11, 2009 10:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Exactly

Our pass coverage problems came in large part because Martin had NO idea where he was supposed to be on the field. Harris got beat on that play, but Martin was supposed to have help over the top. The 50 yard pass to Harvin was also on Martin. He looked lost out there. We really didn’t sell out to stop the run. Our dline just got good pentration, and sealed up all the lanes.

And your spot on with your 2nd point as well. The game was not a blowout by any means. Like you said it came down to one possession, and had we scored on one of our 3 miscues in Vikes territory it would have been a different game.

by packallday555 on Oct 11, 2009 11:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

yup

Childress showed he is not an elite coach (yet, for you Viking fans) when he ran Peterson into a three and out on three plays in the fourth quarter very quickly.

Like Brandon said, you gotta play four quarters

by blackoutsox on Oct 11, 2009 11:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

One more thing

You and others here have made the conversation more about Raji than it started out a couple of weeks ago. At that time I was commenting on a 3 – 4 scheme needing a dominant NT. I said “Pickett and Raji are not dominant at the NT position”. They aren’t. After that conversation I have said many times that I believe Raji will be an very good NT someday.

For me, this conversation has never been about any one player. I started out criticizing McCarthy and TT for their decision to go to a 3 – 4 defense. I have explained, as Hoss did above, that I don’t believe the Packers have the personnel to play a 3 – 4. However, the Pack would have an awesome front four if you had Pickett and Raji side be side in the middle of a 4 – 3 scheme with Kampman (I used to hate watching that guy hit our QB all game long) and Jenkins bookending them, and Jolly getting a lot of playing time in a rotation . Hawk, Barnett, and Matthews at LB. Woodson, Harris, Bigby, and Collins deep. That’s a nice defense.

by Belarus on Oct 11, 2009 10:11 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

You're Changing Belarus

You just stated a couple posts up from here that Raji won’t be ready for “several seasons”. Now you’re saying he’s just not ready to be dominant this year. I totally disagree with the several seasons comment for many reasons, but I do agree with him not being dominant this season. And no one said he dominated pre-season because as you mentioned pre-season means nothing.

He missed the first two pre-season games because he held out for a few weeks. I said weve seen him in a couple of pre-season games, a couple of regular season games and practice, and the guy is gonna be good unless he turns into Justin Harrell injury wise. You seem to forget that the guy held out for 3 weeks and then sprained his ankle and was out another 3 weeks. A month and a half is a lot for a rookie to miss in his first two months of the season so your observations of his play don’t mean a whole lot at the moment.

I also do agree with you that the Packers personnel overall right now would be better suited to play a 4-3 but your comment once again on the Vikings beating three 3-4 teams because the scheme isn’t as good is ridiculous. The Browns might be the worst team in the league regardless of scheme and the 49ers wouldve run away with the game if it wasn’t for 4 dropped INT’s. You can blame the Packers troubles on the o-line and Bigby being hurt, not on the 3-4 scheme. The Packers still had a chance to win and Rodgers had two seconds to throw the ball everytime and Derrick Martin was out of place on half of the pass plays that Favre exploited. Once again, not due to the scheme. In fact, didn’t AP have his worst game in a long time in part because Pickett, Raji, Jolly and Jenkins absolutely stuffed the middle and the LB’s filled nicely?

Also why would the media hype up the 3-4 scheme over the 4-3? I’ve never heard of conspiracy in the NFL to promote schemes. We can argue this day in and day out but the fact of the matter is the offense has to be more sure where certain players are coming from against a 3-4 than a 4-3. Am I saying it is a huge huge difference? No, but it is harder to decipher a 3-4. It’s a fact, watch some tape and if you’ve ever played a high level of football you would know that.

Finally, what is this quotes by so called experts when I told you what his teammates and coaches said about him? I’ve played with and against the best LT in the league right now and a few current NBA players before they went professional. You know if a guy has greatness in him being a teammate or a coach. If EVERY single one of Raji’s teammates and coaches says the guy is gonna be special, that isn’t just “so called experts” making a prediction, that is people who have played with him just stating what they know to be true.

Comparing Raji to Vince Young and Reggie Bush is also ridiculous. There were a few teams who wouldn’t have picked up Young because he didn’t play in that great of a pro-style offense and he didn’t have a father or a role model that helped him to take discipline. A lot of people, including myself, thought Bush was great in college cause he could run faster backwards than a lot of them could run forwards but that wasn’t gonna work in the pros. I said he would have trouble running in between the tackles and he has. Now Raji on the other hand is a massive strong man who will be doing the same thing in the pros that he did in college. There’s a big difference between a DT and a QB when you move up to the pros.

We will obviously have to wait and see how good these guys will be down the line but your comment about Raji not being good for several seasons might be one of the dumbest comments I’ve heard on here in a while. If you can give me two solid reasons why he won’t be good I will listen. Here are the reasons he will be good. 1. Super strong legs 2. More poweful than anyone he will line up against on a regular basis 3. Probably the quickest DT over 330 in the league 4. He’s dominated on every level he has ever played on 5. Everyone who has ever played or coached him says he will be a special player.

by GGGamer on Oct 11, 2009 11:45 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

You work hard to argue GC

Raji won’t be ready this year, or for several seasons. Maybe never. Maybe this year. Who knows? Quit your whining. My point is that the 4 – 3 is a better scheme than the 3 – 4for the Packers personnel RIGHT NOW.

by Belarus on Oct 11, 2009 3:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Enlighten us

Why don’t you tell us what those “many reasons” are for you thinking Raji will not ever be dominant.

I see the other points your trying to make and for the most part agree with them. I think your talking out of your butt about Raji though. You have yet to state any reasons for why he won’t be dominant and your evaluation of him was way off. Based off of this and your past comments, it seems like you just hope Raji and Matthews don’t turn out to be good players because of your dislike for TT.

There are many things that TT has done that I COMPLETELY disagree with. (Like getting rid of Smith, who looked like he could possibly beat Bigby out for the starting job.) I also don’t like he always has to find “versatile o-lineman” who can play multiple positions. But him picking Raji and Matthews has looked very good so far. They fit our new defensive scheme perfectly and have both done some good things thus far.

I guess what I’m trying to get at is that I get you don’t like TT, and I don’t have a problem with you criticizing the things he has done wrong in your opinion, but if you have really watched us this year, then it you would know that him picking Matthews and Raji has looked like a great move so far.

by packallday555 on Oct 11, 2009 4:51 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Reread everything I have posted

and quit being nonsensical. I have never said what you wrote 4 paragraphs about.

by Belarus on Oct 11, 2009 7:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I’m not being nonsensical Belarus. You have been quick to criticize Matthews and Raji this year. You did most of your criticizing of the 2 in another thread and I really have no interest and going back to re-read it.

Again, you have yet to explain why Raji won’t be good this year. I went back and watched the game today, and Raji really looked very good.

I agree with most of your points about the 3-4 and 4-3. There really was no reason for us to switch to it. The only reason we weren’t successful in the 4-3 last year was injuries to some of our key players. We would have probably been very good in it this year. i just don’t agree with your points about Raji and I really do want to know your reasons for why Raji won’t be good this year.

by packallday555 on Oct 11, 2009 10:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Percy Harvin is horrible

he will never be good

by blackoutsox on Oct 11, 2009 5:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

And quit loosely interpretting what I say

and then putting your words in my mouth. I said the Vikings beat three 3-4 teams period. Not because the scheme isn’t as good. You really need to go to an anger management counselor.

The 3 – 4 is certainly not unbeatable. Every team in the league is figuring it out. Look at what the Bengals did to the Ravens today. The Packers are coming late to the 3 – 4 party.

by Belarus on Oct 11, 2009 3:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

OK

If you quit making concrete statements about the Packers and quit saying what Raji will become and instead say what you think he will become based on this, this, and this, then I will not argue but debate. The problem you have, and a bunch of people on this board have made this same point, is that you make pointed statements over and over again.

I listed five things that lead me to believe that Raji will be a very good player. You have yet to list one thing that would lead you to believe he won’t be except backing up your other Viking friend who made the dumb comment that he wasn’t big or strong enough.

Finally, your dislike for the 3-4 is once again pointless. You state (in one of your concrete statements that you love to make) that every team in the league is figuring it out and you point to the Ravens being beat today to say that, yet a couple weeks ago you were saying that the Ravens play more 4-3 now 3-4. Make up your mind. The Ravens had a great 3-4 defense last season and now they have an above average hybrid. It basically comes down to coaches and players. If a team has a bunch of good d-lineman than a 4-3 is better. If a team has a bunch of good LB’s than a 3-4 might be better. I will never understand your 3-4 hate. If I could have one guy run a defense for the Packers, it would be Rex Ryan bringing in a 3-4. The NFL always changes defenses (3-4 to 4-3 back to 3-4 again) and offenses (all the west coast variations) and right now teams are finding a good use for the 3-4. If you have the personnel and coaches to do it, why not? And I’m not talking just about the Packers.

by GGGamer on Oct 11, 2009 3:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

So Finally

List the reasons why Raji won’t be a good player for “several seasons” like you stated above and I will debate instead of argue.

Also please list the reasons why the 3-4 is a bad defense (outside of the point you keep making about the Packers not having the personnel) and the 4-3 is a better defense. Once again I will debate and not argue. I don’t need to here that the personnel don’t fit here and there. Just tell me why you think the 3-4 is a bad defense.

by GGGamer on Oct 11, 2009 3:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

From my post above of this morning

Raji got pushed all over the field when he got in on Monday. Usually # 90 was laying on his belly under Hutchinson. But he was also muscled around by John Sullivan (1st year as a starter) and Phil Loadholt (rookie). He had one tackle in the first half about 7 yards downfield on a AD run to the 2 yard line. Raji also had a tackle in the second half, but I can’t remember the play right now. He doesn’t get penetration to the passer, and he doesn’t seem exceptionally good going laterally down the line of scrimmage, although I haven’t seen enough of him to tell. He is plenty strong to play the position. Remember, I have never said he won’t eventually be very good. He will. Raji is just not ready right now to be dominate.

Why ask for what I have already posted?

by Belarus on Oct 11, 2009 7:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah

But you really haven’t stated anything Belarus, that would lead me to believe that Raji won’t be a good player soon. The Vikings game was his second game back from injury and I just watched a couple plays on my dvr and he wasn’t under Hutchinsons belly and getting pushed around by Sullivan the whole game. In fact he was on the left side going up against Herrera and Loadholt more than anyone else. Once again the guy has missed 70% of his rookie season in practice and games so far. He’s only gonna get better.

You didn’t answer my question as to why the 3-4 is so much worse than the 4-3. I agree that the Packers would have a great d-line with Kamp, Raji, Pick, and Jenkins but I’m talking in general about the two schemes. Please let me know.

by GGGamer on Oct 11, 2009 10:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Belarus

I just saw your awesome post to me after the Vikings win over the Packers. I knew your true colors would become more apparent. You try to act civil on here and I said to myself, if the Vikings win he’s gonna be on here in two seconds going blah blah blah Favre is great and the Pack suck. You proved me right. I just hope your like 15 acting like that cause if you’re an adult, your pathetic. And just wait and see a little bit. Theres plenty left to the season and you guys keep preaching Super Bowl. Give it time. You will fade.

by GGGamer on Oct 15, 2009 5:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I agree

I don’t know if the change to the 3-4 was needed either. Just in 07’ our defense was 6th in scoring defense and 11th in total defense. Now in 08’ those numbers dropped but that was largely due to injury.

I have thought about Jenkins, Pickett, Raji, and Kampman as a front four, and really that would be scary. Even Jolly has looked great this year and he could rotate in there as well. It would be damn hard to run on that front four, and with Kampman and Jenkins on the edge, you would have to think we could have a great pass rush.

But on the flip side, our 3-4 defense has looked very good at times as well. With Bigby, Capers calls games much more aggressive, and we were much more successful during that period as well. We just need to hope that after Bigby gets back, that him and Collins can manage to play the rest of the year.

I think you might be a bit surprised when you guys come to Lambeau. With Bigby in there, Capers will be much more aggressive and that’s what we need on defense.

by packallday555 on Oct 11, 2009 4:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

the thing that pushed me over the top in having the 34 instead of the 43

is that we now have capers intead of sanders

by blackoutsox on Oct 11, 2009 5:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Of course

But we were also looking at coordinators who run 4-3 defenses as well in the offseason.

by packallday555 on Oct 11, 2009 10:55 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

"I'm not excited to see us week 5 agains the Lions"?

typo?

by blackoutsox on Oct 10, 2009 4:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Bottom line: Between injuries and a lack of adequate talent, your 3-4 defense is just not ready to be good yet and will take a few years to solidify.

That’s what I’ve been hearing from numerous sports analysts ever since the Pack announced that they were going to go to a 3-4 defense. And it’s shown to be true. As fans, we all seem ready to have a coaches or players head on a stick if something doesn’t work out right away. I’m a patient man, though; I’m willing to have a mediocre year this year if it means that we’ll have a stellar, solid defense in the following year, and for years to come.

Besides, it’s the offense that has me more worried right now.

by Mark Y on Oct 10, 2009 3:57 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Haha

Well first off, there should be no questions about our d-lineman being able to hold the line because we just held the great AP to 2.2 ypc. Too say Pickett is not good is ridiculous. He owned Sullivan. And your 100% wrong on Raji. They guy has pretty much dominated opposig o-lineman when he has played, and did just that againt Loadholt. He is the prototypical 3-4 NT, and will eventually begin to get snaps there.

Kampman is fast and physical enough (physicality is why he is such a good pass rusher). The problem is we are dropping him into coverage way too much. He still doesn’t look natural or comfortable doing it.

And we have “one REALLY GOOD” saftey as well. His name is Nick Collins, he had 9 INTs last year which was tied for the same amount as this guy named Ed Reed. We just haven’t been able to utilize him because Bigby went down, and he is playing a different role then he would if Bigby were out there.

I agree we might not be ready to be a dominant 3-4 but we can certainly be a very good one and half a defense that ranks in the top half of the league. Bigby is good enough to give our defense the flexibility it needs. Did you watch the first half of the Bears game? The game where they had only 2 points at halftime? Our defense looked very, very good. Then Bigby went down and we started to play more poorly. And let me remind that was against a very good QB. Your right to a degree about the NT position. Pickett is good but he is not a Wilfork, Hampton, or Ngata. He pushes the C back pretty much every play, but he doesn’t push them 3-4 steps back those other 3 I listed normally do. Now Raji, can and probably will be that dominant guy. I don’t think he’s even played a snap at NT yet in the regular season, but when starts playing there he’ll be dominant. I don’t know if you watched him at all Monday night but he looked very good, tossing his block to the side or pushing him back.

Your evaluation is good but you don’t quite know enough about our personnel. If there is any position that is iffy for us, it’s the ILB position.

by packallday555 on Oct 10, 2009 1:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs