December 10, 2018, 06:18:23 PM

Author Topic: Daniels out for weeks  (Read 467 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline mancl

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 684
  • Karma: +4/-0
Daniels out for weeks
« on: November 18, 2018, 10:20:22 AM »
The #Packers lost two starters in their brutal loss to the #Seahawks on Thursday. Along with TE Jimmy Graham (broken thumb), source said DE Mike Daniels is out a few weeks with a foot injury. He saw Dr. Robert Anderson and will get a timeline when he returns from the weekend off.

This is from Rappaport.

Adams hasn't shown anything so far but now is his chance.

Offline dannobanano

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4669
  • Karma: +14/-2
Re: Daniels out for weeks
« Reply #1 on: November 18, 2018, 10:25:19 AM »
They don't know exactly how many weeks as of yet. But when they do know, and if it's 4 or more weeks, I say shut him down and IR him. No sense in risking any further injury. Especially if the season is essentially over by the time he could come back.

They've got Looney and Simon on the PS. Might make sense to bring one up if Daniels is a long term no-go.

Offline mancl

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 684
  • Karma: +4/-0
Re: Daniels out for weeks
« Reply #2 on: November 18, 2018, 05:17:02 PM »
They need to get a DL active this week as they only have 4 Dl on the active roster who can play

Online Gregg

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2499
  • Karma: +9/-1
Re: Daniels out for weeks
« Reply #3 on: November 29, 2018, 03:38:23 PM »
I would not rush Daniels back.

He is too valuable.  And if we do go t a 4-3, which I hope we do, he is very good as a pass rushing DT.

With him, Clark and Wlkerson, all you need is another DE, and we may already have one in Perry.

Online ricky

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5573
  • Karma: +27/-5
Re: Daniels out for weeks
« Reply #4 on: November 29, 2018, 04:21:01 PM »
I would not rush Daniels back.

He is too valuable.  And if we do go t a 4-3, which I hope we do, he is very good as a pass rushing DT.

With him, Clark and Wlkerson, all you need is another DE, and we may already have one in Perry.

First, why would the 4-3 be better than the 3-4? Second, why would Perry be a possible solution at DE? His problem is staying healthy, and I don't see how a position change would alter that fact.
"My hopes are not always realized, but I always hope." Ovid

Online Gregg

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2499
  • Karma: +9/-1
Re: Daniels out for weeks
« Reply #5 on: November 29, 2018, 05:11:46 PM »
In my humble opinion, the 4-3, if you have the right people, is the best defense in the NFL.  It took the Giants to two Super Bowls.

The reason I like it is that you do not have to blitz, which means you can cover with seven.

In todays' game that is  good since with seven back you can play man to man or zone, or even mix it up with fire zones.  And you have enough guys to double team someone.  When you do blitz, its tough on the offense, since its harder to pick up when you need to account for four guys already.

Green Bay went to a 3-4  a couple of years after Jim Bates, a good defensive coach, left. He left when he did not get the HC job.  But when he left, they still played 4-3 with his assistants. The Bates version of the 4-3, which I read up on, is very much player profile reliant.  That is you have to have the correct personnel at each layer, and in some cases, at each position. Green Bay did not have the right player profiles to implement that defense.  So they dumped it for a 3-4.

In the Steve Spagnuolo 4-3 version, which he got from the late, great Jim Johnson, the profiles are not that stringent. I think we could get the right players in about a year, maybe two,  if we are aggressive and smart enough.

As for Perry, that is a suggestion.  Maybe, maybe not.
« Last Edit: November 29, 2018, 05:19:15 PM by Gregg »