When starting a backup center, the last thing you want to face is a 3-4 defense with a massive NT lined up right on top of him all game long. Unfortunately, Green Bay is a 3-4 team (coached by ex-Steeler D.C. Dom Capers) and has gigantic NT's like B.J. Raji and Ryan Pickett.
Last week, we beat the Jets by pounding them into submission. We ran the ball up the gut a lot, even using a sort of reverse-wishbone type of formation on numerous occassions in which Arians employed...gasp...two fullbacks at a time! I don't think that is the way to attack the Pack, though (I don't have a problem with it in short yardage or goalline situations, however).
I think, to ease up pressure on Legursky, we should use a lot of 11 personnel (single RB, single TE). Spread 'em out. If we used 21 personnel (2 RB, 1 TE) or 12 personnel (1 RB, 2 TE), then the Packers would remain in their standard 3-4 with a big ol' NT right on top of Legursky as he snaps the ball.
However, if we go 3-wide as I mentioned earlier, the Pack likes to switch to an 2-4-5 defense. In this formation, the DT's line up opposite Kemoeatu and Foster, with no one right on top of Legursky. In this situation, Legursky simply has to surmise if any of the linebackers are coming on an inside blitz (he should be able to handle that), or if not, he could provide double team assistance to Kemo or Foster as they try to fend off those big ol' DT's. Keep the TE (Miller) to Clay Matthews' side in order to offer assistance via a chip block on his way out into his pattern.
Ward, Wallace, and Sanders will be covered by 3 accomplished corners in Woodson, Williams, and Shields, but that's nothing more than they had to face recently with the likes of Revis, Cromartie, and Coleman. I'm not saying that we should necessarily go pass-happy when we are 3 wide either...I think we should be able to run on them out of 11 personnel as well. Just a thought...
Last week, we beat the Jets by pounding them into submission. We ran the ball up the gut a lot, even using a sort of reverse-wishbone type of formation on numerous occassions in which Arians employed...gasp...two fullbacks at a time! I don't think that is the way to attack the Pack, though (I don't have a problem with it in short yardage or goalline situations, however).
I think, to ease up pressure on Legursky, we should use a lot of 11 personnel (single RB, single TE). Spread 'em out. If we used 21 personnel (2 RB, 1 TE) or 12 personnel (1 RB, 2 TE), then the Packers would remain in their standard 3-4 with a big ol' NT right on top of Legursky as he snaps the ball.
However, if we go 3-wide as I mentioned earlier, the Pack likes to switch to an 2-4-5 defense. In this formation, the DT's line up opposite Kemoeatu and Foster, with no one right on top of Legursky. In this situation, Legursky simply has to surmise if any of the linebackers are coming on an inside blitz (he should be able to handle that), or if not, he could provide double team assistance to Kemo or Foster as they try to fend off those big ol' DT's. Keep the TE (Miller) to Clay Matthews' side in order to offer assistance via a chip block on his way out into his pattern.
Ward, Wallace, and Sanders will be covered by 3 accomplished corners in Woodson, Williams, and Shields, but that's nothing more than they had to face recently with the likes of Revis, Cromartie, and Coleman. I'm not saying that we should necessarily go pass-happy when we are 3 wide either...I think we should be able to run on them out of 11 personnel as well. Just a thought...

Comment