Is Fangio doing too much

[Mel B.]

Can Fangio 'head coach' from the booth or does he have to be on the field as the HC?

[Peerless]

Can Fangio 'head coach' from the booth or does he have to be on the field as the HC?

I think it would be too difficult.

It's very important for them to be on the sideline. They can talk to coordinators and players in person on adjustments and such. From the booth, they can only talk to those who have a headset, and there could always be comm delays / failures.

[whynot162]

If Fangio had been a HC before then he may be ok doing both. I have just been thinking that during the week he has all these other duties, and is in control of the D and the DC is the one who is spending most of the time with the guys. the two should work together for the game plan etc. but the D while holding GreenBay down, did not have any big plays that i remember. but i only got to see part of the one game. After all he sasid he could make miller better, what, turn him into a coverage guy?

[johnlimburg]

If Fangio had been a HC before then he may be ok doing both. I have just been thinking that during the week he has all these other duties, and is in control of the D and the DC is the one who is spending most of the time with the guys. the two should work together for the game plan etc. but the D while holding GreenBay down, did not have any big plays that i remember. but i only got to see part of the one game. After all he sasid he could make miller better, what, turn him into a coverage guy?

The role of an outside linebacker will usually call for them to occasionally be in coverage, and Miller has played coverage snaps dating back to the days Wade Phillips was here. Last year it became a bit of a taking point as to why our coaches "sucked", and it was a reason listed, but the position Miller plays will call for him to be in coverage a small number of snaps per game, it isn't anything new. I also don't see how blaming coaches for the lack of sacks makes any sense when Miller is getting plenty of chances to rush the passer, and plenty of one on one match ups, at some point players need to make plays.

[Southern Bronco]

"I have to say, this is one of the cleanest games... it's the cleanest I think my jersey has ever looked. I think I maybe hit the ground once, took one shot. I'm ecstatic. I've been at this for a long time and to go home with my body feeling this good is a credit to the offensive line. So, I'm feeling really good. I'm going to go home and drink some scotch and watch some Philly tape." - Aaron Rodgers after facing the Broncos in week 3, 2019.

I can’t thank Rodgers enough for that quote. If that doesn’t light a fire under Elway’s/Fangio’s/Miller’s/Chubb’s butt- literally nothing ever will....

[Acedude]

I can’t thank Rodgers enough for that quote. If that doesn’t light a fire under Elway’s/Fangio’s/Miller’s/Chubb’s butt- literally nothing ever will....

Well said . . . . . . .

[KWHIT97]

Von and Chubb should never be in coverage, literally never. They get paid to rush the passer, that’s what they should be doing on 100% of pass plays

[johnlimburg]

Von and Chubb should never be in coverage, literally never. They get paid to rush the passer, that’s what they should be doing on 100% of pass plays

Schematically this doesn't work. Playing OLB in any scheme will pretty much call for you at some point in some capacity to play coverage snaps. If we made Von and Chubb defensive ends, Chubb could do it, then yes you make a valid point, and they wouldn't play coverage. But as linebackers, it is a small part of their job description.

[Fantaztic7]

Von and Chubb should never be in coverage, literally never. They get paid to rush the passer, that’s what they should be doing on 100% of pass plays

Schematically this doesn't work. Playing OLB in any scheme will pretty much call for you at some point in some capacity to play coverage snaps. If we made Von and Chubb defensive ends, Chubb could do it, then yes you make a valid point, and they wouldn't play coverage. But as linebackers, it is a small part of their job description.

Sometimes dropping into coverage creates a turnover when least expected. That’s how Von picked off Brady in the 2015 AFC Championship Game.

[L.M.]

Much worse ? Are we expecting the dominance of the 2015 defense with a roster only half as talented ? I think for the group of guys we have, the results on defense against Aaron Rodgers were pretty damn good. Obviously we are lacking the big time plays, interceptions, sacks, fumbles forced, etc. but I put that on our players not making plays, the coaches are not responsibility for that in my opinion.

But, think about the gifts of field position the offense gave to Greenbay, and then consider outside of that we held Aaron Rodgers to only 17 points in the game, that's pretty good. The defense done a great job of getting off the field on 3rd downs, the Packers were 22% on 3rd downs, that is great. We held their run game to an average of 3.3 yards per carry, again, a solid result. I think our defense is doing enough to keep us competitive in these games, especially the last 2 weeks where I believe we have been greatly improved from week 1.

Nobody is expecting 2015 dominance, I certainly didn't write nor imply that anywhere.

If one player like Miller wasn't getting sacks or FF's while others were, you might have a point, but when an entire unit is under performing, it mostly points to the HC/DC. Even with a couple roster holes, we should be getting something, or dialing up some blitzes. We need the big plays, they change momentum, and can mean the difference between winning and losing these close games. Imagine if we could have created turnovers in any of the last three.

[Fantaztic7]

When Von and Chubb were getting sacks last season we never heard, “VJ and Woods have a great scheme to help Von and Chubb.”

Now Von and Chubb aren’t getting sacks what do we hear, “It’s on the HC/DC.”

[johnlimburg]

Nobody is expecting 2015 dominance, I certainly didn't write nor imply that anywhere.

If one player like Miller wasn't getting sacks or FF's while others were, you might have a point, but when an entire unit is under performing, it mostly points to the HC/DC. Even with a couple roster holes, we should be getting something, or dialing up some blitzes. We need the big plays, they change momentum, and can mean the difference between winning and losing these close games. Imagine if we could have created turnovers in any of the last three.

Who says they are under performing though ? You ? That is your opinion based on thinking they are more talented then they clearly are. I would say that Von Miller is under performing, maybe Bradley Chubb as well, but beyond that I wouldn't agree. In terms of team defense, we were pretty rock solid against Greenbay as I outlined. Schematically what are the coaches doing wrong then ? Besides saying "blitz more", what will better position our defenders to create turnovers and generate sacks ? Blaming coaches in my opinion is lazy and shows no understanding of what is going on out there, as is saying, blitz more.

On the topic of "dialling up blitzes", I thought I would look back at all the chunk plays from the Greenbay game and see how the defense played. On the opening drive we "blitzed" on two occasions and gave up 56 yards on the two completions. In the second quarter the chunk play down the sideline where Harris got beat on the back shoulder throw, 22 yard completion when we "blitzed". In the 3rd quarter, the route down the sideline where Jewel got beat, it was a 26 yard completion and came against a "blitz". In the 4th quarter when it was a one possession game, after the Flacco turnover we "blitzed" on two occasions and it resulted in 2 completions for a total of 34 yards.

So, 148 totals yards of passing offense for the Packers came against the Denver Broncos blitzing defense. Aaron Rodgers only had a total of 235 passing yards on the day, so you could say he had a field day and his most success when we went after him with more defenders. So this idea we need to blitz more to stiffen up the defense, it kind of doesn't add up based on the Greenbay game, and to me it's a lazy way of blaming coaches with no idea of whats going on.

[L.M.]

When Von and Chubb were getting sacks last season we never heard, “VJ and Woods have a great scheme to help Von and Chubb.”

Now Von and Chubb aren’t getting sacks what do we hear, “It’s on the HC/DC.”

No one on our D is getting sacks nor turnovers right now.

[Fantaztic7]

No one on our D is getting sacks nor turnovers right now.

How often did you credit Vance Joseph and Joe Woods for sacks and turnovers last season, by any player?

[L.M.]

How often did you credit Vance Joseph and Joe Woods for sacks and turnovers last season, by any player?

My response was deleted but it's the only one I have to this line of inquiry.