Since most of the game is played in sub packages, the biggest difference between 3-4 (4-2-5) nickle and 4-3 (4-2-5) nickle is the DEs being in a 2 point stance (3-4) vs 3 point stance (4-3). The 3 point stance should allow for better initial leverage and get off. Otherwise for Hafley they are going to a 1 gap system instead of a 2 gap.

Ignoring injuries, Jaire and Nixon are very likely to “start” in the secondary in week one. Of the other starters, it’s possible none were here last year or at least regular contributors. That’s a decent revamp I think.

As to King, the reason he may contribute is that despite being a mostly outside corner in college, he profiles much better inside than any other CB and is accepted to have genuinely plus ball skills and anticipation. It’s interesting that they have already had him at slot. He’s a guy who could provide useful sub package depth as a result. For outside depth keep an eye on Robert Rochelle.

By not picking up the 5th year option for Stokes, he's in a 1 year "prove himself" contract this year. I'm hoping Stokes can return to his rookie form under Hafley. But should he stumble, I expect King to see significant playing time. There's also the question of whether Nixon improves enough to play the slot. That's also expecting Ballentine and Valentine to play as well or better than last year. So there's plenty of opportunities for King to get on the field this year. If nothing else, they need to evaluate King to know what they'll have in 2025. Go Pack go! :)

"I'm surprised how many people are expecting Kalen King to be a factor this year. "

I think it's just the "afterglow" of the draft and draft season hype. The early play at PSU is giving people a lot of hope, and the Packers got some good snaps from a bunch of no-name CBs for a big chunk of 2023. But if King plays a lot it either means something good (he's outplayed a bunch of returnees and earned regular play time), or something bad (he's outplayed a bunch of underperforming returnees--or injuries have ravaged the position--and the Packers were forced to put him on the field. I think you're right: realistically he's a 7th round flier who has a chance to contribute at some point and may apply some depth chart pressure to the guys ahead of him.

It wasn't that long ago that Mel Kiper and the other broadcast chuckleheads were still essentially dissecting sixth and seventh round picks the same way they were hitting first and second rounders. It was comical that they wanted to pitch every pick in a 'savior of the roster' light.

"There are too many obscure stats in this article, and I'm not sure of their significance."

On Soapbox: the application of analytics and the spontaneous generation of 'next gen stats' in the NFL is mind numbing. They apply to sports like baseball--which is essentially a one-on-one sport played in a team context--but tend to rapidly lose significance as you increase the number of supporting pieces and add in situational play. They way these stats are defined is also "self-fulfilling": how you include or reduce data strongly impacts the outcome of the algorithm. In the end, they ruined baseball by installing economists and number munchers in GM roles and chasing "three true outcomes." MLB is starting to see the error in that and is doing things like eliminating shifts and speeding up game play (which reintroduces some strategy and cuts down the ability for hitters and pitchers to try to manipulate each other---AND makes games far more watchable). But whole farm systems have been built around big-swinging, high-strikeout, all-or-nothing guys who limit the game to islands of HRs in a sea of Ks. It will take years to undo the damage that's been done to the game.

It's my hope that the NFL doesn't get into bed with high-end analytics and remains only acquaintances. There are some insights to be gained, but the variability from week-to-week and opponent-to-opponent is limiting. The NFL has bigger fish to fry in its relationship with betting and legalized gambling.

We also allowed the 5th greatest 3rd down conversion rate against us (and it was getting worse late in the season), 43.75% over the season. Add that to the lack of turnovers and the D is not getting off the field without a score often enough or with good field position.

Players, not Plays. Do they have guys who create havoc and steal the ball? The 'I like to watch" crowd has been whittled down, but were they replaced with Better defenders?

I think Hafley's system simplifies the duties of the backfield, and we won't see someone passing off a receiver to the next guy's zone and no one's there. An aggressive pressing zone with some guys staying with their guy while others come to help.

"Flexable depending on the next opponent" and I hear reports of an unheard-of development of quick and easy adjustments DURING games if something isn't working or the other team makes adjustments.

How novel and wonderful is that?

He referred yesterday to “vision and break” zone if not playing press man. The distinctive feature of both is attacking the route and catch point. That’s what made Jaire a star, what Stokes does well and also should help Valentine.

Barry’s year 2 and 3 RAS a read and react of coverage. Much more passive, far less likely to lead to a breakup or interception but designed to minimize the play. The problem is that every system fails, so big plays weren’t eradicated, and too often we were just conceding the catch and this the drives went on and on. Our D got more tired, the offense out of rhythm.

It was essentially defeatist. They are going to make plays so let’s just try to minimize them and hope that they make an error. The problem with that is that less pressure on the catcher makes for less errors. Thus our only counter was the rush. When that worked we did ok, but it didn’t work well enough often enough.

We were essentially a one trick pony and our opponents knew it, especially if they could establish the run and force the front 7 into more caution. Barry vastly exacerbated that by the even more defeatist proclivity to go full prevent far too often. He needed more confidence in himself, his ability and that if his players. He defeated himself far more often than necessary because he feared it so deeply.

Hafley’s system is going to risk big plays, and is predicated on getting the ball back faster. In the end, that more fun to watch and for most, I suspect, more fun to play. We will still lose some, but the days of letting sun par QBs and teams stroll over us are likely gone. Make them beat you not hope they screw up. I’m all for it, philosophically and as a fan. Just expect bumps along the way.

Kevin King definitely wasn't in press coverage, he was about 7 yards off the LOS when the ball was snapped. He was anticipating a throw to the sticks to set them up for a FG. I have no idea what the safeties we're doing on that play but one of them definitely messed up. Here's the play:

https://youtu.be/WBThT59O6hY?si=xVZuvZxUxxhM6-_J

Thanks for stirring up a hornets nest of playoff nightmares. Rough day at Cheesehad TV. No new content until just a few minutes ago, and it's an article about the new kickoff rules. At this point, though, I'll take it!

Funny how narrative works. The reality was Matt and Aaron, our co-head coaches, fucked the monkey, then Barry played aggressive, squatting on the short route. People bitched non-stop about Barry's cautiousness, here it was anything but, and they got burned.

it's a damned if you do and damned if you don't situation. Aaron Jones inexcusable turnover never seems to get mentioned, now that he's been deified.

LH—An excellent rehash—Many what if’s? The missed int by Redmond was a cream puff pass and hit him in the hands dead center. It should’ve added to Brady’s three INT’s.
But you’re right the offense did not do their job.