Mike Neal: 2015 Packers Player Report Card
By hobbes
Mike Neal
- Age: 28
- Ht./Wt: 6'3", 261lbs
- College: Purdue
- NFL Experience: 6 years
Expectations coming into the season: Continue to replace Clay Matthews at outside linebacker across from Julius Peppers. With Matthews making the full on switch to inside linebacker, the Packers were relying mainly on Neal and to some extent Nick Perry, Andy Mulumba and Jayrone Elliott to provide the pressure against opposing quarterbacks. Last year Neal did fairly well, recording 4.5 sacks and 24 tackles as a rotational pass rusher.
Player’s highlights/low-lights: Neals best game, perhaps of his career, was against Washington during the playoffs where he recorded 2 sacks and 3 tackles and generally hung out with Kirk Cousins in the backfield alongside the rest of the Packers rush defensive linemen.
Level of Expectations met: Neal essentially duplicated his 2014 season. In 2014 Neal recorded 4.5 sacks and put up 4 in 2015. In 2014 Neal made 24 tackles and made exactly the same in 2015. Neal saw a bump in snap counts going from 647 to 845, highest for all outside linebackers but overall was a nice rotational pass rusher to compliment Julius Peppers.
Grade: C
Player’s contributions to team success: While Neal has probably never lived up to his 2nd round status, he's still a solid pass rusher and a valuable member of the pass rush rotation that allowed defensive coordinator Dom Capers to mix and confuse opposing offenses. Neal wasn't a guy that teams had to plan around, but he's also not a guy that offensive tackles could just gloss over. Overall, Neal is pretty much an average contributor, he's not a star by any means but he's also not a liability on the field.
Grade: C+
Player’s contributions in the playoffs: While Neal's performance against the Redskins nets him an A+ after recording 2 sacks and 3 tackles and wrecking havoc against a weak Washington offensive line, he followed it up with a complete dud against the Cardinals. In a game where Carson Palmer was sacked 3 times, Neal failed to record a sack or even a tackle.
Grade: C
Intangibles/misc: Not much to say about Neal, he's a good enough player but certainly not a leader on the defense and not even the veteran of the linebacking corps (that would be either Peppers or Matthews)
Grade: C
Comments (23)
jeremyjjbrown
January 29, 2016 at 12:38 pm
This is a little disappointing for a second rounder in his fifth season.
Bearmeat
January 29, 2016 at 03:48 pm
He was a misfit for the 34 defense from the beginning. Just like Perry. Just like Datone.
TT has been trying to find a 5 tech and an OLB while picking from 20-32 for 6 years. The fact is that he's had to reach because all the "sure fire" guys that can defend the run and rush the passer are almost always gone by pick 15. TT did strike gold in Mike Daniels - but that was dumb luck. Most guys that are 6'0" can't play 5 tech. Daniels work ethic and wrestling background allows him to do it. And even then, as good as he has been at 5 Tech and nickel rusher, he would still be suited better to a 3 tech DT in a 43 D.
The fact is that for a draft guy, TTs picks on the front 7 on defense have been just awful for his entire decade of running the personnel department - with 3 exceptions: 1. CM3. 2. Raji (he's been above average at NT but terrible at 5 Tech) 3. Daniels. That's a hideous batting average! And that right there ladies and gents is the single biggest reason why GB does not have more than 1 super bowl in the Rodgers era...
But at least he's willing to go to mid tier free agency to fill those deficiencies. Oh wait... nevermind....sonofa... Call it what you want: Disappointing. Frustrating as hell. Flat out ugly. But make sure you call it true too.
That said, 2015 was the first time since 2010 that the front 7 on GBs D hasn't been a liability. But that's not because of star players - it's because they had great depth. That depth is going to be gone this offseason. Perry and Neal probably gone. Peppers might retire. Either Raji or Guion gone. (I'd bet it's Raji and Guion stays cheap to pair with Pennel next year.) And while Barrington is coming back, I don't think a Barrington and Ryan pairing at ILB scares anyone. And who is going to be paired with CM3 outside if Peppers retires? Elliot? That's a hope and a prayer, not a plan. Datone? Not an OLB. Mulumba? No. Who's going to pair with Daniels at 5 Tech? Datone? Not a full time player. There's no on else there!
That all leads me to believe that the front 7 on D is the TOP priority in the draft this year. Again. In order of need: OLB, 5 Tech, ILB, NT. In other words, several players at all of the above.
PS: This offseason Neal will probably be gone, as will Perry - to play DE in a 43 D by April.
hobbes
January 29, 2016 at 05:04 pm
I would only say that Thompson has a bad batting average if you are hoping he finds a pro-bowl caliber player with every pick. For complete busts I would only go with Justin Harrell, Jerel Worthy and Khyri Thornton.
Bearmeat
January 29, 2016 at 05:40 pm
See -but that's the thing: Other than CM3, Daniels and Raji... I'd argue that ALL his draft picks and UDFAs on the front 7 have been weaker than his role players at every other position on the field. He's gotten production out of low round WRs. OL of every stripe. RB. CB. Hell even Burnett was a 3rd round pick. He's a solid player.
Only on the front 7 have his high pick "misses" been sub par starters or role players. A 1/2nd round pick SHOULD be impact players for your team. 4-UDFA are role players and great if they end up more. TT has put a TON of draft stock into his front 7 and the results haven't equaled up to that draft stock.
hobbes
January 29, 2016 at 07:00 pm
1/2nd round picks "should" be impact players, but more often times than not they simply aren't. My opinion is picking defensive line players as a league is difficult, even more so when you pick in the bottom 10 of the round every year.
Another way of saying it is that there's a ton of risk involved in picking defensive line talent high; case in point I'm going to do some shameless advertising and tell you to check out this incredibly thoughtful article, particularly the 2nd figure: http://cheeseheadtv.com/blog/rookies-just-arent-that-good (Man, that author's prose is good). tl;dr, the learning curve for rookie front 7 defensive linemen are some of the worst on defense, especially for 34 defenses. My argument isn't that Thompson is missing on players, but so is the rest of the league so he's not particularly worse in that regard.
porupack
January 30, 2016 at 02:09 am
Hobbes,
Thanks for that analysis and you're convincing. So, if I was a GM, the data would lead me to focus a bit more on proven NFL talent; (which would be free agents or trades) to fill some of the front 7 gaps.
A vet has tangible evidence of skill/performance. A draftee is a lot of hope and 'should-be' potential.
I get the salary cap totally as why TT builds from draft (cheap) players, but on the other hand...that is primarily a game of odds/percentages...and you have to invest in those draftees, and they take valuable slots on your 53 roster. So these aren't blue chips if betting on impact players.
I think odds obviously favor vets, but still some risk as a good vet on one team often underperforms on another (bad system---i.e., Ndamakong Suh). You reduce odds though with actual NFL evidence on tape, inherit training and experience, pay more, but it isn't a bad strategy in getting 1-3 playmakers.
I submit Denver and NE as evidence.
And now the defendant (Dom) may approach the bar and present the rebuttal....
WKUPackFan
January 30, 2016 at 05:28 am
The issue is those veteran FAs, for the most part, don't exist. A few impact players hit the market, mainly those with bad contracts, like Suh with Detroit. Otherwise it's mostly guys that you would rather have a younger player instead anyway. Which leads to the second issue:
It's a young man's game, now more than ever. In that sense Neal and Perry are both getting on up there.
Bearmeat
January 30, 2016 at 07:11 am
Denver went all in on top line FA talent. They are totally screwed after this year cap wise. New England on the other hand has been smart. A dabble here, a middling risk there... with huge payoff potential. And if that player busts? Eh... he wasn't a big money guy anyway.
This is what separates BB from TT.
So if the front 7 on D is the hardest to predict in the draft, why would you not hedge your bet with some mid level free agency? TT has no answer that is good enough - and it's what turns him from an elite GM into merely a good one.
Unless GB wins another 2 super bowls before TT/AR/MM retire, there will be no HOF for TT and MM - and honestly, I'm not sure they deserve it as is.
Tundraboy
January 30, 2016 at 11:16 am
Very true. And problem is balancing need. Don't have to go to Denver extreme because Rodgers has more years left.but waiting exclusively for 3 to 4 years for draft picks to develop has clearly not worked.
hobbes
February 01, 2016 at 02:12 pm
I think it's interesting that fans feel like veteran players have tape that shows they can play with the Packers. Tape on other teams simply means they can play in that scheme. Case in point, Mike Wallace was a very good player for the Steelers, who ran a very aggressive vertical game while all teh other teams that he's played with don't or don't have a QB to support that scheme. I would argue that the vast majority of high priced free agents are/were really good in the scheme that they played originally in but it's very rare that their new team will play the exact same scheme. Denver and NE also really operate differently; NE is more about picking up lower priced free agents and seeing what they do while Denver is more about picking big names. I would argue that Denver's strategy is unsustainable, sooner or later you will pick up a bad player on a big contract and you will spends years to get rid of the cap charges.
Tundraboy
January 30, 2016 at 11:01 am
Hobbes. Good point, which tells me he needs to supplement and hedge his bets with FAs.. Wonder what numbers are for rest of league in that regard.
Tundraboy
January 30, 2016 at 10:53 am
Bearmeat. If we don't hit at least a couple of doubles in draft on D line as you pointed out, and a good FA pickup as well, it could be one step forward, two steps back. Just when we put together a solid D, we have to potentially rebuild. Man do they have their work cut out for them. Seems we go into draft with more needs than picks, and not really addressing ILB and TE for past 3 years only adds to challenge. Critical year no doubt.
Bearmeat
January 30, 2016 at 12:37 pm
The NFL is designed that way in the modern era. Every year it's like this for every team, we just happen to know our team better than others.
I'm not on the FIRW TT/MM bandwagon at all. I think they are both very good at what they do - but they're human. They make mistakes, which is WHY they should be willing to augment their roster with free agents who don't cost a ton. I don't care if the guys they get don't have a huge ceiling, as long as they don't have a huge price tag!
You can't tell me that a veteran ILB or TE or hell, even backup OT wouldn't have been a lifesaver this year. Just like James Jones was. The Green Bay Packers don't have a monopoly on talent in the NFL. There are other good players out there - WHY not take advantage of them in some way???
UGH!!!!
As Nagler said post loss at home to the Kitties, "The hubris coming out of 1265 Lombardi is staggering right now.
hobbes
February 01, 2016 at 02:15 pm
I think Thompson's argument would likely be that yes there is good talent on other teams but given the price to get them it's not worth the risk. Higher price free agents are usually overbid on and lower price free agents may not be any better than a unknown rookie, and the unknown rookie has a higher chance of turning into something special. Is it a fool-proof plan? Absolutely not, but it's probably the most conservatively optimal plan if your long term goal is to make the playoffs every year versus getting to the Super Bowl in one. Frankly, Thompson has done enough (like winning the Super Bowl in 2010) where he can afford to play the long game.
Tundraboy
January 29, 2016 at 12:45 pm
Well that's depressing, but all true. Makes it key in my mind that we need to find someone, if not draft, then F/A, or hope to sign Perry and pray he's healthy. So I hope that it's a case for just when things look bleak.....
hobbes
January 29, 2016 at 02:17 pm
I'd guess that the market for Neal should be rather weak. First off, plenty of teams probably don't know what to make of him; he's a buff defensive end who lost a ton of weight to play outside linebacker. A lot of times he still looks like a defensive end who just happens to have his head up. I don't think Neal has done anything to warrant a bigger contract from the one he got before and since he's older now he should be cheaper.
Tundraboy
January 29, 2016 at 02:36 pm
True,but I was looking at it from the point of getting better, and when I see C grades , it makes me wish we could somehow go beyond average and mediocre next year.
Packer_Pete
January 29, 2016 at 01:37 pm
The poster child for 'we need to find someone better at that position'. Really frustrating to me is that he is very close to getting to the QB but mostly seems a 1/2 step away - see the big play in OT at Arizona, where he was literally 1/2 step away from sacking Palmer. If he had, that game would've ended differently...
he is what I would expect a 4th or 5th rounder to be - solid but not special, and makes some plays but not too often - unfortunately he was a 2nd rounder...
But at least his injury woes from 1st and 2nd seasons seem to be behind him, and he was rarely injured this year or the last.
hobbes
January 29, 2016 at 02:15 pm
1/2 a step away is still pretty good. Keep in mind sacking the quarterback is the best case scenario, getting the quarterback off his mark, getting him to rush his throw or decision making, or even making the quarterback go for the hot read dump pass rather than the bomb down the sideline is still a win. To be honest, I'd rather have an outside linebacker who disrupts the quarterback a lot of times rather than a outside linebacker who sacks the quarterback a few times. The vast majority of quarterbacks in the NFL can't manage pressure 1/2 a step away.
zoellner25
January 29, 2016 at 03:32 pm
Neal was the one guy I thought they shouldn't convert. I think his speed and power would have been more like Mike Daniels, undersized, but strong and quick. But he's a tweener at all positions.
hobbes
January 29, 2016 at 03:54 pm
I don't think the plan was to convert him, rather he ended up being relatively ineffective at DE and they needed more bodies at OLB. If anything it was more of a "get what we can out of him" rather than a "this will make our team better" (like Matthews going from OLB to ILB). I wonder now that he's a veteran and probably has better technique whether or not they could put him back at DE.
Bearmeat
January 30, 2016 at 12:38 pm
No. He's underweight and injury prone at a 5 Tech. He can't handle the pounding - his frame, while it can hold plenty of muscle, can't handle the hits.
It's time to cut bait on both Perry and Neal and get a TRUE OLB in the draft and/or Free Agency.
Thegreatreynoldo
January 30, 2016 at 07:37 pm
Neal plays about 70% of the snaps. He does get some consistent pressure on the QB, which is more important than mere sacks. Still, it is difficult to know which snaps he got since CM3 moved to OLB on obvious passing downs. I do not think he could gain enough weight to move back to DE - I read that he is down to about 260 lbs. I do not think he is quick enough for 4-3 DE. I think Hobbes is right and the market for him will be limited, and if anything he will command only about what he got last time - about $4 million per year, maybe a tad less guaranteed. I have no idea what the market for Perry will be. Clearly it should be less than Neal, but the potential is there, perhaps as a 4-3 DE.