Stafford will be sacked 5 times
Printable View
Stafford will be sacked 5 times
That would be a recipe for a win, as long as the offense does its part. I hope you are right, TO.
No turnovers and the Packers win this.
Football games are still going on? Well I'll be a son-of-a-bitch. I thought everything got canceled due to the lack of discussion about it in the media.
I think you guys beat the Lions but it's not going to a walk in the park........Vikings unlikely to beat the Saints despite a putrid defense.
It was Fritz but it's a great story similar to the wizzinator so I use it when I can - but let's not derail the discussion. So how is the confidence in Michigan for Sundays game?
Got a friend who's a die hard Lions fan. He's feeling pretty cocky right now. I'm talking The Lions up. Lulling him into a sense of false security.
I heard both Hayward and Hyde were full participants at practice yesterday but Bulaga was still limited.
Yes.
Tyler Dunne @TyDunne · 21h
Bryan Bulaga again in pads for the #Packers at tackle. Seemed to do a lot. McCarthy will be speaking later.
Tyler Dunne @TyDunne · 21h
Brandon Bostick (fibula) in pads, participating in position drills during segment of practice open to media.
Tyler Dunne @TyDunne · 21h
Also practicing for Green Bay was Casey Hayward (glute). Only players out: Brad Jones, Andy Mulumba.
You had to open THAT old wound?:lol::lol:
Jones being out is addition by subtraction - now if we can only find a way to get Hawk off the field, we might be on to something.
Unfortunately - there is always dunderdummy :(
Is there any other team in the league that is as QB dependent as Green Bay??
It has never made sense to me that a team would have a philosophy which in effect says bad defense is acceptable, as long as it is supposedly predicated upon producing turnovers - and failing that, is to be bailed out by the QB.
The defense for bad defense is that our QB is awesome?? Seriously, that has never, ever made sense to me. Bad defense is bad defense.
I would rather have a defense that produces 0 turnovers per game, but forces 8 punts/game and only gives up 13 pts/game. This nonsense that says giving up 30 pts/game is okay, as long as you produce 3 TO's/game is mindboggling to me.
The Packer team philosphy that says bad defense is acceptable is why we can't compete - at all!!! - if our QB goes down. If our QB goes down, we are then stuck with that pathetic defense that can't keep you in games. Instead of being in a 13-10 game where you have chance, you're blown out 40-10.
wist, the thing I can't understand is this whole defensive play calling thing. Apparently, there are rules that only one guy on defense can wear the headset in his helmet. But then does that guy have to play all the snaps? What if he gets hurt?
In the first game Jones wore the headset and played every defensive down. In the second, Hawk wore it and played every down.
Is our defense so complicated and dependent on schemes and personnel groups that it would fall apart without communicating on the headset? Stubby is big on cross training guys, can't he have Burnett or Shields or Tramon or Matthews wear it and call defensive signals? Are we forever tied to Jones or Hawk?
There are now probably three elite QBs (Manning, Rodgers, Brees), and all three of those teams are as dependent on that elite QB as the others. Pittsburgh is highly dependent on Big Ben too--as is San Diego with Rivers. After watching Brady the first two weeks, I'm leaning towards dropping him out of the elite category. His downfield passing ability has fallen off dramatically. It's true that there are some teams that have a good QB that are not as dependent on that QB (namely Seattle, San Fran, Carolina, maybe Cincinnati and Arizona), but those teams are about as scarce as teams with elite QBs. Those teams have arguably the five best defenses in football. Those teams have been fortunate that their QBs have mostly been playing on their rookie contracts--except for Arizona. Things are about to change there.
Have you ever considered that the defense may not be intentionally faulty? Like what if Capers has never said "The goal is to give up 30 points this week" or "We're just not going to try controlling the line of scrimmage"? What if Thompson has never said "Lets pass on that guy, he's too physical for us"?
What if there are 31 other teams also trying to build the perfect defense and competing for all the same resources and even the most fortunate one still won't give up just 13 points per game?
And to answer your question yes there are other teams just as QB dependent. The Broncos, Bears, Giants, Steelers, Saints, and Patriots all come to mind. I'd wager nearly every team would also be smoldering heap of dysfunction after losing 20 million dollars worth of their best players.
Lions
I don't buy it. Edelman is their best receiver. He's pretty darn good--in the Welker mold. Gronk is back. Vereen is one of the best pass catching RBs in football. Dobson has talent--although he missed the first game. Amendola is a decent slot receiver. Wright caught 56 passes in Tampa Bay last year. While that's not the best receiving crops, he's not completely devoid of weapons.
Pats have serious O line issues.
They shouldn't. They have a 4th year starter at LT, a third year starter at C, a fifth year starter at RG, and Vollmer at RT. Only Marcus Cannon is inexperienced, and they felt good enough about him to get rid of Mankins. I know they struggled against Miami, but teams have bad games. Brady barely got touched when he did drop back against Minnesota. I see a noticeable difference in Brady. It sucks because I thought he'd bounce back, and I drafted him my fantasy league. He's turned into a game manager because he's just not very good on the deep ball anymore.
The entire problem with your take is that you discount certain facts.
The defense was on the field for 40 minutes of the game. The offense turned the ball over 3 times and only managed 126 total yards of offense despite the defense getting 2 picks and 2 fumble recoveries (one for a TD).
The Packers D actually came to play that game, but was completely hung out to dry by the offense.
So saying "oh, they put up 'x' yards" ignores the fact that the offense never moved the ball and based on TOP alone the Lions were bound to rack up monster numbers.
Here's what the offense did last year:
Punt, FG (after an out out of bounds KO), punt, punt, punt, punt, turnover, turnover, punt, punt, turnover.
Here's what the defense did:
Fumble Recovery, Allowed FG, Fumble Recovery for TD, Interception, Allowed TD, Allowed TD, Missed FG, Allowed TD, Interception, Punt, Allowed TD, Allowed TD, End of Game.
Anybody know who the Packer's activated to take Mulumba's spot?
Questionable: RT Bryan Bulaga (knee), CB Casey Hayward (glute)
Probable: S Hyde (knee)
Out: ILB Brad Jones (quad)
OLB Andy Mulumba (knee)
Goddamn right Hayward needs some yoga. Every yoga instructor I've ever perved on seems like they've taken real good care of those glutes.
Seriously, you can't be saying that the Packers defensive performance last T-giving was due to a lack of TOP??
What of a game where 2 great defensive teams slug it out to a 6-3 score?? Each team forced 8 punts... is forcing punts so out of vogue that it is considered fascist now??
TOP matters to some extent at the end of the game - after the defense has been out there for 75 plays, but if they're in the 3rd quarter, and the opposing offense has only snapped the ball 53 times, and have already put up 35 pts?? You can't fall back on TOP as a defense for the defense.
Guys running wide open all over the field, huge holes that RB's are walking thru for big gains... we gave up 241 yds rushing in that game - that's HS stuff.
Go ahead and try to defend dunderdummy - he's all yours.
I looked it up - Detroit ran 21 plays in the 1st quarter. Drove the length of the field twice, only to be stymied by a Bush fumble; the 2nd drive ended at the beginning of the 2nd quarter with a Detroit FG. Nobody was gassed then - if they were, they're not in good enough shape to be playing in the NFL.
We produced 2 TO's in the 2nd quarter that produced our 10 pts - after that, it was complete Detroit domination in every phase of the game - including special teams.
I don't think anyone expected us to win that game - but you have to put up a fight... if not for them shooting themselves in the foot, the score at halftime would have been 31-0, and 31-0 would have been a more accurate indicator of just how dominant Detroit was on both sides of the ball.
Gassed defense had nothing to do with the 1st half.
TOP isn't so much about being gassed on defense. If a team has the ball for a game and a half worth of offense, you'd expect them to put up a game and a half worth of points.
offense and defense are very connected.