Studs & Duds - Packers vs. Seahawks

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joemailman

They don't usually bother me the way they do some people. Today though was an exception.

---

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/rwMUwyTri04/maxresdefault.jpg

Buck:I agree Troy

Troy:Well of course Buck.

Buck:I agree Troy

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vince

What a beautiful game. Who's supposed to be the bad-asses and who are the softies again?

Rodgers 28/42/311 - and the masterful TD to Nelson after yet another fake-huddle quick-snap 12-men-on-the-field opportunity. He was holding the ball too long in the first half and that mostly ended in the second half when they remembered that the quick-release timing plays are the way to get things going.

How about that 9-minute offense to close out the game? Against Seattle's D? Epic. When this team gets leads, they don't lose - and they've got all the tools to be better than ever.

Monty with the BEASTLY catch and then run through Thomas’ tackle attempt. 95 HUGE all-purpose yards and a powerful goalline TD – a bunch of big plays at clutch times that were difference makers in that game.

Williams had a couple nice runs to move the chains in his limited action.

Cobb and Nelson showed they know how to make big first-down catches and had big days.

Cobb 9 for 85 yds.
Nelson 7 for 79 and a TD.

It seemed like all 16 of 'em were clutch too.

And I’d say Marty B. earned himself some serious trust points with Rodgers with 3/43 - including the big-gain for the dagger. And then he goes after guy who had the audacity to hit Rodgers downfield. Dumb play by itself but that’s the kind of don’t-fuck-with-us attitude that guys rally around – and that great teams tend to have.

Adams can separate from press coverage with the best of ‘em. He threw arguably the best press cover-corner in the league - Sherman for a loop on that slant in the 2nd half. Who can stop that if not Sherman? More quick slants in his future. 4/39. He’ll have his plays this year but APRH he could be the guy whose opportunities are sacrificed by fact that there are more playmakers than ever and still only one ball.

And how about Daniels? Holy shit. He just decided it was time for him to single-handedly take that game over. 7 tackles (5 solo – all of which he seemed to throw the poor schmucks trying to block him to the side - 1.5 sacks and the forced fumble that basically won the game. Fack showed his athleticism snatching the hot potato coming his way. How many times have we seen guys fail to recover balls just lying there?

Perry was physically dominant too. 1.5 sacks and he had to have 4 or 5 pressures on top of that. The whole front 7 had Wilson watching them and trying to avoid getting pounded for most of that game.

And they dominated Seattle’s run game. Other than the one really nice cutback by Carson where he escaped 4 or 5 guys to the outside for 30 yards and the Wilson scramble for 29 - Seattle’s other 16 attempts got them a whopping 31 yards.

Jake Ryan got taken off the field in the 2nd half because they made Seattle so one-dimensional after getting the lead, but he set the tone early with some pounding tackles stuffing the run early.

Eddie Lacy might be done running behind that line. He can’t make people miss quickly enough. I think Carson and Rawls are gonna be their guys.

House gave up some plays I thought. And he was lucky they couldn’t connect a few more times. Randall and Rollins both had tight coverage all day I thought and both tackled well. Rollins had 8 tackles (4 solo) and Randall had 6 – all solo.

And the safeties were all over the place. It seemed like there was about 10 of them out there. Burnett, Clinton-Dix, and Bryce - active and everywhere - In the box, at the line of scrimmage, big hits down the deep sideline, breaking up 3rd down passes down the middle against bigger TE’s at the sticks, denying Jimmy Graham in the endzone, knocking balls out in the back of the endzone.... Jimmy Graham had a whopping 3 cathces for 8 yards today. Nullified.

Josh Jones can’t contain himself on kickoff coverage. Too young and aggressive and lost his contain twice for sure. He’ll figure that out though, and he’s going to add to this safety group’s ability to control games as the season goes on.

……………......……….Seattle………..G reen Bay
First Downs.......……12…………………26
……by Rushing….......3………………….8
…...by Passing......….8……………….16
…..by Penalty.......….1………………..2
3rd Down Efficiency….3/12…..9/16
Total Net Yards……..225…………..370
# Plays……........……48………………..72
Rushing Plays…......18………………28
Runs for Loss..……4 for -9……..1 for -1
Passing Yds…….....158……………..311
Sacks Allowed…..3 for 23 yds……4 for 24 yds. – all in 1st Half
Touchdowns.......……0……...........2
Time of Possession.20:47………………39:13

Other than the offensive ineffectiveness in the first half (that’s a serious defensive unit) which they remembered how to overcome in the 2nd half by getting the ball out quicker and in rhythm - and a couple big plays the defense allowed that helped Seattle get into field goal range – that was a serious can of whoop ass Seattle got themselves sprayed all over with. It’ll be interesting to see how often that happens to that offensive line – offensive being the operative word - by other defenses this year. I assume they’ll get better, but that was quite the ass-kicking.

Atlanta’s offense obviously won’t be quite that shitty. I’d say the Packers match up a ton better with Atlanta this year though – at least up the middle of the field - with all those safeties playing everywhere. Not sure how they hang with Jones, Sanu, etc. outside though. House better sharpen up his game. King will eventually be a much better match-up, but I fear for his safety next week.

No better test for a defense that will have a little swagger going in. We’ll see pretty quick if it’s real of fake I'd say.

---

I think you covered it all....awesome Post Vince.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bretsky

STUDS: REFS...........We undoubtedly got the calls today...which IMO never happens........they really F'cked up the TD for Seattle and it was a huge gamechanger

---

We caught a huge break right there because early the Packer 'O' was misfiring too much; as ARod was just trying toget settled in after so little Pre Season work.

I thought that Clay Matthews was next to invisible. He did make two (2) tackles.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gbgary

no problem with the strategy but it never seems to work out for him.

---

Ya...I hear ya but it just seemed like it was time to let the clock run out and go to the locker room. The D had played great up to that point but shit....give them a rest.

As yetisnowman (I think it was YSM) pointed out in the Game Day thread, M3 did not even have 3 TOs to stop the clock with. With only two, he might get one last play.

Anyone ask at press conference?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pbmax

As yetisnowman (I think it was YSM) pointed out in the Game Day thread, M3 did not even have 3 TOs to stop the clock with. With only two, he might get one last play.

Anyone ask at press conference?

---

Yes. MM defended the strategy. Said the defense was dominating, and he wanted to get the ball back. If you get the ball at midfield with :15, you do have a chance to complete a sideline pass to set up a long field goal. Both Nelson and Adams are pretty good at those. Interesting how many people here think MM was too aggressive when he could have let the clock run out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joemailman

Yes. MM defended the strategy. Said the defense was dominating, and he wanted to get the ball back. If you get the ball at midfield with :15, you do have a chance to complete a sideline pass to set up a long field goal. Both Nelson and Adams are pretty good at those. Interesting how many people here think MM was too aggressive when he could have let the clock run out.

---

I would be fine with the strategy if we had all 3 timeouts. I am fine when he has done that in the past with the other team backed up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joemailman

Yes. MM defended the strategy. Said the defense was dominating, and he wanted to get the ball back. If you get the ball at midfield with :15, you do have a chance to complete a sideline pass to set up a long field goal. Both Nelson and Adams are pretty good at those. Interesting how many people here think MM was too aggressive when he could have let the clock run out.

---

If he had three TOs, it might happen that way. But even with three, I don't like the TO on 3rd and three.

But with two, here is where you would be:

(:55) C.Prosise left end to SEA 10 for -1 yards (B.Martinez, Q.Rollins). Timeout #2 by GB at 00:48.

(:48) C.Prosise up the middle to SEA 18 for 8 yards (C.Matthews, D.House).
Timeout #3 by GB at 00:43


At 43 seconds after your last timeout, with 5-8 seconds for the play, the 40 second play clock for fourth down starts with 35 to 38 seconds to go. You literally cannot get the ball back. Even if a miracle happens and 4th down starts on 43 seconds left. All Jon Ryan has to do is call for the punt at 3 seconds and run backward to the 1.

The only hope is Seattle committing a penalty.

The downside is that now you defense is in the middle of the field trying to prevent long bombs, which always leads to shorter passes being open.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pbmax

If he had three TOs, it might happen that way. But even with three, I don't like the TO on 3rd and three.

But with two, here is where you would be:

(:55) C.Prosise left end to SEA 10 for -1 yards (B.Martinez, Q.Rollins). Timeout #2 by GB at 00:48.

(:48) C.Prosise up the middle to SEA 18 for 8 yards (C.Matthews, D.House).
Timeout #3 by GB at 00:43


At 43 seconds after your last timeout, with 5-8 seconds for the play, the 40 second play clock for fourth down starts with 35 to 38 seconds to go. You literally cannot get the ball back. Even if a miracle happens and 4th down starts on 43 seconds left. All Jon Ryan has to do is call for the punt at 3 seconds and run backward to the 1.

The only hope is Seattle committing a penalty.

The downside is that now you defense is in the middle of the field trying to prevent long bombs, which always leads to shorter passes being open.

---

You think there's any chance MM forgot he had burned a timeout after the 1st play of the game?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joemailman

Yes. MM defended the strategy. Said the defense was dominating, and he wanted to get the ball back. If you get the ball at midfield with :15, you do have a chance to complete a sideline pass to set up a long field goal. Both Nelson and Adams are pretty good at those. Interesting how many people here think MM was too aggressive when he could have let the clock run out.

---

The problem is that the second down play ended (and the Packers took a TO) with 43 seconds left on the clock. A third down run was going to take at least 3 seconds; the 1st down and 2nd down runs both took 5 seconds off the clock, so Seattle would have been able to run out the clock anyways. MM's only chance was for Seattle to pass, the runner to fumble, or the runner to go out of bounds. It was stupid decision.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joemailman

You think there's any chance MM forgot he had burned a timeout after the 1st play of the game?

---

Yep, there is a chance.

Or he could, as Bossman said, just be hoping for an error deep in their own territory. So I am on board using the TOs.

But not on first down and nor after the 8 yard gain.

It was dumb. Hopefully, he learns his lesson after taking time to think about it. The reporters should grill him more on it. Maybe that would help. It's not just the time though. I don't think you call the timeout after you just gave up 5 yards on a run and it 3rd and just 3.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bossman641

Interestingly enough...Evans graded out as one of the Packers top 5 performances by PFF. I've never really followed their ratings in the past so I can't comment on how they are calculated...just passing along the info.

TOP 5 GRADES:
Edge Nick Perry, 89.8 overall grade

LB Blake Martinez, 87.0 overall grade

DI Mike Daniels, 86.6 overall grade

WR Jordy Nelson, 81.8 overall grade

RG Jahri Evans, 79.1 overall grade

---

Packers coaches did not agree, said Daniels and Perry graded out the best on Defense.

Kind of like in last year's regular season Dallas game. Dallas was content with and trying to just run out the clock before half with a 10-6 lead when MM started calling timeouts and the D forgot how to tackle/went prevent. The Boys then proceeded to march right down the field and score a TD with .31 left before the half. It was a killer and completely changed the complexion of the game with it being 17-6 instead of 10-6 at the half. That tactic just never seems to work for us.

As others have pointed out, we didn't have 3 timeouts, Seattle only needed 2 yards for a first on 3rd down, the D had played great for the entire half up to that point so the rest would have done them good, we hadn't moved the ball very well all half, and we were due to get the ball to start the 2nd half. Under those circumstances I thought it was dumb to call those TO's and give the Hags any chance at all. I would have been content to go into the locker room at 0-0 and re-group. The way Ryan had been booming his punts and pinning us deep in our own territory the entire half why would you think we were going to end up with the ball anywhere near mid-field to begin with. I just didn't think anything was in our favor at that point to call those TO's and it ended up backfiring again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pbmax

If he had three TOs, it might happen that way. But even with three, I don't like the TO on 3rd and three.

But with two, here is where you would be:

(:55) C.Prosise left end to SEA 10 for -1 yards (B.Martinez, Q.Rollins). Timeout #2 by GB at 00:48.

(:48) C.Prosise up the middle to SEA 18 for 8 yards (C.Matthews, D.House).
Timeout #3 by GB at 00:43


At 43 seconds after your last timeout, with 5-8 seconds for the play, the 40 second play clock for fourth down starts with 35 to 38 seconds to go. You literally cannot get the ball back. Even if a miracle happens and 4th down starts on 43 seconds left. All Jon Ryan has to do is call for the punt at 3 seconds and run backward to the 1.

The only hope is Seattle committing a penalty.

The downside is that now you defense is in the middle of the field trying to prevent long bombs, which always leads to shorter passes being open.

---

At 43 seconds, if they stop the play in under 3 seconds, there was a shot at a free kick even if time ran out...if I remember the rule correctly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Smidgeon

At 43 seconds, if they stop the play in under 3 seconds, there was a shot at a free kick even if time ran out...if I remember the rule correctly.

---

Let's say the play took 2 seconds and the zebras immediately got the play clock going. Even then, with 1 second left, Wilson could have just taken the snap on 4th down and kneeled to run out the clock.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Smidgeon

At 43 seconds, if they stop the play in under 3 seconds, there was a shot at a free kick even if time ran out...if I remember the rule correctly.

---

43 seconds is before third down. 40 seconds would be before fourth down. You only need to kill a second by running backward to end the half.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JustinHarrell

Brice becoming a legit NFL safety, Clark and Lowry becoming men (plus the addition of the vet relief DL we brought in), Daniels being a super hero and Burnett being so versatile and smart makes the Nitro defense possible. It's one of those things where the right pieces just fit together the right way!

It's like Collins speed covering the whole back end allowed peprah and Woodson to do whatever they wanted inside...... the strength of the DL now and the depth of our safety group is making the speed of this Nitro defense possible.

Can't wait!!!!!!

---

THIS!

I know it's one game but this defense really has me excited.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brandon494

THIS!

I know it's one game but this defense really has me excited.

---

this is the problem with this game

the seahawks o-line was really really bad. did we look great because we're great, or did we look that we because they blow so bad

i don't know if we can judge how good our d-line is after that game. however, if we would have looked bad against that bad line, then we would be in trouble

what we do know, is that we looked good against a sucky o-line