WHAT IS YOUR VIEW OF DOM CAPERS

[pbmax]

From Bob McGinn's rating the Packers vs Falcons: http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packe...285318851.html

Sam Barrington (44) joined Matthews in nickel and A.J. Hawk (eight) in base, and Brad Jones (23) was the dime. Barrington's alignments are far from precise. He does play downhill, and is a heavier hitter than Hawk or Jones. His vulnerability in coverage was apparent on a 14-yard pass to Jacquizz Rodgers when he was slow reacting and didn't get through a pick. Jones wasn't a dependable presence in the middle. Hawk didn't see the field until 4 minutes remained in the half.

If you have to play Hawk, why would you pick base when, if he has a strength, its coverage? Whatever is affecting him, the new development has to be his legs or something else affecting his speed.

It would really help if Jones could be passable in coverage, but he seems incapable of improvement.

[wist43]

Just going by what you wrote wist. I need to re-remind myself not to get mired in the circle-jerk of scheme discussion guaranteed to go nowhere. "That's not what I meant. I really meant this you idiot." Carry on with your authoritative solutions Mr. Coordinator.

And I really meant this you idiot - if you don't know anything about football, you should probably keep your commentary restricted to how much like the team colors.

[Fritz]

PB, I do agree that the entire ILB corp is now a tire fire. Jones is less than a JAG, Hawk is slower than my mom, Barrington is a part-time guy who can plug the run but can't cover his ears, Lattimore is ST only, and obviously the team feels that Carl Bradford is still nowhere near being able to play inside. Or probably outside.

I wonder if Dom - or if anyone - will be able to scheme around that weakness in the middle of the field. Thank the gods that Matthews is playing inside at all.

[pbmax]

PB, I do agree that the entire ILB corp is now a tire fire. Jones is less than a JAG, Hawk is slower than my mom, Barrington is a part-time guy who can plug the run but can't cover his ears, Lattimore is ST only, and obviously the team feels that Carl Bradford is still nowhere near being able to play inside. Or probably outside.

I wonder if Dom - or if anyone - will be able to scheme around that weakness in the middle of the field. Thank the gods that Matthews is playing inside at all.

The one theory of wist that I do find interesting is the old chestnut that the Packers don't draft defense well and haven't since Wolf came on board.

While I think that is overstating it, they do go through streaks at positions where nothing they try hits. And then at QB and WR, Ted could wake up from a year long coma 5 days before the draft and get you 3 guys who can play in the NFL.

[wist43]

PB, I do agree that the entire ILB corp is now a tire fire. Jones is less than a JAG, Hawk is slower than my mom, Barrington is a part-time guy who can plug the run but can't cover his ears, Lattimore is ST only, and obviously the team feels that Carl Bradford is still nowhere near being able to play inside. Or probably outside.

I wonder if Dom - or if anyone - will be able to scheme around that weakness in the middle of the field. Thank the gods that Matthews is playing inside at all.

I actually like what I saw from Barrington in the NE game - didn't see the Atlanta game, so I don't know how he did there; but overall, I'd say Barrington should be given an opportunity to stick. The rest of 'em should all be cut in the offseason.

That said, the lack of playmakers in the middle is all the more reason to gameplan more to have guys like Perry, Neal, and D. Jones on the field, and Matthews/Neal roving in the middle. In base 3-4, count Barrington as 1... why not try Neal there?? He's primarily a pass rusher and edge guy, but he's got a lot of bulk and movement skill for the position. I'd rather have Neal on the field at ILB than any of the actual ILB's we have.

In base you could have Daniels, Guion, D. Jones on the line; and Peppers, Neal, Barrington, and Matthews at LB.

Just about anything is better than having Hawk and Brad Jones on the field.

[wist43]

The one theory of wist that I do find interesting is the old chestnut that the Packers don't draft defense well and haven't since Wolf came on board.

While I think that is overstating it, they do go through streaks at positions where nothing they try hits. And then at QB and WR, Ted could wake up from a year long coma 5 days before the draft and get you 3 guys who can play in the NFL.

I like a lot of the players we have now... the question for this current crop of players is, '... where do you play them, and how do you use them'?? There absolutely has been a disconnect between TT and dunderdummy. Less so this year, as I think dunderdummy was brought into the principles office during the offseason.

That said, it is just true that the Packers historically don't draft very well on the defensive side of the ball, but I'm taking that back to the 70's when I really began to pay attention to our drafts - and as you said, they could sling a spitball at the wall and hit on a WR.

[George Cumby]

And I really meant this you idiot - if you don't know anything about football, you should probably keep your commentary restricted to how much like the team colors.

I really like forest green!

[Maxie the Taxi]

I really love gold!

[pbmax]

I like a lot of the players we have now... the question for this current crop of players is, '... where do you play them, and how do you use them'?? There absolutely has been a disconnect between TT and dunderdummy. Less so this year, as I think dunderdummy was brought into the principles office during the offseason.

That said, it is just true that the Packers historically don't draft very well on the defensive side of the ball, but I'm taking that back to the 70's when I really began to pay attention to our drafts - and as you said, they could sling a spitball at the wall and hit on a WR.

Well we diverge here too. Daniels, Guion, Boyd and Jones all had awful, pedestrian games against a bunch of scrubs. Neal was the only front seven guy to show up other than Matthews.

[Fritz]

Against Russell Wilson in a passing situation, how about the NASCAR package, if one of the guys is a spy? That might keep those ILB's on the bench.

[vince]

And I really meant this you idiot - if you don't know anything about football, you should probably keep your commentary restricted to how much like the team colors.

With authority!
Packers Defense: What My Eyes Might Be Missing

Packers Yards Allowed

The Numbers: The Green Bay Packers defense ranks 26th in the NFL with 374.4 yards allowed per game. The Atlanta Falcons nearly came back on it Monday night. At first glance, the defense looks very vulnerable over the long haul.

The Truth: No one will mistake the Packers defense for the Seattle Seahawks defense. But there is an incredible amount of fluff in its yardage allowed totals, due to the fact that the Packers offense is so good that opponents rack up gobs of garbage yardage against a prevent defense.

Opponents have accumulated 1,126 passing yards and 359 rushing yards when trailing by 17 or more points (all stat splits come from the Football Outsiders internal database unless noted otherwise). Those 1,485 yards work out to an average of 114.2 yards per game, over 30 percent of the Packers total yardage allowed! It's safe to assume that the Packers defense can tighten up and cut down on that 114.2 yard figure if it has to. After all, those 17-point leads never happen if the defense does not make a few early stops.

Coming at it another way, Football Outsiders ranks defenses by quarter in its Premium Database. Here is how the Packers defense shakes out on a quarter-by-quarter basis:

Packers Defensive Rank by Quarter
Quarter....Rank
First.........10th
Second.....14th
Third........14th
Fourth......28th

Football Outsiders' methodology adjusts for late-game blowouts, but it does not completely ignore them; scares like the Packers received on Monday night are a reminder that so-called "meaningless" drives can pile up and cause a problem. But the quarter-by-quarter analysis shows a better-than-average defense through three quarters with a habit of letting up when it enters the fourth leading 48-7. That's as good a defense as the Packers need to remain Super Bowl contenders. When the games are tighter, the Packers are less likely to let up.

And now I see in another thread that PB once again beat me to the punch.

I love green.

[mraynrand]

It's just possible a lot of guys took the night off. Can't get away with that against the Bills. They are gonna bring the hammer.

[woodbuck27]

Well we diverge here too. Daniels, Guion, Boyd and Jones all had awful, pedestrian games against a bunch of scrubs. Neal was the only front seven guy to show up other than Matthews.

I felt that Sam Barrington had a decent game with 5 Tackles and 2 Assisted Tackles:

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/201412...alyze=boxscore

[wist43]

Well we diverge here too. Daniels, Guion, Boyd and Jones all had awful, pedestrian games against a bunch of scrubs. Neal was the only front seven guy to show up other than Matthews.

It sounds like dunderdummy ran a pretty vanilla 2-4 most of the game, no?? Regardless of what coverages he ran on the back end... if he ran his patented static 2-4 most of the game - then he set his players up to fail before the first snap.

I can't really comment on the type of game those guys had b/c I haven't seen the game. If we ran a 2-4 most of the game, and remained fairly static in our presnap looks, then that front is very predicatable. The players do not have the assistance of scheme helping them gain an edge - it is straight forward mano-o-mano... no deception, and very little stunting and blitzing.

If that is what dunderdummy ran most of the game, then the lack of pressure is more his fault than the players. If he put them in the best position to make plays - and it certainly sounds like he did not, and the results would say that he did not - then it would be on the players.

Someone posted that we ran the 3-4 front 8 times during the game... what else did he run, how often, how many blitzes, etc??

[Joemailman]

Someone posted that we ran the 3-4 front 8 times during the game... what else did he run, how often, how many blitzes, etc??

Blitzed only 24% of the time, the least since week 3.

[Zool]

Blitzed only 24% of the time, the least since week 3.

And a lot of that was during the 4th quarter attempt to not lose.

[mraynrand]

I had the feeling the Packers were in 'prevent mode' the entire game.

[George Cumby]

I had the feeling the Packers were in 'prevent mode' the entire game.

Which is what one does with a big lead, n'est ce pas?

Je t'aime vert!

[vince]

It's pretty clear that Dom's approach revolves around this, from the Quality Stats link in Woody's thread... He's said as much before.

3. Owning the Quarterback Battle

As you've likely heard from us, efficiency in the passing game on both sides of the football gives you best chance to win in this league. That's why we call Passer Rating Differential the "Mother of All Stats." However, if you want a spin off to this story, look at Real Quarterback Rating Differential. This stat applies better to today's discussion particularly because of how Russell Wilson is running the football under center. RQRD adjusts the PRD to sacks and rushing totals from quarterbacks to give a more complete picture.

Don't be surprised that these four teams lead the league in RQRD. This includes four of the top five offenses in this area (the Dallas Cowboys rank fourth in REALQBR). The Green Bay Packers led the league with a 27.18 RQRD, followed by the Denver Broncos with a 18.77 RQRD.

The New England Patriots and Seattle Seahawks rank third and fourth in RQRD, respectively. However, they are only two teams to rank the in the top 9 on both sides of the football (the Indianapolis Colts are quite close, ranking 9th and 10th on offense and defense, respectively).

Defenses obviously don't operate in a vacuum. Having (by far) the most efficient QB in history tends to make his defensive approach more conservative.

[woodbuck27]

With authority!
Packers Defense: What My Eyes Might Be Missing



And now I see in another thread that PB once again beat me to the punch.

I love green.

This is a solid find:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2...istics-told-me

Did B/R come through here? Give us a ditto heads up on a Football Outsiders Report/Analysis Result?

I believe so. I also find it comforting.