More Banjo: @ Saints Week Oh Who the *$%&! Cares

[Guiness]

On a lot of plays last night, the receivers were not "wide open uncovered". Open? I suppose, but on many it took excellent throws to get the completion and not a batted ball or an interception. That is what the elite QBs give you that guys like Cutler do not give you on a consistent basis.

There were two passes in particular I remember in which a receiver ended up totally uncovered. The announcers commented on it, I really can't remember why it was. I seem to have a bit of spot amnesia where last night is concerned

[pbmax]

There were two passes in particular I remember in which a receiver ended up totally uncovered. The announcers commented on it, I really can't remember why it was. I seem to have a bit of spot amnesia where last night is concerned

There were three I remember. TD to TE in the flat. Similar play, midfield, player into flat after motion. He was covered but it was late and behind. Packers actually corned him well to get him down when they did.

Third was the crossing pattern out of backfield after motion. He was uncovered completely and was the only one other than the TE who I would call wide open. I think an ILB (Lattimore) blew that one.

[Patler]

There were two passes in particular I remember in which a receiver ended up totally uncovered. The announcers commented on it, I really can't remember why it was. I seem to have a bit of spot amnesia where last night is concerned

Sure there were. As I wrote in another post, there are usually some of those in every game. But I didn't see guys running absolutely clear all night long. Yes, they were "open" and Brees put it on the money all night long.

[Guiness]

Sure there were. As I wrote in another post, there are usually some of those in every game. But I didn't see guys running absolutely clear all night long. Yes, they were "open" and Brees put it on the money all night long.

Ya, I saw that after I posted. Usually when someone is wide open, on the replay you see that someone slipped, or ran into his own player, something, there's a reason for it. There were a couple of times in this game where someone was just flat out uncovered...running a flat route I think, go figure.

[Joemailman]

"We need to tackle the damn ball carrier and put him on the ground," he said. "That's what we'll be focused on."

Is this simply frustration with the players, or is MM starting to run out of patience with his defensive coaching staff? He's stuck with Capers for a long time, but he's fired his defensive coaching staff before.

[George Cumby]

Is this simply frustration with the players, or is MM starting to run out of patience with his defensive coaching staff? He's stuck with Capers for a long time, but he's fired his defensive coaching staff before.

I hope the latter. The players, mostly, are there.

[Maxie the Taxi]

"We need to tackle the damn ball carrier and put him on the ground," he said. "That's what we'll be focused on."

Is this simply frustration with the players, or is MM starting to run out of patience with his defensive coaching staff? He's stuck with Capers for a long time, but he's fired his defensive coaching staff before.

When I hear this kind of thing from McCarthy, I get frustrated. It's kind of like the Sales Manager of a declining company saying: "We've got to go out and beat the bushes and close sales." As PB might say, it's just "word salad."

There is definitely something wrong in Green Bay and it's been wrong for some time. The Packers' defense is a mess. In a big game against an elite QB the defense got gashed for 200 yards on the ground and 300 yards through the air.

What's the answer? "We need to tackle the damn ball carrier." Well, tackling the ball carrier helps, but the problems run deeper than that.

PERSONNEL -- The Packers are undersized and under-manned on the D-line. The Saints had five guys on their O-line who are well over 300 lbs. The Pack's D-line is barely over 300 lbs. per man. Two of these men are untested rookies. And this undersizing is by design. Bigger, tested D-linemen like Pickett and Jolly have been available all season after Raji went down, but the Packers' brain trust passed on them.

SCHEME -- So, what is Dom Capers' answer to this intentional mismatch? Play only two D-lineman! That didn't work out too well against the Saints, so reportedly Dom is reconsidering. According to Rob Demovsky:

"Capers might have to decide whether he can continue to play his undersized nickel package, which features just two defensive linemen, as his primary defensive look."

While Stubby rages about putting the ball carrier on the ground, Dom doesn't seem too worried:

"I’ve seen us through the first half of the season play pretty good run defense, so I feel like we can," defensive coordinator Dom Capers insisted Monday. "You look at last night, you might question it a little bit. But I've seen us have our moments where we've played good run defense. That's what we've got to do this second half. We know when you have something like that you get tested, and you get tested until you take care of it."

Are you kidding me? He has seen his team "have our moments" of good run defense?

Now that's the sense of urgency Stubby is no doubt looking for out of his Defensive Coordinator!

To be fair to Dom, I've seen the Packers' run defense have its moments too, but it's been damn few and far between.

HEAD COACHING -- However, Stubby doesn't want to talk about scheme and personnel, which I have just done:

"Everybody wants to talk about scheme and personnel," McCarthy said. "That's something that you’re always weighing or looking at. Or are there other individuals who deserve opportunities? Can we use other individuals a certain way? That's really what we talk about as coaches day-in and day-out. Our issue is on run D are fundamental. We need to do a better job of staying square [and] getting in our gaps."

Yes, our 200 lb. DB's need to fill the gaps between those 300+ offensive linemen and stay square. I can see that.

In my judgement the real problem IS scheme and personnel. Our personnel have been tailored to fit Capers' scheme and we're paying the price for it.

[Joemailman]

When I hear this kind of thing from McCarthy, I get frustrated. It's kind of like the Sales Manager of a declining company saying: "We've got to go out and beat the bushes and close sales." As PB might say, it's just "word salad."

There is definitely something wrong in Green Bay and it's been wrong for some time. The Packers' defense is a mess. In a big game against an elite QB the defense got gashed for 200 yards on the ground and 300 yards through the air.

What's the answer? "We need to tackle the damn ball carrier." Well, tackling the ball carrier helps, but the problems run deeper than that.

PERSONNEL -- The Packers are undersized and under-manned on the D-line. The Saints had five guys on their O-line who are well over 300 lbs. The Pack's D-line is barely over 300 lbs. per man. Two of these men are untested rookies. And this undersizing is by design. Bigger, tested D-linemen like Pickett and Jolly have been available all season after Raji went down, but the Packers' brain trust passed on them.

SCHEME -- So, what is Dom Capers' answer to this intentional mismatch? Play only two D-lineman! That didn't work out too well against the Saints, so reportedly Dom is reconsidering. According to Rob Demovsky:

"Capers might have to decide whether he can continue to play his undersized nickel package, which features just two defensive linemen, as his primary defensive look."

While Stubby rages about putting the ball carrier on the ground, Dom doesn't seem too worried:



Are you kidding me? He has seen his team "have our moments" of good run defense?

Now that's the sense of urgency Stubby is no doubt looking for out of his Defensive Coordinator!

To be fair to Dom, I've seen the Packers' run defense have its moments too, but it's been damn few and far between.

HEAD COACHING -- However, Stubby doesn't want to talk about scheme and personnel, which I have just done:



Yes, our 200 lb. DB's need to fill the gaps between those 300+ offensive linemen and stay square. I can see that.

In my judgement the real problem IS scheme and personnel. Our personnel have been tailored to fit Capers' scheme and we're paying the price for it.

Actually, the Packers have played decent (not outstanding) run defense in half their games. The problem is they've played terrible run defense in the other half. And it's not like the teams that have run over them are so much better running the ball than the other teams. They've just been maddeningly inconsistent when it comes to playing the run. I think that's what has MM so frustrated. It looked like they had had 3 consecutive pretty good weeks, and then New Orleans happened. I don't think the problem is really the scheme, or the lack of size up front. If that were the case, I think they'd be consistently bad unless facing a poor running team. The real problem I think is a combination of poor tackling, and poor gap discipline. Whether the Packers need a wholesale personnel change or a coaching change is the big question. The Packers under Capers will never be a great run-stuffing team because of the amount of nickel Capers uses. But they have shown the ability to play middle-of-the-road run defense which would be good enough if they could do it consistently.