More Banjo: Week 3 vs. Cincinnati

[pbmax]

Hey, I called one right!

Wilde: http://host.madison.com/wsj/sports/f...48838e603.html

On Sunday, Capers employed a four-safety look – Ha Ha Clinton-Dix and Marwin Evans at traditional safety, Burnett mostly in the slot and Jones as the hybrid inside linebacker

[bobblehead]

Hey, I called one right!

Wilde: http://host.madison.com/wsj/sports/f...48838e603.html

Yea, I commented during the game to friends that when Brice comes back we have a good problem. 4 safeties you want on the field. Ghostpepper played pretty damn good and despite a couple bad coverage handoffs he was a gamechanger. Brice is a thumper. HaHa is a probowler and MM still loves Burnett.

[pbmax]

In fairness, Lazor had a bad offense but one big advantage.

One of the Packers on the postgame show (Lowry I think) said they watched preseason and game film of only the Bengals. So they got a lot of unscouted looks from the Benglas and Lazor.

They fixed the run D in the second half and closed up on that offense, which a functional defense should do. Wth one exception, they got the ball back for the offense. On the one scoring play in the second half, the Bengals had good field position and the D game up a big play but then held for a FG.

It wasn't a fire drill and they tightened up. They are not there yet, but there were still encouraging signs.

[run pMc]

In fairness, Lazor had a bad offense but one big advantage.

One of the Packers on the postgame show (Lowry I think) said they watched preseason and game film of only the Bengals. So they got a lot of unscouted looks from the Benglas and Lazor.

They fixed the run D in the second half and closed up on that offense, which a functional defense should do. Wth one exception, they got the ball back for the offense. On the one scoring play in the second half, the Bengals had good field position and the D game up a big play but then held for a FG.

It wasn't a fire drill and they tightened up. They are not there yet, but there were still encouraging signs.

I realize it's a "what-if", but Mixon slipping on that 3rd and 1 was a big play. That drive would have likely kept going and *possibly* ended up as 7 instead of 3 points. Still, if this defense can hold teams to 17-21 points per game they are contenders because of their offense.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Still, if this defense can hold teams to 17-21 points per game they are contenders because of their offense.

Contenders for what? Packer offense hasn't been great for several years, and now with iffy O-line, they are more reliant on Rodgers voodoo than ever.

Maybe parity in the NFL means lots of teams are contenders.

Packers so look like a pretty solid team, other than lack of depth at O-line. They're good, not special.

[Zool]

Contenders for what? Packer offense hasn't been great for several years, and now with iffy O-line, they are more reliant on Rodgers voodoo than ever.

Maybe parity in the NFL means lots of teams are contenders.

Packers so look like a pretty solid team, other than lack of depth at O-line. They're good, not special.

15th through 3 http://www.espn.com/nfl/statistics/t...lPointsPerGame
4th http://www.espn.com/nfl/statistics/t...Game/year/2016
15th http://www.espn.com/nfl/statistics/t...Game/year/2015
1st http://www.espn.com/nfl/statistics/t...Game/year/2014
8th http://www.espn.com/nfl/statistics/t...Game/year/2013
5th http://www.espn.com/nfl/statistics/t...Game/year/2012
1st http://www.espn.com/nfl/statistics/t...Game/year/2011
10th http://www.espn.com/nfl/statistics/t...Game/year/2010

Unless you don't count scoring average as a good metric for an offense.