Results 1 to 20 of 225

Thread: So if the defense is terrible again this season?

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Fried Rat HOFer KYPack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    In the Bluegrass
    Posts
    8,656
    Blog Entries
    1
    We were the 25th overall defense, 25th against the run.

    Give us credit, we gave up exactly 2000 rushing yards, that's hard to do.

    We were 24th vs the pass, so that's some balance.

  2. #2
    Skeptical Rat HOFer wist43's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    11,777
    Quote Originally Posted by KYPack View Post
    We were the 25th overall defense, 25th against the run.

    Give us credit, we gave up exactly 2000 rushing yards, that's hard to do.

    We were 24th vs the pass, so that's some balance.
    I just grabbed that number off of CBSsportsline...

    Went back there, and they have those numbers; and in another spot have us listed at 27th against the run, and 27 overall, lol...

    I'm all doped up from a surgery, doesn't help when a website just throws numbers up there without worry if they are correct or not

    Any way you slice it - it's ugly, ugly stuff.
    wist

  3. #3
    Fried Rat HOFer KYPack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    In the Bluegrass
    Posts
    8,656
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by wist43 View Post
    I just grabbed that number off of CBSsportsline...

    Went back there, and they have those numbers; and in another spot have us listed at 27th against the run, and 27 overall, lol...

    I'm all doped up from a surgery, doesn't help when a website just throws numbers up there without worry if they are correct or not

    Any way you slice it - it's ugly, ugly stuff.
    That is true. Different site ranks the D's differently. The NFL site criteria is yards allowed. Some sites go by points or a weighted formula. The GBP had a bottom tier D last season no matter how ya cut it. We need to get better.

    I think you are too hung up on criticizing Capers. The guy is a brilliant defensive coach. he came in and straightened out our D when he got here. That said, it's probably time to change things up if the D doesn't perform this season.

    The constant drone about the 2-4 is annoying. The 2-4 is a nickel. When we play it with Neal or Perry at one LB, it's really a 30 front anyhow. 3-3, 2-4 is basically the same set, especially on the back end. We need help at multiple spots. George Allen, Buddy Ryan, & Fritz Shurmr couldn't make a go of our D last season. Capers was undermanned last season and hopefully will have the troops he needs this year. A factor in our poor performance last season was an offensive team that was woeful with ARod out. We just didn't have an offense that could give the D a blow and they wore down.

    Sometimes when sending in the defenses, you have to give to get. If a coverage is giving up "routine" 17 yard completions, it still might be the right scheme. The safeties made few plays last season and it's tough to dial up an ideal coverage when you get such scanty help from the back line like we had last year.

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by KYPack View Post
    That is true. Different site ranks the D's differently. The NFL site criteria is yards allowed. Some sites go by points or a weighted formula. The GBP had a bottom tier D last season no matter how ya cut it. We need to get better.

    I think you are too hung up on criticizing Capers. The guy is a brilliant defensive coach. he came in and straightened out our D when he got here. That said, it's probably time to change things up if the D doesn't perform this season.

    The constant drone about the 2-4 is annoying. The 2-4 is a nickel. When we play it with Neal or Perry at one LB, it's really a 30 front anyhow. 3-3, 2-4 is basically the same set, especially on the back end. We need help at multiple spots. George Allen, Buddy Ryan, & Fritz Shurmr couldn't make a go of our D last season. Capers was undermanned last season and hopefully will have the troops he needs this year. A factor in our poor performance last season was an offensive team that was woeful with ARod out. We just didn't have an offense that could give the D a blow and they wore down.

    Sometimes when sending in the defenses, you have to give to get. If a coverage is giving up "routine" 17 yard completions, it still might be the right scheme. The safeties made few plays last season and it's tough to dial up an ideal coverage when you get such scanty help from the back line like we had last year.
    You're making the mistake of using rational thought in this discussion. The nattering nabobs of negativity want nothing of it!

    They want nothing less than a pike with Caper's head on it. They may very well get their wish if things don't improve (and I would agree).

  5. #5
    Skeptical Rat HOFer wist43's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    11,777
    Quote Originally Posted by KYPack View Post
    That is true. Different site ranks the D's differently. The NFL site criteria is yards allowed. Some sites go by points or a weighted formula. The GBP had a bottom tier D last season no matter how ya cut it. We need to get better.

    I think you are too hung up on criticizing Capers. The guy is a brilliant defensive coach. he came in and straightened out our D when he got here. That said, it's probably time to change things up if the D doesn't perform this season.

    The constant drone about the 2-4 is annoying. The 2-4 is a nickel. When we play it with Neal or Perry at one LB, it's really a 30 front anyhow. 3-3, 2-4 is basically the same set, especially on the back end. We need help at multiple spots. George Allen, Buddy Ryan, & Fritz Shurmr couldn't make a go of our D last season. Capers was undermanned last season and hopefully will have the troops he needs this year. A factor in our poor performance last season was an offensive team that was woeful with ARod out. We just didn't have an offense that could give the D a blow and they wore down.

    Sometimes when sending in the defenses, you have to give to get. If a coverage is giving up "routine" 17 yard completions, it still might be the right scheme. The safeties made few plays last season and it's tough to dial up an ideal coverage when you get such scanty help from the back line like we had last year.
    The reason to harp on the 2-4, is b/c Capers plays it far more than any other team in the league - if he played even amounts of 3-3 and 4-2 and the numbers were as pathetic as the 2-4, then there would be no hope whatsoever, and I would figure the personnel to be the problem instead of the coaching.

    But the way Capers plays the nickel is an outlier compared to the rest of the league - a huge, throbbing outlier.

    As I mentioned in another post, I read an article recently in which it detailed the amount of nickel/dime that teams are playing - the Saints played more nickel/dime than anyone in the league, 85% of snaps. The Packers came in 5th or 6th on that list as I remembered.

    The Saints played the 3-3 and 4-2 about evenly, and no 2-4; whereas the Packers played no 3-3 or 4-2, and 2-4 65% of the time. The Niners and Redskins played the 2-4 in the 40 percentile; no one else played it above 30%.

    That is an outlier compared to the rest of the league.

    If it were an outlier that were working - being a copycat league, the rest of the league would be following suit, and Capers would be knighted as a genius; instead, the Packers defense is garbage, and some Packer fans have actually noticed... some even calling "for his head on a pike".

    To tell you the truth, I'm a bit surprised the homers aren't more on Capers's case - b/c if Capers is not to blame, then TT is - yet I don't hear anyone complaining about him either. It would seem that Packer fans are content with garbage defense.

    Strange... almost like the "long suffering" years of the 70's and 80's, no??
    wist

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •