PDA

View Full Version : What I am seeing - Packers 2005 Season to now.



woodbuck27
06-21-2006, 02:06 PM
Notes on the Packers 2005 Offence - Defence

by: woodbuck27 June 21, 2006.

Ref: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/drivestats.php


The Packers had 186 drives in 2005 with a success of 27.93 yards / Drive (14th in the NFL). The Packers had 1.49 points / Drive ( 20th in NFL ) and .167 TD's / Drive (18th in the NFL).

In 2004 we ranked 4th in the NFL in yard's per drive at 35.41 or nearly 7.5 more yards. We were 6th in the NFL in both points per Drive ( 2.16 ) and TD's / Drive ( 2.51). So OUR "O" fell off about 15 positions overall, compared to results we enjoyed in 2004.

Why was that?

** The Packers had .226 TO's / Drive ( The WORST - Turnover Rate in the NFL ).

The Packers were also - 32nd in Interceptions / Drive and 23rd in Fumbles / Drive. These are major concerns. . . . that 'the Packers' have to overcome.

The Packers were 30th in the NFL with their line of scrimmage, starting on average ( at approx. the 29 yard line). We were always - dug in too deep, constantly, trying to get out of a HOLE. That . . . coupled with the fact, that [OUR "D" always had to defend well into Packer territory, didn't bode well for us on the scoreboard.

The Packers ranked 5th in punts /drive, but now consider their Turn Over Rate - at 32nd in the NFL, coupled with a DSR ( Drive Success Rate) that was ranked 13th in the NFL. Is this simply a matter of inconsistency, or 'the hot and cold' syndrome? I choose neither.

I believe it was due to injuries to key players and an inadequate OL due to the loss of two starting guards in the off season, and those valuable guards not being adequately replaced. It was also a matter, of a lack of depth on OUR side. The OL woes and injuries caused ' the Running Game ' to collapse and place far too much pressure on OUR passing game.

We also saw too many penalty's on the OL, and LT Chad Clifton had a sub par performance last season. We saw a constant revolving door in the middle of OUR OL, and maybe it was simply a matter of Chad Clifton having to be concerned with alot more than protecting the QB? He never knew who would be lining up on his right . Did he feel he had to cover two positions?

Our QB did what he ( Brett Favre) does best .Try to compete, but where were his weapons, besides Donald Driver? We saw a revolving door on OUR OL and at RB and WR and Bubba Franks never got on track at the TE spot . Did he ever get in proper shape? He was hampered with injury and IMO not ready to go ( proper conditioning) due to his prolonged stance to hold out of TC. He needed to be signed to a fair contract and onboard, alot sooner than he was.

I'll also stand by this claim. In TC last year, we saw way too much attention given to Aaron Rodgers. I don't believe that when the season began and 'the Lions' came to town we were in any way - shape - manner . . . READY. Thus the poor start, despite close games generally and all the injuries.


Notes on the Packers 2005 Defence.


I believe we saw Jim Bates deliver on improving OUT Defence in 2005. We also see a long ways to go for this season. We added three major pieces to that "D" in CB Chales Woodson ( we think?) , DT Ryan Pickett and S Marquand Manual. If these three FA's do work out for us, the Packers should be better on the defensive side of the ball.

So where did OUR Defence stand Vs. the rest of the NFL in 2005?


We were 9th in the NFL in yards / Drive at 25.23 yards.
We were 15th in points per Drive and 12th in TD's per Drive, in the NFL; but we were only 26th in Turnover's per Drive and 29th in interception's per drive and 16th in fumbles (caused) per drive.

Our defence, was 32nd or WORST in the NFL in having to defend from inside their own 35 yard line. Our defence always had their backs to the wall. It suffered the same woes as OUR offence as far as field position, when it came on the field to try to defend.

Despite the foregoing the Packers Defence was rated 9th overall in the NFL with a DSR of .641.


Net Ranking of NFL Teams the Packers face in 2006


NET values are simply OFFENSE minus DEFENSE

Overall in Net ranking, we rank 11th in the NFL .

If we look at OUR opposition in 2006 - how were they ranked compared to the Packers?

The only teams that we face with a better Net ranking are:

Would you believe it's only one team , the Seattle Seahawks, with a ranking of (2nd in the NFL- Overall or in Net Ranking)?

In other words, we match up favorably (given last season's Offensive and Defensive Drive Stat's - and Net Ranking), with the teams we face in 2006.

Now with all things considered, like improvements to teams with Off season moves via trades, FA , the Draft and Coaching changes etc.) this analysis won't amount to 'a hill of beans' for most of you, but in any case you have it . The statistical facts.

By the way, how were the teams we face in 2006 ranked?

Listed by order of who we face in the schedule:

Packers - Ranked 13th on 'O' and. . . . 9th on 'D' and. . . . .overall or Net . . .11th.
************************************************** ***********

Bears - Ranked 31th on 'O' and. . . . 1st on 'D' and. . . . . overall or Net. . .21st.

Saints - Ranked 15th on 'O' and. . . . 21st on 'D' and . . . . overall or Net. . .18th

Lions - Ranked 25th on 'O' and. . . . 25th on 'D' and. . . . overall or Net. . . 27th

Eagles - Ranked 29th on 'O' and. . . . 8th on 'D' and. . . . overall or Net. . .24th

Rams - Ranked 16th on 'O' and. . . . 27th on 'D' and. . . . overall or Net. . . 22nd.

Dolphins - Ranked 27th on 'O' and. . . . .15th on 'D' and. . . . overall or Net. . . .25th.

Card's - Ranked 19th on 'O' and. . . . 10th on 'D' and. . . .overall or Net. . . .16th

Bill's - Ranked 24th on 'O' and. . . . . . . 4th on 'D' and . . . .overall or Net. . . .30th

Vikings - Ranked. 20th on 'O' and. .. . . . . 20th on 'D' and. . . . .overall or Net. . .23rd

Pat's - Ranked. . . 6th on 'O' and. . . . . 26th on 'D' and. . . . .overall or Net. 12th

Seahawks - Ranked. . . 2nd on 'O' and. . . .12th on 'D' and. . . .overall or Net. . 2nd

Jet's - Ranked. . . 23rd on 'O' and. . . 29th on 'D' and. . . .overall or Net. . .29th

49er's - Ranked 32nd on 'O' and. . . . .28th on 'D' and. . . .overall or Net. . . .32nd

What are OUR concerns in 2006?

From my viewpoint, I see the following needs:

Our ST play last season was not good.

We have to find a return game on kick off's and punts. To date, that remains a problem, an open question mark through the Mini camps and OTA's. Who do we have available to improve this area of ST's? We are aware from reports that the search is on but the OTA's are nearly over and we see little to answer there.

Punting was dreadful last season and I believe that BJ Sander isn't the answer but will Jon Ryan fill the bill ? The competition between these two continues, but it appears to me that Jon Ryan has a huge lead as OUR new punter.

Our kicking game with Ryan Longwell didn't serve us well in 2005 as well. Will we even approach what we saw there with kickers Billy Cundiff and Dave Raynor competing for that job?

Turnovers! We give up too many on offence and don't take back enough on the "D". Somehow, OUR dreadful ranking on offence in that area, has to improve dramatically. We were 32nd or 'worst in the NFL' , on interceptions / Drive and turnovers and 23rd worst on fumbles on offence.

Adversity.

Damn - we had way over the top, too much of that in 2005. We have to just hope that OUR RB's can come back from serios injuries ( the odds are against that - based on the two year rule for a RB to recover from a leg injury ) and in all liklihood, will see - 'a running game by committee approach' utilized in 2006 for any REAL improvement in OUR offence or I believe we put all that pressure back on Brett Favre and the passing game.

The Packers OL must get in gear with the new ZBS, and be effective by at least mid season, or we are drafting very early in next April's draft . That is no easy request as we are well aware, that the entire middle of OUR OL, will be very inexperienced compared to OUR opponents.

Sorry to place this in here, but I am not impressed with all I see to date, with the poor attendence at the OTA's and the results we are getting from reports, as far as OUR RB's, TE's and WR's progress's are concerned (Donald Driver as usual , exempt from any criticism). The OTA's are nearly over and did the Packers miss the boat there, as far as building towards a successful TC?

I believe that TT and M3 have to go to a more toughen'd up approach, with the entire team's goals in mind. I counted as high of 20-25% absenteeism among players that I would slate to, or safely say, would make OUR 53-man Roster. I don't like it. I hate that Charles Woodson and Al Harris, went for a crap on their teammates at the OTA's, and these are supposedly among OUR leaders. I'm not impressed as 'a loyal' - long time Packer fan.

Polaris
06-21-2006, 02:28 PM
Nice, Woodbuck. It says, in a rather lengthy manner, what I've stated in my blog on numerous occasions: Despite the injuries, this team could have won several more games last year if they'd just taken better care of the ball on offense and had a little better special teams play.

I can think of two games last year that were narrowly lost last year which could have been won if we'd been able to kick a field goal or extra point, or been able to cover a kick. I can think of another two or three games that were winnable if we'd just taken better care of the ball.

And of course, the Carolina game, which we could have won if our QB had simply had the presence of mind to call a huddle before the final play. He had a great second half but that was a critical lapse in judgement in the clutch that hurt.

So, in retrospect, what hurt this team more than anything in 2005 was not the injuries as much as it was poor execution, poor decision making, and poor special teams play. And ALL of that goes back to coaching and discipline.

I was greatly hoping that McCarthy would instill a little discipline in this error-plagued group; to this point, I'm not seeing it yet.

Partial
06-21-2006, 02:30 PM
Woodbuck you're out of control bold

woodbuck27
06-21-2006, 02:49 PM
Nice, Woodbuck. It says, in a rather lengthy manner, what I've stated in my blog on numerous occasions: Despite the injuries, this team could have won several more games last year if they'd just taken better care of the ball on offense and had a little better special teams play.

I can think of two games last year that were narrowly lost last year which could have been won if we'd been able to kick a field goal or extra point, or been able to cover a kick. I can think of another two or three games that were winnable if we'd just taken better care of the ball.

And of course, the Carolina game, which we could have won if our QB had simply had the presence of mind to call a huddle before the final play. He had a great second half but that was a critical lapse in judgement in the clutch that hurt.

So, in retrospect, what hurt this team more than anything in 2005 was not the injuries as much as it was poor execution, poor decision making, and poor special teams play. And ALL of that goes back to coaching and discipline.

I was greatly hoping that McCarthy would instill a little discipline in this error-plagued group; to this point, I'm not seeing it yet.

I dug up the material for that post yesterday and spinned my yarn this morning.

The Packers do have the potential to do well in 2006 but so many area's have to be addressed. The biggest one's are the OL and ST's and this team had to find some heart and play with 'ball a fire'.

Coming out of the OTA's and all the reports (good bad or indifferent) it matters little what TT did so well in the Draft, and any efforts good or otherwise that we saw from him in Free agency, if the TEAM approach and them coming together doesn't - GET THERE.

woodbuck27
06-21-2006, 03:02 PM
Woodbuck you're out of control bold

I try to be a Packer fan with a straight up approach to what I search to see.

I'm afraid too, that being a longtime fan - that I have little patience for the way we played between the Lombardi and Holmgren Era's. I can't stand to see 'the Packers' lay aside the absolute need 'to play it's best' for the loyal fans.

I may not have much longer to enjoy Brett Favre and what we endured last season was predictable based on OUR off season and before it's too late I want TT and M3 and all the Packer Coach's to pull out all the stops.

I don't subscribe to the bias that you start any player based on the $ you pay him. I want only the BEST and most deserving players to man both sides of the ball once TC breaks for the regular season.

If I was TT and M3 .The likes of Al Harris and Charles Woodson might get a wee bit embarassed. Their attitude's really suck in my view. They needed to do one thing, after the season we had last.

Get their inexcusable butts to the OTA's and demonstrate their leadership not lack thereof.

Partial
06-21-2006, 03:20 PM
No I just meant you use bolded text often

woodbuck27
06-21-2006, 04:13 PM
No I just meant you use bolded text often

What can I say but I'm an emphatic fella. :mrgreen:

In any case - I went back and address'd that Partial. :roll: