Studs and Ughs

[MJZiggy]

Ok, Ok. It's Studs and Duds.

by E. Homer.

Check out this week's article. (http://www.packerrats.com)

[channtheman]

Agree with you on the announcers. The one also couldn't admit that Jennings did not have PI on his TD play. He was convinced that Jennings had pushed off. "It was very subtle" I recall him saying. This along with last weeks announcers leaves a lot to be desired.

The defense blew the lead again in the 4th and I too wondered why MM would go for it in the 4th when Jacksonville was doing jack shit with the ball the whole game. His tight end screen was stupid too since on the previous TD we had, Jennings basically just ran into the endzone and turned around. Why not at least try that same play MM? I guess a coach's mind has a lot of crap going around in it that they can never think straight or something.

[denverYooper]

Agree with you on the announcers. The one also couldn't admit that Jennings did not have PI on his TD play. He was convinced that Jennings had pushed off. "It was very subtle" I recall him saying. This along with last weeks announcers leaves a lot to be desired.

The defense blew the lead again in the 4th and I too wondered why MM would go for it in the 4th when Jacksonville was doing jack shit with the ball the whole game. His tight end screen was stupid too since on the previous TD we had, Jennings basically just ran into the endzone and turned around. Why not at least try that same play MM? I guess a coach's mind has a lot of crap going around in it that they can never think straight or something.

Doesn't MM have a new baby? He probably hasn't slept all season. It's gotta affect his playcalling.

edit: 4-3 pre-baby, 1-6 post-baby.

[channtheman]

Agree with you on the announcers. The one also couldn't admit that Jennings did not have PI on his TD play. He was convinced that Jennings had pushed off. "It was very subtle" I recall him saying. This along with last weeks announcers leaves a lot to be desired.

The defense blew the lead again in the 4th and I too wondered why MM would go for it in the 4th when Jacksonville was doing jack shit with the ball the whole game. His tight end screen was stupid too since on the previous TD we had, Jennings basically just ran into the endzone and turned around. Why not at least try that same play MM? I guess a coach's mind has a lot of crap going around in it that they can never think straight or something.

Doesn't MM have a new baby? He probably hasn't slept all season. It's gotta affect his playcalling.

edit: 4-3 pre-baby, 1-6 post-baby.

There you go. In MM's case it seems to have made him worse and/or think less. In TT's case though, I think he needs to get a wife so he can get some balls and go out and get some good free agents.

[MateoInMex]

Agree with you on the announcers. The one also couldn't admit that Jennings did not have PI on his TD play. He was convinced that Jennings had pushed off. "It was very subtle" I recall him saying. This along with last weeks announcers leaves a lot to be desired.

The defense blew the lead again in the 4th and I too wondered why MM would go for it in the 4th when Jacksonville was doing jack shit with the ball the whole game. His tight end screen was stupid too since on the previous TD we had, Jennings basically just ran into the endzone and turned around. Why not at least try that same play MM? I guess a coach's mind has a lot of crap going around in it that they can never think straight or something.

Doesn't MM have a new baby? He probably hasn't slept all season. It's gotta affect his playcalling.

edit: 4-3 pre-baby, 1-6 post-baby.

There you go. In MM's case it seems to have made him worse and/or think less. In TT's case though, I think he needs to get a wife so he can get some balls and go out and get some good free agents.


LOL. If he goes out and gets a wife, he will permanently detach his balls from his taint. Slumpbusters...yes....I'm all for it. What if he hitches with a "Doug Christie" wife? Good God, the drafts would be ugly

[texaspackerbacker]

Let's see, if Thompson chooses a wife the way he drafts and GMs, he won't get anybody that has been with somebody else; He will prefer young and needing to be developed; And he will need somebody who is suited for unconventional schemes.

Oh yeah, studs and ughs:

I didn't get to see the game, but from what I gather following the play-by-play on the internet, Tramon Williams was screwing up trying to cover Northcutt. James Jones must have been doing something right. The play calling seemed horrible. They should pass to set up the run instead of vice versa. The D was pretty good at run-stopping against was at least used to be a good running team.

[bobblehead]

Agree with you on the announcers. The one also couldn't admit that Jennings did not have PI on his TD play. He was convinced that Jennings had pushed off. "It was very subtle" I recall him saying. This along with last weeks announcers leaves a lot to be desired.

The defense blew the lead again in the 4th and I too wondered why MM would go for it in the 4th when Jacksonville was doing jack shit with the ball the whole game. His tight end screen was stupid too since on the previous TD we had, Jennings basically just ran into the endzone and turned around. Why not at least try that same play MM? I guess a coach's mind has a lot of crap going around in it that they can never think straight or something.

Jennings did push off....blatantly. I'm not complaining cuz we get the short end of that most of the time. But if you think the PI was on the defense on that play you are a bit too much of a homer.

[channtheman]

Agree with you on the announcers. The one also couldn't admit that Jennings did not have PI on his TD play. He was convinced that Jennings had pushed off. "It was very subtle" I recall him saying. This along with last weeks announcers leaves a lot to be desired.

The defense blew the lead again in the 4th and I too wondered why MM would go for it in the 4th when Jacksonville was doing jack shit with the ball the whole game. His tight end screen was stupid too since on the previous TD we had, Jennings basically just ran into the endzone and turned around. Why not at least try that same play MM? I guess a coach's mind has a lot of crap going around in it that they can never think straight or something.

Jennings did push off....blatantly. I'm not complaining cuz we get the short end of that most of the time. But if you think the PI was on the defense on that play you are a bit too much of a homer.

I'm not one to say something is and isn't PI when it only happens to the Packers. If that was their team I would say the same thing: that the receiver simply turned around and caught the ball. I don't know if I would have even thrown a flag there because there was a little contact both ways but nothing that really affected anything.

[sharpe1027]

The DB cut off Jennings route and was making contact while the ball was in the air. Jenings pushed off a little. Worse calls than that have gone against us all year.

[Gunakor]

Let's see, if Thompson chooses a wife the way he drafts and GMs, he won't get anybody that has been with somebody else; He will prefer young and needing to be developed; And he will need somebody who is suited for unconventional schemes.

Oh yeah, studs and ughs:

I didn't get to see the game, but from what I gather following the play-by-play on the internet, Tramon Williams was screwing up trying to cover Northcutt. James Jones must have been doing something right. The play calling seemed horrible. They should pass to set up the run instead of vice versa. The D was pretty good at run-stopping against was at least used to be a good running team.

JJ had a very good day. The run defense was marginally better than they have been lately. Other than that, if you saw Carolina, or Minnesota, or Houston... You know what it looked like. New week, same 5 minutes of futility. It's disgusting, really.

As often as it's happened, I can't blame the players or the GM who brought them here. As often as this is happening, and as similar as every defeat looks, I have to blame the coordinator. If Sanders would ever learn to be a little more aggressive when the Packers have the lead late in the game, maybe our defense could close one out. Yesterday he called a very good game right up until the end, but still couldn't get it done when it matters most.

I know you like the guy, but we are losing games on Sanders' watch. That's gotta change if we are to get where we want to be.

[texaspackerbacker]

I don't care one way or the other about the guy, but I like his/Bates's D scheme. I really think getting more aggressive at any point in the game would be a big mistake. It seems like every game I watch, teams get burned on blitzes, and good things happen when team drop into coverage.

Even when the aggressiveness i.e.blitzing works, it's a dubious benefit. Did you hear during the Cowboys/Giants game, the Cowboys lead the league in sacks. However, they only have seven interceptions all season despite having fairly decent DBs. I don't know about anybody else, but I'd rather have the interceptions than the sacks.

The Packers problem is not lack of sacks or lack of aggressiveness or whatever. It is lack of run-stopping--and that got a whole lot worse when Barnett went down.

[hoosier]

I don't care one way or the other about the guy, but I like his/Bates's D scheme. I really think getting more aggressive at any point in the game would be a big mistake. It seems like every game I watch, teams get burned on blitzes, and good things happen when team drop into coverage.

Even when the aggressiveness i.e.blitzing works, it's a dubious benefit. Did you hear during the Cowboys/Giants game, the Cowboys lead the league in sacks. However, they only have seven interceptions all season despite having fairly decent DBs. I don't know about anybody else, but I'd rather have the interceptions than the sacks.

The Packers problem is not lack of sacks or lack of aggressiveness or whatever. It is lack of run-stopping--and that got a whole lot worse when Barnett went down.

Interesting quesiton about sacks vs interceptions. If I had to choose between one and the other I might pick interceptions, but I'm not sure it's always an either/or proposition: sometimes a heavy pass rush forces turnovers (rushed throws, bad decisions, fumbles) whereas lack of pass rush doesn't. The fact is that in the current four game losing streak the Packer defense has only come up with two picks.

[hurleyfan]

I don't care one way or the other about the guy, but I like his/Bates's D scheme. I really think getting more aggressive at any point in the game would be a big mistake.

The Packers problem is not lack of sacks or lack of aggressiveness or whatever. It is lack of run-stopping--and that got a whole lot worse when Barnett went down.

I also like the Bates "scheme", as it has been successful other places, and a few years ago in Green Bay when Bates ran the defense.

This scheme needs pressure from the D-line with minimal blitzing to prosper, but the Packers apply zero pressure with the talent in place.

[Gunakor]

I don't care one way or the other about the guy, but I like his/Bates's D scheme. I really think getting more aggressive at any point in the game would be a big mistake. It seems like every game I watch, teams get burned on blitzes, and good things happen when team drop into coverage.

Even when the aggressiveness i.e.blitzing works, it's a dubious benefit. Did you hear during the Cowboys/Giants game, the Cowboys lead the league in sacks. However, they only have seven interceptions all season despite having fairly decent DBs. I don't know about anybody else, but I'd rather have the interceptions than the sacks.

The Packers problem is not lack of sacks or lack of aggressiveness or whatever. It is lack of run-stopping--and that got a whole lot worse when Barnett went down.

I could care less about sacks OR interceptions. That's not the debate IMO. I want to see more opponents punting. I want to see more 3 and outs. Sacks, interceptions, forced fumbles... These are all great things but do not speak to the real responsibility of a defense - which is to stop an opponent on 3rd down and get off the field. That's what I want to get back to. Making it tough as hell for opponents to move the ball, regardless how many sacks or interceptions we have.

[texaspackerbacker]

I don't care one way or the other about the guy, but I like his/Bates's D scheme. I really think getting more aggressive at any point in the game would be a big mistake. It seems like every game I watch, teams get burned on blitzes, and good things happen when team drop into coverage.

Even when the aggressiveness i.e.blitzing works, it's a dubious benefit. Did you hear during the Cowboys/Giants game, the Cowboys lead the league in sacks. However, they only have seven interceptions all season despite having fairly decent DBs. I don't know about anybody else, but I'd rather have the interceptions than the sacks.

The Packers problem is not lack of sacks or lack of aggressiveness or whatever. It is lack of run-stopping--and that got a whole lot worse when Barnett went down.

I could care less about sacks OR interceptions. That's not the debate IMO. I want to see more opponents punting. I want to see more 3 and outs. Sacks, interceptions, forced fumbles... These are all great things but do not speak to the real responsibility of a defense - which is to stop an opponent on 3rd down and get off the field. That's what I want to get back to. Making it tough as hell for opponents to move the ball, regardless how many sacks or interceptions we have.

To an extent, I agree with you. As I said above, "run-stopping"--and the lack thereof since Barnett went down--is the major problem. Jenkins being gone, Kampman not playing as well as last season, and injuries among the safeties and LBs also have hurt. All of that translates to not forcing punts.

Going all the way back to the Lombardi Era, however, that has been the Packers style--give them some yardage in the middle of the field, then toughen up, force turnovers, avoid blitzing, and emphasize man coverage.

I can remember lots of teams over the years that lived and died by pressure on the QB, often with blitzing. Those teams, with very few exceptions, finished in the middle of the pack.

Yeah, sacks vs. interceptions is not an all the time thing, and yeah, sometimes pressure helps get interceptions, and yeah, the Packers have been lacking in both the past few weeks. I STILL say, though, INJURIES is the primary cause of all of that.