THE TRENCHES

[Bretsky]

http://www.620wtmj.com/news/local/68386847.html

I agree with some of this and some of it I disagree with, but a good article for discussion

[mraynrand]

Rodgers again was at fault for several of his sacks. He was also at fault - again - in the first half for not getting the ball out faster. Two critical throws - the throw before the first FG - jones was open and Rodgers hesitated. Later, Rodgers had the ball knocked out. Jones was open across the deep middle - have to get that out.

Still, weak pass rush by D-line and depending on a washed up Clifton at LT was stupid. Woodson, Pickett, and Chillar isn't enough FA activity in five years. Vikings feasted on FA - Hutchinson, Favre, Leiber, Williams, and Allen are huge contributor to that team. Thompson needs more success in FA, especially if he wants to continuously keep the roster young with inexperienced draft picks. Experience has to come from somewhere.

[pbmax]

Allen was a trade and Favre happens once a generation (like Reggie or Deion). And few teams have two experienced left tackles of any quality. While injuries are no excuse, lose a left tackle and someone young or used up is stepping in no matter where you are. Even the Ravens threw a draft pick out there after injury. Same story as Clifton getting his first starts in 2000.

Youth at this point is an excuse. There is better than average starting experience at most positions. The incumbent O line starters need to step it up. Only the rookie Left Tackle should require and get help.

[Fosco33]

Too many people put this game on a pedestal and talking about revenge... Woodsen said they let a lot of people down.

And while I agree - a few other things happened here.

2 games

0 wins
0 sacks
0 ints

There was not even a hint of 'getting the monkey off your back'. A couple sacks, an int and a W would have done that.

So now what? M3 better be saying - get over it. Division is likely out of the picture. So focus on wins and playing smarter (penalties, avoidable sacks, missed assignments).


At this point, the chances of playing in January are slim.

At least we won't have to play 'him' anymore this year. :roll:

[mraynrand]

Allen was a trade and Favre happens once a generation (like Reggie or Deion). And few teams have two experienced left tackles of any quality. While injuries are no excuse, lose a left tackle and someone young or used up is stepping in no matter where you are. Even the Ravens threw a draft pick out there after injury. Same story as Clifton getting his first starts in 2000.

Youth at this point is an excuse. There is better than average starting experience at most positions. The incumbent O line starters need to step it up. Only the rookie Left Tackle should require and get help.

My mistake about Allen. It does fall under pro-player personnel and not the draft however, which is where Thompson struggles.

The general issue is shoring up the trenches. Do you wait 1,2, or more years for draft picks to gel together or do you supplement with free agency/trade? I think you have to do both. Thompson, knowing Tauscher was finished, and knowing Clifton was at the bottom of his tank, could have reasoned he needed to do something to guarantee the O-line. Unless he is playing for next year or the year after, expecting his draft picks to come along by then. (edit: I don't agree that there is enough experience. Sitton and Barbre? Not enough)

[mraynrand]

At least we won't have to play 'him' anymore this year. :roll:

I wouldn't count that out. I would say there is a very good chance the Packers will be losing a Divisional playoff game at Minnesota. In fact, my cynical, depressed, post-game persona is predicting it.

[pbmax]

The general issue is shoring up the trenches. Do you wait 1,2, or more years for draft picks to gel together or do you supplement with free agency/trade?
That is the crux of the problem. We have waited three plus years for Colledge, Wells and Spitz and 2 years for Sitton. Barbre is in year 3, and he has had half a season of starts. I understand Lang struggling, but the other breakdowns should have stopped. Either we have misjudged the talent or coaches are not getting the pertinent message across.

[Fosco33]

At least we won't have to play 'him' anymore this year. :roll:

I wouldn't count that out. I would say there is a very good chance the Packers will be losing a Divisional playoff game at Minnesota. In fact, my cynical, depressed, post-game persona is predicting it.

Let's hope so. We need at least 6 more wins, some luck. Our schedule is getting tougher, people are dropping like flies and some players need to take their head out of their asses.

If MN keeps playing well, they may lock up a bye anyway...

[mraynrand]

Maybe Ari Fleisher could coach the O-line while Campen flies off to consult with Favre.

[mmmdk]

http://www.620wtmj.com/news/local/68386847.html

I agree with some of this and some of it I disagree with, but a good article for discussion

Thanx, good article.

Yet I'm baffled; what do you not agree with? The article is spot on. Is it your boy, Jenkins? Jenkins is average at best but I actually take some of my harsh talk on Pickett back. Pickett is crucial to Packers mediocre DL.

Our OL is just terrible, just terrible. Rodgers has some fault but he's special too. I think Favre would've thrown a zillion interceptions had he had an OL like current Packers do. The first 8 weeks of 2009, I only saw Favre play this well during his 3 mvp years. For Favre, this few ints. is unreal for the king of TDs and Ints. Unreal !

[Smidgeon]

Good article, but definitely biased (when you use hyperbolic expressions like the writer did with Barbre, it's a clue that it's a biased--"opinion"--article). I don't agree with the summaries on Josh Sitton (penalty prone? that would be Barbre), the snide comment about Jordy Nelson and Jermichael Finley always being in the training room is also hyperbolic, and "Ted Thompson should be blamed for not going after a defensive end that has enough oomph on pass rush to be able to tie more blockers up and free Jenkins, Kampman or the others from making plays" would be BJ Raji who TT took with the #9 pick in the draft. How is that not "going after a DE that has enough oomph on pass rush"?

The article has points, but it's definitely opinion and therefore shouldn't be taken with a serious grain of salt.

[green_bowl_packer]

Does our line suck because we have a mix of ZBS guys and power guys?

Jagodinski was the only guy who really knew the zbs system as the guru taught it and he was only here a year, and yet we kept it.

These guys have been together too long, to play this badly.

[mmmdk]

Good article, but definitely biased (when you use hyperbolic expressions like the writer did with Barbre, it's a clue that it's a biased--"opinion"--article). I don't agree with the summaries on Josh Sitton (penalty prone? that would be Barbre), the snide comment about Jordy Nelson and Jermichael Finley always being in the training room is also hyperbolic, and "Ted Thompson should be blamed for not going after a defensive end that has enough oomph on pass rush to be able to tie more blockers up and free Jenkins, Kampman or the others from making plays" would be BJ Raji who TT took with the #9 pick in the draft. How is that not "going after a DE that has enough oomph on pass rush"?

The article has points, but it's definitely opinion and therefore shouldn't be taken with a serious grain of salt.

Ok but hear this; Kampy won't be back with Packers next season....unless McCoach and Dom, with his 3-4, are gone. TT won't resign expensive guys that don't fit the system.

I think Sitton is ok too but let's not get carried away with the "talent" on OL. Preseason is over :lol:

[retailguy]

Does our line suck because we have a mix of ZBS guys and power guys?

Jagodinski was the only guy who really knew the zbs system as the guru taught it and he was only here a year, and yet we kept it.

These guys have been together too long, to play this badly.

Jags was only exposed to it for two years, then his "year" of teaching in GB. I was never convinced he was an "expert" and still am not. Smoke and Mirrors... thats Jeff Jagodinski.

[Smidgeon]

Good article, but definitely biased (when you use hyperbolic expressions like the writer did with Barbre, it's a clue that it's a biased--"opinion"--article). I don't agree with the summaries on Josh Sitton (penalty prone? that would be Barbre), the snide comment about Jordy Nelson and Jermichael Finley always being in the training room is also hyperbolic, and "Ted Thompson should be blamed for not going after a defensive end that has enough oomph on pass rush to be able to tie more blockers up and free Jenkins, Kampman or the others from making plays" would be BJ Raji who TT took with the #9 pick in the draft. How is that not "going after a DE that has enough oomph on pass rush"?

The article has points, but it's definitely opinion and therefore shouldn't be taken with a serious grain of salt.

Ok but hear this; Kampy won't be back with Packers next season....unless McCoach and Dom, with his 3-4, are gone. TT won't resign expensive guys that don't fit the system.

I think Sitton is ok too but let's not get carried away with the "talent" on OL. Preseason is over :lol:

I don't disagree with the lack of talent on OL. I like Lang, Sitton, and Spitz (and not necessarily at their current positions). I think Wells has peaked--he's serviceable, just won't be getting better and better. But I am actually a huge fan of the DL. Huge. Jenkins, Jolly when his head isn't full of sand, Picket, Raji...

I'm also starting to fervently believe that AK is one of the better if not one of the best LOLBs in the league. Have any successful runs gone in that direction? Seems that most of the big runs cut the other way. LOLBs aren't the big sack machines. They're the run support (I think). And to think at 20 lbs lighter (or whatever he is) he can still be successful when he puts his hand down. Now, that sounds like drivel after the Min game, but I maintain that stance based on what he's shown and the progression he seems to be having.

[Brandon494]

Rodgers again was at fault for several of his sacks. He was also at fault - again - in the first half for not getting the ball out faster. Two critical throws - the throw before the first FG - jones was open and Rodgers hesitated. Later, Rodgers had the ball knocked out. Jones was open across the deep middle - have to get that out.

Still, weak pass rush by D-line and depending on a washed up Clifton at LT was stupid. Woodson, Pickett, and Chillar isn't enough FA activity in five years. Vikings feasted on FA - Hutchinson, Favre, Leiber, Williams, and Allen are huge contributor to that team. Thompson needs more success in FA, especially if he wants to continuously keep the roster young with inexperienced draft picks. Experience has to come from somewhere.

You ever think maybe players just arent interested in coming to play for Green Bay? Only reason Woodson came here was because we were the only ones serious about giving him the money he wanted and at that time a lot of people thought we were taking a risk on him.

This isn't Madden 10, can't just make a offer and expect the player to want to come to GB. Also TT did try and go after Gonzalez until the Chiefs GM tried to big boy him at the last minute and request a 2nd rounder instead of a 3rd. Honestly I would have still traded the 2nd but I'm not the GM. Anyway I agree he does need to be more active, but I just don't think its as easy as you think getting players to come here.

[Smidgeon]

Rodgers again was at fault for several of his sacks. He was also at fault - again - in the first half for not getting the ball out faster. Two critical throws - the throw before the first FG - jones was open and Rodgers hesitated. Later, Rodgers had the ball knocked out. Jones was open across the deep middle - have to get that out.

Still, weak pass rush by D-line and depending on a washed up Clifton at LT was stupid. Woodson, Pickett, and Chillar isn't enough FA activity in five years. Vikings feasted on FA - Hutchinson, Favre, Leiber, Williams, and Allen are huge contributor to that team. Thompson needs more success in FA, especially if he wants to continuously keep the roster young with inexperienced draft picks. Experience has to come from somewhere.

You ever think maybe players just arent interested in coming to play for Green Bay? Only reason Woodson came here was because we were the only ones serious about giving him the money he wanted and at that time a lot of people thought we were taking a risk on him.

This isn't Madden 10, can't just make a offer and expect the player to want to come to GB. Also TT did try and go after Gonzalez until the Chiefs GM tried to big boy him at the last minute and request a 2nd rounder instead of a 3rd. Honestly I would have still traded the 2nd but I'm not the GM. Anyway I agree he does need to be more active, but I just don't think its as easy as you think getting players to come here.

Didn't Warren Sapp say when he left Tampa that if Favre had called him, he would have been willing to go to GB? Maybe all we need is to get AR on the phone...

[Bretsky]

Rodgers again was at fault for several of his sacks. He was also at fault - again - in the first half for not getting the ball out faster. Two critical throws - the throw before the first FG - jones was open and Rodgers hesitated. Later, Rodgers had the ball knocked out. Jones was open across the deep middle - have to get that out.

Still, weak pass rush by D-line and depending on a washed up Clifton at LT was stupid. Woodson, Pickett, and Chillar isn't enough FA activity in five years. Vikings feasted on FA - Hutchinson, Favre, Leiber, Williams, and Allen are huge contributor to that team. Thompson needs more success in FA, especially if he wants to continuously keep the roster young with inexperienced draft picks. Experience has to come from somewhere.

You ever think maybe players just arent interested in coming to play for Green Bay? Only reason Woodson came here was because we were the only ones serious about giving him the money he wanted and at that time a lot of people thought we were taking a risk on him.

This isn't Madden 10, can't just make a offer and expect the player to want to come to GB. Also TT did try and go after Gonzalez until the Chiefs GM tried to big boy him at the last minute and request a 2nd rounder instead of a 3rd. Honestly I would have still traded the 2nd but I'm not the GM. Anyway I agree he does need to be more active, but I just don't think its as easy as you think getting players to come here.


The two most convenient arguments against Free Agency are.....there is nobody out there better..........and maybe nobody wants to come

I don't see us making much of an effort.

This is a results game

How much longer should fans tolerate a shitty offensive line ?

[retailguy]

I guess indefinitely if we can keep blaming the problems on Rodgers.

This posturing is stupid.... just stupid.

too many new guys on the line. too little experience. it takes time, but they need someone to learn from...

[mraynrand]

I guess indefinitely if we can keep blaming the problems on Rodgers.

This posturing is stupid.... just stupid.

too many new guys on the line. too little experience. it takes time, but they need someone to learn from...

Maybe you should be talking to McCarthy. He is blaming some of the problems on Rodgers. Specifically, I believe he attributed up to 6 sacks in Minnesota to Rodgers holding the ball too long. Don't know what he thinks about yesterday's game, but I saw Rodgers screw up at least twice on critical plays. Maybe if you won't listen to us, you'll listen to Stubby.

[Brandon494]

Rodgers again was at fault for several of his sacks. He was also at fault - again - in the first half for not getting the ball out faster. Two critical throws - the throw before the first FG - jones was open and Rodgers hesitated. Later, Rodgers had the ball knocked out. Jones was open across the deep middle - have to get that out.

Still, weak pass rush by D-line and depending on a washed up Clifton at LT was stupid. Woodson, Pickett, and Chillar isn't enough FA activity in five years. Vikings feasted on FA - Hutchinson, Favre, Leiber, Williams, and Allen are huge contributor to that team. Thompson needs more success in FA, especially if he wants to continuously keep the roster young with inexperienced draft picks. Experience has to come from somewhere.

You ever think maybe players just arent interested in coming to play for Green Bay? Only reason Woodson came here was because we were the only ones serious about giving him the money he wanted and at that time a lot of people thought we were taking a risk on him.

This isn't Madden 10, can't just make a offer and expect the player to want to come to GB. Also TT did try and go after Gonzalez until the Chiefs GM tried to big boy him at the last minute and request a 2nd rounder instead of a 3rd. Honestly I would have still traded the 2nd but I'm not the GM. Anyway I agree he does need to be more active, but I just don't think its as easy as you think getting players to come here.

Didn't Warren Sapp say when he left Tampa that if Favre had called him, he would have been willing to go to GB? Maybe all we need is to get AR on the phone...

I never heard that but to answer that question would we even want Sapp? I don't remember him being all that great when he left TB. Also don't think Chad Clifton would have be happy about that. Also Mike Sherman was still the GM and I remember him and Sapp having words after that game and don't really think that would have happen.

[retailguy]

I guess indefinitely if we can keep blaming the problems on Rodgers.

This posturing is stupid.... just stupid.

too many new guys on the line. too little experience. it takes time, but they need someone to learn from...

Maybe you should be talking to McCarthy. He is blaming some of the problems on Rodgers. Specifically, I believe he attributed up to 6 sacks in Minnesota to Rodgers holding the ball too long. Don't know what he thinks about yesterday's game, but I saw Rodgers screw up at least twice on critical plays. Maybe if you won't listen to us, you'll listen to Stubby.

the odds are not high. I like stubby about as much as you do.

I'm watching rodgers too. I see the issues, but I also see him looking around... for the pressure. this holding the ball too long stuff is crap. these things go away when rodgers has confidence in his line.

[Smidgeon]

Rodgers again was at fault for several of his sacks. He was also at fault - again - in the first half for not getting the ball out faster. Two critical throws - the throw before the first FG - jones was open and Rodgers hesitated. Later, Rodgers had the ball knocked out. Jones was open across the deep middle - have to get that out.

Still, weak pass rush by D-line and depending on a washed up Clifton at LT was stupid. Woodson, Pickett, and Chillar isn't enough FA activity in five years. Vikings feasted on FA - Hutchinson, Favre, Leiber, Williams, and Allen are huge contributor to that team. Thompson needs more success in FA, especially if he wants to continuously keep the roster young with inexperienced draft picks. Experience has to come from somewhere.

You ever think maybe players just arent interested in coming to play for Green Bay? Only reason Woodson came here was because we were the only ones serious about giving him the money he wanted and at that time a lot of people thought we were taking a risk on him.

This isn't Madden 10, can't just make a offer and expect the player to want to come to GB. Also TT did try and go after Gonzalez until the Chiefs GM tried to big boy him at the last minute and request a 2nd rounder instead of a 3rd. Honestly I would have still traded the 2nd but I'm not the GM. Anyway I agree he does need to be more active, but I just don't think its as easy as you think getting players to come here.

Didn't Warren Sapp say when he left Tampa that if Favre had called him, he would have been willing to go to GB? Maybe all we need is to get AR on the phone...

I never heard that but to answer that question would we even want Sapp? I don't remember him being all that great when he left TB. Also don't think Chad Clifton would have be happy about that. Also Mike Sherman was still the GM and I remember him and Sapp having words after that game and don't really think that would have happen.

I don't think that GB wanted Sapp. He was actually pretty good on the Raider DL. I just remember something about him being asked if he had considered GB. It was just a speculation question. And true to Sapp's character, he answered honestly. It wasn't because it was anything close to likely, he was just stating what it would have taken to get him to GB.

[mraynrand]

I guess indefinitely if we can keep blaming the problems on Rodgers.

This posturing is stupid.... just stupid.

too many new guys on the line. too little experience. it takes time, but they need someone to learn from...

Maybe you should be talking to McCarthy. He is blaming some of the problems on Rodgers. Specifically, I believe he attributed up to 6 sacks in Minnesota to Rodgers holding the ball too long. Don't know what he thinks about yesterday's game, but I saw Rodgers screw up at least twice on critical plays. Maybe if you won't listen to us, you'll listen to Stubby.

the odds are not high. I like stubby about as much as you do.

I'm watching rodgers too. I see the issues, but I also see him looking around... for the pressure. this holding the ball too long stuff is crap. these things go away when rodgers has confidence in his line.

I like Stubby. But he is stubborn. Talk to him about Rodgers and the line. I am bored discussing this with you.

[Deputy Nutz]

I honestly think that the interior core of Colledge, Spitz, and Sitton are good young football players on the rise. Colledge has been banged up this year with leg injuries, he doesn't like to come out of the game, he has also been moved around this season. Colledge in the second half of last year was our best offensive linemen.

The Packers were bound to run into problems at left and right tackle with the physical breakdowns of both Tausch and Clifton. Good players but are now past there prime. They might give the Packer a couple of good games down the stretch of the season but neither will be back next season. What to do? The Packers are going to spend either a couple of high draft picks, or sign someone, whether it is a stop gap or a starting quality offensive tackle. Barbre is not improving fast enough to have any confidence in, and Lang is a good kid, but I am not blown away by his technique or skill level.

I think the article was a bit poor. Jenkins was never a "great" defensive end. He was ok, but injured a bit too often.

Pickett eats up blockers, he is a valuable asset that any team would be honored to have. He isn't a pass rusher, not many NT in this league can be labeled as a pass rusher.

Jolly is ok another good run stopper and if he was positioned as a defensive tackle he would be considered a player that has enough pass rushing skill to make him a double threat player.

I think Thompson has put together a pretty decent defensive line. Especially when it comes to stopping the run. I don't expect these three to have double digit sack totals.

I do expect someone on this team to have double digit sack totals by the end of the year, and if they don't this defense can be labeled as a failure in year one of Dom Capers Defensive Coordinator of the Green Bay Packers.

[Smidgeon]

I do expect someone on this team to have double digit totals by the end of the year, and if they don't this defense can be labeled as a failure in year one of Dom Capers Defensive Coordinator of the Green Bay Packers.

Either that or next year, when a whole year of learning and seeing it done has been completed, that you have at least one in double digits and several others close.

[Brandon494]

I honestly think that the interior core of Colledge, Spitz, and Sitton are good young football players on the rise. Colledge has been banged up this year with leg injuries, he doesn't like to come out of the game, he has also been moved around this season. Colledge in the second half of last year was our best offensive linemen.

The Packers were bound to run into problems at left and right tackle with the physical breakdowns of both Tausch and Clifton. Good players but are now past there prime. They might give the Packer a couple of good games down the stretch of the season but neither will be back next season. What to do? The Packers are going to spend either a couple of high draft picks, or sign someone, whether it is a stop gap or a starting quality offensive tackle. Barbre is not improving fast enough to have any confidence in, and Lang is a good kid, but I am not blown away by his technique or skill level.

I think the article was a bit poor. Jenkins was never a "great" defensive end. He was ok, but injured a bit too often.

Pickett eats up blockers, he is a valuable asset that any team would be honored to have. He isn't a pass rusher, not many NT in this league can be labeled as a pass rusher.

Jolly is ok another good run stopper and if he was positioned as a defensive tackle he would be considered a player that has enough pass rushing skill to make him a double threat player.

I think Thompson has put together a pretty decent defensive line. Especially when it comes to stopping the run. I don't expect these three to have double digit sack totals.

I do expect someone on this team to have double digit sack totals by the end of the year, and if they don't this defense can be labeled as a failure in year one of Dom Capers Defensive Coordinator of the Green Bay Packers.

I agree I think our interior core is pretty solid. I hope we sign/trade/draft a legit LT and I think Lang is our future RT. Also think we should go after a new O-line coach during the offseason.

On the defensive side of the ball I don't think we are that bad off at all. Jenkins and Jolly are perfect 3-4 DEs and Pickett is holding up at the nose tackle. Raji showed pontenial early on but not so much during the regular season. He is only a rookie though learning a completely new defense with everyone else.

[rbaloha1]

IMO the o-line has talent. Lang is a lt. A new o-line coach is in order. Maybe scrapping the zone blocking scheme is in order or rehiring Jags to properly teach it.

If Jags is unavailable a new running scheme must be utilized.

[sharpe1027]

My mistake about Allen. It does fall under pro-player personnel and not the draft however, which is where Thompson struggles.

The general issue is shoring up the trenches. Do you wait 1,2, or more years for draft picks to gel together or do you supplement with free agency/trade? I think you have to do both. Thompson, knowing Tauscher was finished, and knowing Clifton was at the bottom of his tank, could have reasoned he needed to do something to guarantee the O-line. Unless he is playing for next year or the year after, expecting his draft picks to come along by then. (edit: I don't agree that there is enough experience. Sitton and Barbre? Not enough)

I will say that they did sign a OLineman that started several games last year...he didn't make the team.

I guess we could have went after O. Pace? He costs three times as much and is just as bad as anything we have.

Here's a list of unrestricted FA OT from this past offseason (we signed one of them, can you find him?):

Stacy Andrews
Khalif Barnes
Vernon Carey
Kirk Chambers
Damane Duckett
Jason Fabini
George Foster
Wayne Gandy
Adam Goldberg
Brandon Gorin
Jordan Gross
Kwame Harris
Jonas Jennings
Fred Miller
Frank Omiyale
Orlando Pace
Jon Runyan
Ephraim Salaam
Kevin Shaffer
John St. Clair
Jonathan Stinchcomb
Barry Stokes
Mark Tauscher
Tra Thomas
Ray Willis
Floyd Womack
Daniel Loper

[mraynrand]

My mistake about Allen. It does fall under pro-player personnel and not the draft however, which is where Thompson struggles.

The general issue is shoring up the trenches. Do you wait 1,2, or more years for draft picks to gel together or do you supplement with free agency/trade? I think you have to do both. Thompson, knowing Tauscher was finished, and knowing Clifton was at the bottom of his tank, could have reasoned he needed to do something to guarantee the O-line. Unless he is playing for next year or the year after, expecting his draft picks to come along by then. (edit: I don't agree that there is enough experience. Sitton and Barbre? Not enough)

I will say that they did sign a OLineman that started several games last year...he didn't make the team.

I guess we could have went after O. Pace? He costs three times as much and is just as bad as anything we have.

Here's a list of unrestricted FA OT from this past offseason (we signed one of them, can you find him?):

Stacy Andrews
Khalif Barnes
Vernon Carey
Kirk Chambers
Damane Duckett
Jason Fabini
George Foster
Wayne Gandy
Adam Goldberg
Brandon Gorin
Jordan Gross
Kwame Harris
Jonas Jennings
Fred Miller
Frank Omiyale
Orlando Pace
Jon Runyan
Ephraim Salaam
Kevin Shaffer
John St. Clair
Jonathan Stinchcomb
Barry Stokes
Mark Tauscher
Tra Thomas
Ray Willis
Floyd Womack
Daniel Loper

And?

[sharpe1027]

My mistake about Allen. It does fall under pro-player personnel and not the draft however, which is where Thompson struggles.

The general issue is shoring up the trenches. Do you wait 1,2, or more years for draft picks to gel together or do you supplement with free agency/trade? I think you have to do both. Thompson, knowing Tauscher was finished, and knowing Clifton was at the bottom of his tank, could have reasoned he needed to do something to guarantee the O-line. Unless he is playing for next year or the year after, expecting his draft picks to come along by then. (edit: I don't agree that there is enough experience. Sitton and Barbre? Not enough)

I will say that they did sign a OLineman that started several games last year...he didn't make the team.

I guess we could have went after O. Pace? He costs three times as much and is just as bad as anything we have.

Here's a list of unrestricted FA OT from this past offseason (we signed one of them, can you find him?):

Stacy Andrews
Khalif Barnes
Vernon Carey
Kirk Chambers
Damane Duckett
Jason Fabini
George Foster
Wayne Gandy
Adam Goldberg
Brandon Gorin
Jordan Gross
Kwame Harris
Jonas Jennings
Fred Miller
Frank Omiyale
Orlando Pace
Jon Runyan
Ephraim Salaam
Kevin Shaffer
John St. Clair
Jonathan Stinchcomb
Barry Stokes
Mark Tauscher
Tra Thomas
Ray Willis
Floyd Womack
Daniel Loper

And?

Or?

[mmmdk]

IMO the o-line has talent. Lang is a lt. A new o-line coach is in order. Maybe scrapping the zone blocking scheme is in order or rehiring Jags to properly teach it.

If Jags is unavailable a new running scheme must be utilized.

The change to zone blocking was not tough for Mark to learn. Tauscher started all 16 regular season games in 2007 and was stellar. If Tausch has ANYTHING left in the tank; he's way better than Barberella.

Tauscher even gave an interview on packers.com that year which schooled the media/fans on ZBS.

The Packer OL talent is mediocre, can't zone block or protect the passer. Dumb too.

[mmmdk]

I guess indefinitely if we can keep blaming the problems on Rodgers.

This posturing is stupid.... just stupid.

too many new guys on the line. too little experience. it takes time, but they need someone to learn from...

Yup!

Rodgers was sacked only 34 times last season; 31 already this season and on pace for 71.

Favre was sacked more than 30 times, 8 out of his first 10 seasons in his first starting seasons; when Favre still could run. An avg. of 32,1 sacks per season and actually was sacked 40 times in SB win season.

Furthermore, Favre has been sacked 3 times a game this season as a Viking...oh, sans the games vs the "one trick pony" Packer defense. Packers D players are, overall, overrated the last few seasons and beyond - even in 2007. We love our guys but suck at evaluating them. The results speak for themselves though. We have, apparently, forgotten was a great defense is like as it has been abscent since 1996.

Look at Pats, Steelers, Ravens, Giants, current Minnesota D plus others the last decade...if you REALLY want to know what a great D looks like.

[sharpe1027]

I guess indefinitely if we can keep blaming the problems on Rodgers.

This posturing is stupid.... just stupid.

too many new guys on the line. too little experience. it takes time, but they need someone to learn from...

Yup!

Rodgers was sacked only 34 times last season; 31 already this season and on pace for 71.

Favre was sacked more than 30 times, 8 out of his first 10 seasons in his first starting seasons; when Favre still could run. An avg. of 32,1 sacks per season and actually was sacked 40 times in SB win season.

Furthermore, Favre has been sacked 3 times a game this season as a Viking...oh, sans the games vs the "one trick pony" Packer defense. Packers D players are, overall, overrated the last few seasons and beyond - even in 2007. We love our guys but suck at evaluating them. The results speak for themselves though. We have, apparently, forgotten was a great defense is like as it has been abscent since 1996.

Look at Pats, Steelers, Ravens, Giants, current Minnesota D plus others the last decade...if you REALLY want to know what a great D looks like.

IDK about over-rating our D. I think we all agree our D was horrid last year. I think most of us just assumed that if it was at least average we would be taking a HUGE step forward. I'd say that they are at least average.

[denverYooper]

I guess indefinitely if we can keep blaming the problems on Rodgers.

This posturing is stupid.... just stupid.

too many new guys on the line. too little experience. it takes time, but they need someone to learn from...

Yup!

Rodgers was sacked only 34 times last season; 31 already this season and on pace for 71.

Favre was sacked more than 30 times, 8 out of his first 10 seasons in his first starting seasons; when Favre still could run. An avg. of 32,1 sacks per season and actually was sacked 40 times in SB win season.

Furthermore, Favre has been sacked 3 times a game this season as a Viking...oh, sans the games vs the "one trick pony" Packer defense. Packers D players are, overall, overrated the last few seasons and beyond - even in 2007. We love our guys but suck at evaluating them. The results speak for themselves though. We have, apparently, forgotten was a great defense is like as it has been abscent since 1996.

Look at Pats, Steelers, Ravens, Giants, current Minnesota D plus others the last decade...if you REALLY want to know what a great D looks like.

IDK about over-rating our D. I think we all agree our D was horrid last year. I think most of us just assumed that if it was at least average we would be taking a HUGE step forward. I'd say that they are at least average.

I remember that seeming to be the popular sentiment as well.

[Smidgeon]

IDK about over-rating our D. I think we all agree our D was horrid last year. I think most of us just assumed that if it was at least average we would be taking a HUGE step forward. I'd say that they are at least average.

I don't think our D is overranked. I would say we're just not used to seeing a strong run defense and a weaker pass defense. We're used to people running us over and not being able to pass on us. Right now that seems to be reversed. Our run D is good and our pass D is a little less good but still good.

Waldo wrote a great post about why our run D is good in another thread.

[sharpe1027]

I don't think our D is overranked. I would say we're just not used to seeing a strong run defense and a weaker pass defense. We're used to people running us over and not being able to pass on us. Right now that seems to be reversed. Our run D is good and our pass D is a little less good but still good.

Waldo wrote a great post about why our run D is good in another thread.

Yeah, but I think that our pass defense looked good before partly because, all things being equal, pretty much every team would rather run the ball than pass. Teams ran all over us and thus our pass-defense gave up less yards. Now that they can't run as easily, they are forced to pass more, which means we give up more yards passing.

IMO, it is a positive step forward, but the next critical thing is to start getting some damn QB pressures.

[Smidgeon]

I don't think our D is overranked. I would say we're just not used to seeing a strong run defense and a weaker pass defense. We're used to people running us over and not being able to pass on us. Right now that seems to be reversed. Our run D is good and our pass D is a little less good but still good.

Waldo wrote a great post about why our run D is good in another thread.

Yeah, but I think that our pass defense looked good before partly because, all things being equal, pretty much every team would rather run the ball than pass. Teams ran all over us and thus our pass-defense gave up less yards. Now that they can't run as easily, they are forced to pass more, which means we give up more yards passing.

IMO, it is a positive step forward, but the next critical thing is to start getting some damn QB pressures.

Well, our pass D also looked good becuase of all the interceptions which seem to be down this year. Don't know that for a fact, it just seems that way.

Agreed on the "damn QB pressures" being the next step. I think that's the only thing we're really missing on this D. I like everything else. Once we start getting to the QB, I think the other pieces will start looking way better. I like the DL, the LB (for the most part), the CBs and the S (for the most part). I think it will get better, but someone besides Matthews has to start getting home.

[sharpe1027]

Well, our pass D also looked good becuase of all the interceptions which seem to be down this year. Don't know that for a fact, it just seems that way.

Agreed on the "damn QB pressures" being the next step. I think that's the only thing we're really missing on this D. I like everything else. Once we start getting to the QB, I think the other pieces will start looking way better. I like the DL, the LB (for the most part), the CBs and the S (for the most part). I think it will get better, but someone besides Matthews has to start getting home.

Whatever happened Jeremy Thompson? He was supposed to have all the physical tools to be a good pass-rusher...must be all "potential" if he can't even make it in for situational downs?

[mraynrand]

Well, our pass D also looked good becuase of all the interceptions which seem to be down this year. Don't know that for a fact, it just seems that way.

Agreed on the "damn QB pressures" being the next step. I think that's the only thing we're really missing on this D. I like everything else. Once we start getting to the QB, I think the other pieces will start looking way better. I like the DL, the LB (for the most part), the CBs and the S (for the most part). I think it will get better, but someone besides Matthews has to start getting home.

Whatever happened Jeremy Thompson? He was supposed to have all the physical tools to be a good pass-rusher...must be all "potential" if he can't even make it in for situational downs?

Look like Tarzan play like Jane.

[Smidgeon]

Well, our pass D also looked good becuase of all the interceptions which seem to be down this year. Don't know that for a fact, it just seems that way.

Agreed on the "damn QB pressures" being the next step. I think that's the only thing we're really missing on this D. I like everything else. Once we start getting to the QB, I think the other pieces will start looking way better. I like the DL, the LB (for the most part), the CBs and the S (for the most part). I think it will get better, but someone besides Matthews has to start getting home.

Whatever happened Jeremy Thompson? He was supposed to have all the physical tools to be a good pass-rusher...must be all "potential" if he can't even make it in for situational downs?

I think he's been on the inactive list most of the games. What I was hearing in the preseason was that he just wasn't physical enough. I think that's the big thing: he has the tools, he just doesn't know how to use them. When the pads went on, he disappeared. (Of course, the hamstring injury helped there too.) He was said to have (I think) the most fluid hips of all the OLBs. He might have the "looks like Tarzan, plays like Jane" syndrome, but it's too early to write him off. I want to see him with another year before I start waiting for him to be replaced.

[Bretsky]

Well, our pass D also looked good becuase of all the interceptions which seem to be down this year. Don't know that for a fact, it just seems that way.

Agreed on the "damn QB pressures" being the next step. I think that's the only thing we're really missing on this D. I like everything else. Once we start getting to the QB, I think the other pieces will start looking way better. I like the DL, the LB (for the most part), the CBs and the S (for the most part). I think it will get better, but someone besides Matthews has to start getting home.

Whatever happened Jeremy Thompson? He was supposed to have all the physical tools to be a good pass-rusher...must be all "potential" if he can't even make it in for situational downs?

Overhyped Sieve this year

looks great in shorts but once you put the pads on and take on a blocker he disappears

[mmmdk]

IDK about over-rating our D. I think we all agree our D was horrid last year. I think most of us just assumed that if it was at least average we would be taking a HUGE step forward. I'd say that they are at least average.

I don't think our D is overranked. I would say we're just not used to seeing a strong run defense and a weaker pass defense. We're used to people running us over and not being able to pass on us. Right now that seems to be reversed. Our run D is good and our pass D is a little less good but still good.

Waldo wrote a great post about why our run D is good in another thread.

12 sacks in 7 games? Packers D give up big plays vs good teams - not just this season. Lions, Rams & Browns - c'mon, these assclowns can be clubbed by NCAA teams. Now the Bucs? Soon Packers will have the # 1 Defense...just like in 1996 :roll: :lol:

[Smidgeon]

IDK about over-rating our D. I think we all agree our D was horrid last year. I think most of us just assumed that if it was at least average we would be taking a HUGE step forward. I'd say that they are at least average.

I don't think our D is overranked. I would say we're just not used to seeing a strong run defense and a weaker pass defense. We're used to people running us over and not being able to pass on us. Right now that seems to be reversed. Our run D is good and our pass D is a little less good but still good.

Waldo wrote a great post about why our run D is good in another thread.

12 sacks in 7 games? Packers D give up big plays vs good teams - not just this season. Lions, Rams & Browns - c'mon, these assclowns can be clubbed by NCAA teams. Now the Bucs? Soon Packers will have the # 1 Defense...just like in 1996 :roll: :lol:

The 12 sacks can be attributed to the weaker pass defense as opposed to the stronger run defense. I am optimistic that the D will start getting home a little more frequently as the year progresses.

[rbaloha1]

The D has only been dominant against weak offenses.

[ThunderDan]

The D has only been dominant against weak offenses.

How is that different than any other NFL team's defense?

Let's look at Denver. :oops:

CIN- 307 y
CLE- 200 y
OAK- 137 y
DAL- 315 y
NE- 305 y
SD- 311 y
BAL - 292 y

They averaged 168 ypg against OAK and CLE.
They averaged 306 ypg against CIN, DAL, NE, SD and BAL.

[ThunderDan]

How does an NFL team put up 137 yards?

[Partial]

Yards given up are the absolute stupidest stat to judge a defense.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

How does an NFL team put up 137 yards?

Haver you seen Jamarcus?

[ThunderDan]

Yards given up are the absolute stupidest stat to judge a defense.

ASSCLOWN ALERT!!!

[Smidgeon]

How does an NFL team put up 137 yards?

What did GB give up against Cleveland?

[ThunderDan]

Yards given up are the absolute stupidest stat to judge a defense.

Partial, I know you don't like me and I have posted I am not fond of you. But at least put some thought into your posts before responding.

I mean the NFL ranks defenses based on YPG and PPG. I am sure the NFL knows nothing about the game.

[Partial]

Yards given up are the absolute stupidest stat to judge a defense.

Partial, I know you don't like me and I have posted I am not fond of you. But at least put some thought into your posts before responding.

I mean the NFL ranks defenses based on YPG and PPG. I am sure the NFL knows nothing about the game.

My opinion of you has zero bearing on the stupidity of a stat like yards per game. It's like that Texans game where we got our asses kicked but Rodgers was a stud because he threw for 400 yards.

Points matter. The statistic that should matter is something to the effect of expected points per game (weighted by strength of opponent) / actual points given up per game. I'm by no means an actuary but yards per game is dumb as hell for so many reasons.

[mraynrand]

Yards given up are the absolute stupidest stat to judge a defense.

Partial, I know you don't like me and I have posted I am not fond of you. But at least put some thought into your posts before responding.

I mean the NFL ranks defenses based on YPG and PPG. I am sure the NFL knows nothing about the game.

My opinion of you has zero bearing on the stupidity of a stat like yards per game. It's like that Texans game where we got our asses kicked but Rodgers was a stud because he threw for 400 yards.

Points matter. The statistic that should matter is something to the effect of expected points per game (weighted by strength of opponent) / actual points given up per game. I'm by no means an actuary but yards per game is dumb as hell for so many reasons.

How good was the Packer defense in 2005?

[ThunderDan]

My opinion of you has zero bearing on the stupidity of a stat like yards per game. It's like that Texans game where we got our asses kicked but Rodgers was a stud because he threw for 400 yards.



Rodgers Texans stats 19/30 295 2TD 1INT

ARods biggest game last year was 328 yards. Where do you get your information from?

[Partial]

My opinion of you has zero bearing on the stupidity of a stat like yards per game. It's like that Texans game where we got our asses kicked but Rodgers was a stud because he threw for 400 yards.



Rodgers Texans stats 19/30 295 2TD 1INT

ARods biggest game last year was 328 yards. Where do you get your information from?

Dude I don't remember the exact stat of you being a dbag? Why are you nitpicking about the irrelevant side comment? Maybe it was that we gave up 400 yards but only like 17-20 points ish? Yards don't mean shit is the key factor that should be taken away from this discussion.

You should learn to focus on the important portion of the argument instead of the example, hypothetical or not, demonstrating a similar situation.

[mraynrand]

My opinion of you has zero bearing on the stupidity of a stat like yards per game. It's like that Texans game where we got our asses kicked but Rodgers was a stud because he threw for 400 yards.



Rodgers Texans stats 19/30 295 2TD 1INT

ARods biggest game last year was 328 yards. Where do you get your information from?

Dude I don't remember the exact stat of you being a dbag? Why are you nitpicking about the irrelevant side comment? Maybe it was that we gave up 400 yards but only like 17-20 points ish? Yards don't mean shit is the key factor that should be taken away from this discussion.

You should learn to focus on the important portion of the argument instead of the example, hypothetical or not, demonstrating a similar situation.

you don't argue your point very convincingly. But you seem to have a talent insulting people. The issue on the table is whether stats have meaning. You say they do not. Support your point.

[ThunderDan]

My opinion of you has zero bearing on the stupidity of a stat like yards per game. It's like that Texans game where we got our asses kicked but Rodgers was a stud because he threw for 400 yards.



Rodgers Texans stats 19/30 295 2TD 1INT

ARods biggest game last year was 328 yards. Where do you get your information from?

Dude I don't remember the exact stat of you being a dbag? Why are you nitpicking about the irrelevant side comment? Maybe it was that we gave up 400 yards but only like 17-20 points ish? Yards don't mean shit is the key factor that should be taken away from this discussion.

You should learn to focus on the important portion of the argument instead of the example, hypothetical or not, demonstrating a similar situation.

Let's look at what is really happening.

2007 Top 5 YPG Defenses-
PITT- 10-6 Lost 1st Round of Playoffs
TB- 9-7 Lost 1st Round of Playoffs
IND- 13-3 Lost Divisional Round of Playoffs
NE- 16-0 Superbowl Loser
TENN- 10-6 Lost 1st Round of Playoffs

5 for 5 in the playoffs, Superbowl Loser

2008 Top 5 YPG Defenses-
PITT- 12-4 Won Superbowl
BALT- 11-5 Lost in Conference Final
PHI- 9-6-1 Lost in Confernece Final
WASH- 8-8 Missed Playoffs
NYG- 12-4 Lost Divisional Round of Playoffs

4 for 5 in the playoffs, Superbowl Winner

2009 Top 5 YPF Defenses-
DEN- 6-1
NYJ- 4-4
NYG- 5-3
GB- 4-3
WASH- 2-5

[Partial]

What is that saying? Again, I'm not saying there isn't a correlation, I'm saying its a stupid statistic and a stupid pov to look at merely yards allowed to make an assessment.

You could have a dominant D and a dominant O and the opposition is going to throw for a ton of yards because you'll be up so big you take your foot off the gas and play prevent, yet they have to chuck it since they're down by so much.

It's one stat. Looking at one stat is dumb. You've got to look at more than that to even come close to doing any sort of analysis.

The Packers defense is not good in my opinion. I think few here would pick the Packers D in their top 5 D's if they needed to win a game tomorrow and had their choice of any D in the NFL.

[mraynrand]

My opinion of you has zero bearing on the stupidity of a stat like yards per game. It's like that Texans game where we got our asses kicked but Rodgers was a stud because he threw for 400 yards.



Rodgers Texans stats 19/30 295 2TD 1INT

ARods biggest game last year was 328 yards. Where do you get your information from?

Dude I don't remember the exact stat of you being a dbag? Why are you nitpicking about the irrelevant side comment? Maybe it was that we gave up 400 yards but only like 17-20 points ish? Yards don't mean shit is the key factor that should be taken away from this discussion.

You should learn to focus on the important portion of the argument instead of the example, hypothetical or not, demonstrating a similar situation.

Let's look at what is really happening.

2007 Top 5 YPG Defenses-
PITT- 10-6 Lost 1st Round of Playoffs
TB- 9-7 Lost 1st Round of Playoffs
IND- 13-3 Lost Divisional Round of Playoffs
NE- 16-0 Superbowl Loser
TENN- 10-6 Lost 1st Round of Playoffs

5 for 5 in the playoffs, Superbowl Loser

2008 Top 5 YPG Defenses-
PITT- 12-4 Won Superbowl
BALT- 11-5 Lost in Conference Final
PHI- 9-6-1 Lost in Confernece Final
WASH- 8-8 Missed Playoffs
NYG- 12-4 Lost Divisional Round of Playoffs

4 for 5 in the playoffs, Superbowl Winner

2009 Top 5 YPF Defenses-
DEN- 6-1
NYJ- 4-4
NYG- 5-3
GB- 4-3
WASH- 2-5

I wish you would stop using these stats. They don't support Partial's POV.

[mraynrand]

What is that saying? Again, I'm not saying there isn't a correlation, I'm saying its a stupid statistic.

You could have a dominant D and a dominant O and the opposition is going to throw for a ton of yards because you'll be up so big you take your foot off the gas and play prevent, yet they have to chuck it since they're down by so much.

It's one stat. Looking at one stat is dumb. You've got to look at more than that to even come close to doing any sort of analysis.

The Packers defense is not good in my opinion. I think few here would pick the Packers D in their top 5 D's if they needed to win a game tomorrow and had their choice of any D in the NFL.

OK. Pick your top five.

[ThunderDan]

Yards given up are the absolute stupidest stat to judge a defense.

This is what you said.

If it is the absolute stupidest stat to judge a defense by why have 9 out of the last 10 best YPG teams made the playoff? Now, there is a correlation?

Way to try and change the argument again.

[Partial]

Yards given up are the absolute stupidest stat to judge a defense.

This is what you said.

If it is the absolute stupidest stat to judge a defense by why have 9 out of the last 10 best YPG teams made the playoff? Now, there is a correlation?

Way to try and change the argument again.

I'm not changing any argument. It is one of the stupidest stats to judge a defense on. Far too many variables, quality of opposition, quality of offense, etc all make way too big of an impact on it.

The point I was making is I don't care how many yards my team gives up as long as they don't give up points. There is probably a statistical correlation between the two, sure, but I don't think it's as valuable as some stats.

The Packers have padded stats big time right now because of the Lions and Browns. They're ranked as a better D than Minne right now, but are you tellign me you wouldn't take Minne's vastly superior D over ours? Is this what you're saying?

The one stat that would be killer would be the expected points to produce of opposition versus actual points scored by opposition.

[Bretsky]

Packers rank tied for fourth in total defense (283.4 yards per game allowed), but if you took away performances against the horrible Detroit Lions and Cleveland Browns, the Packers would rank 21st (338 per game).

[mraynrand]

What is that saying? Again, I'm not saying there isn't a correlation, I'm saying its a stupid statistic.

You could have a dominant D and a dominant O and the opposition is going to throw for a ton of yards because you'll be up so big you take your foot off the gas and play prevent, yet they have to chuck it since they're down by so much.

It's one stat. Looking at one stat is dumb. You've got to look at more than that to even come close to doing any sort of analysis.

The Packers defense is not good in my opinion. I think few here would pick the Packers D in their top 5 D's if they needed to win a game tomorrow and had their choice of any D in the NFL.

OK. Pick your top five.

still waiting

[mraynrand]

Packers rank tied for fourth in total defense (283.4 yards per game allowed), but if you took away performances against the horrible Detroit Lions and Cleveland Browns, the Packers would rank 21st (338 per game).

What if you took away their games against the 7-1 Vikings?

[Partial]

What is that saying? Again, I'm not saying there isn't a correlation, I'm saying its a stupid statistic.

You could have a dominant D and a dominant O and the opposition is going to throw for a ton of yards because you'll be up so big you take your foot off the gas and play prevent, yet they have to chuck it since they're down by so much.

It's one stat. Looking at one stat is dumb. You've got to look at more than that to even come close to doing any sort of analysis.

The Packers defense is not good in my opinion. I think few here would pick the Packers D in their top 5 D's if they needed to win a game tomorrow and had their choice of any D in the NFL.

OK. Pick your top five.

still waiting

I'm not really interested in responding to a million posts from you. If you honestly believe they're a top 5 D, well, good for you. I do not.

[mraynrand]

What is that saying? Again, I'm not saying there isn't a correlation, I'm saying its a stupid statistic.

You could have a dominant D and a dominant O and the opposition is going to throw for a ton of yards because you'll be up so big you take your foot off the gas and play prevent, yet they have to chuck it since they're down by so much.

It's one stat. Looking at one stat is dumb. You've got to look at more than that to even come close to doing any sort of analysis.

The Packers defense is not good in my opinion. I think few here would pick the Packers D in their top 5 D's if they needed to win a game tomorrow and had their choice of any D in the NFL.

OK. Pick your top five.

still waiting

I'm not really interested in responding to a million posts from you. If you honestly believe they're a top 5 D, well, good for you. I do not.

I never said I thought they were. I'm seeing whether your evaluation of defenses has any merit. I suspect, based on most of the emotionally based garbage you post that it doesn't. Put your money where your mouth is - Who is top 5? I suspect you don't want to list it because it would force you to actually evaluate using some sort of logic.

[Bretsky]

Packers rank tied for fourth in total defense (283.4 yards per game allowed), but if you took away performances against the horrible Detroit Lions and Cleveland Browns, the Packers would rank 21st (338 per game).

What if you took away their games against the 7-1 Vikings?


Why are you asking me ? If you want to know look it up and argue against the information I just simply copied and pasted :lol:

[Partial]

What is that saying? Again, I'm not saying there isn't a correlation, I'm saying its a stupid statistic.

You could have a dominant D and a dominant O and the opposition is going to throw for a ton of yards because you'll be up so big you take your foot off the gas and play prevent, yet they have to chuck it since they're down by so much.

It's one stat. Looking at one stat is dumb. You've got to look at more than that to even come close to doing any sort of analysis.

The Packers defense is not good in my opinion. I think few here would pick the Packers D in their top 5 D's if they needed to win a game tomorrow and had their choice of any D in the NFL.

OK. Pick your top five.

still waiting

I'm not really interested in responding to a million posts from you. If you honestly believe they're a top 5 D, well, good for you. I do not.

I never said I thought they were. I'm seeing whether your evaluation of defenses has any merit. I suspect, based on most of the emotionally based garbage you post that it doesn't. Put your money where your mouth is - Who is top 5? I suspect you don't want to list it because it would force you to actually evaluate using some sort of logic.

I have never claimed to be some guru, I said judging based on yards allowed is stupid. I listed several reasons why there can be anomalies.

I have no idea who the top 5 are, but I can name 5 Ds that I think are better than the Packs. I don't really understand the point of this exercise...

1. Minnesota
2. New York Jets
3. New York Giants
4. Dallas Cowboys
5. Pittsburgh

[Bretsky]

At this point I'd rate my top 6 defenses in no particular order as

Denver
Jets
Indy
New England
Pittsburg
Cincy

In the second tier/group I'd put

Green Bay
Phily
Minnesota
Washington
Dallas
Giants and maybe
Baltimore.......blind faith I guess as they might not deserve to be here


No specific stat formula although I would say that I probably value Points Per Game over yardage

[mraynrand]

Packers rank tied for fourth in total defense (283.4 yards per game allowed), but if you took away performances against the horrible Detroit Lions and Cleveland Browns, the Packers would rank 21st (338 per game).

What if you took away their games against the 7-1 Vikings?


Why are you asking me ? If you want to know look it up and argue against the information I just simply copied and pasted :lol:

Well, I suspect you know what I was driving at - check out other teams - they play stinkers too and their overall stats would look worse if you throw out their worst opponents. Or would look better if you tossed out their toughest games. The Packers are middle of the road right now. Everything - stats, record, gameplay, all support that. No need to gerrymander stats.

[Smidgeon]

Packers rank tied for fourth in total defense (283.4 yards per game allowed), but if you took away performances against the horrible Detroit Lions and Cleveland Browns, the Packers would rank 21st (338 per game).

What if you took away their games against the 7-1 Vikings?


Why are you asking me ? If you want to know look it up and argue against the information I just simply copied and pasted :lol:

Well, I suspect you know what I was driving at - check out other teams - they play stinkers too and their overall stats would look worse if you throw out their worst opponents. Or would look better if you tossed out their toughest games. The Packers are middle of the road right now. Everything - stats, record, gameplay, all support that. No need to gerrymander stats.

2 points for the appropriate use of the word "gerrymander" in a sentence.

[Bretsky]

I think we all agree GB is not a top five defensive team but I'm by no means ready to panic. We're not terrible either. Middle of the pack would certainly be better than last year

[Fritz]

Packers rank tied for fourth in total defense (283.4 yards per game allowed), but if you took away performances against the horrible Detroit Lions and Cleveland Browns, the Packers would rank 21st (338 per game).

Bretsky, you've made 15,083 posts. If you took away two of them, you'd have 15,081.

The games against Detroit counted last year, too, and how many points did the 0-16 Leos rack up against last year's 4-3 defense in that first game? 28, was it?

Doesn't anybody recall the lousy Packer special teams play on Sunday? Or Jolly's idiotic penalty which occurred after a play was over?

I am unhappy with the lack of pressure on the opposing QB's. But this defense has on the whole been good enough. That's all we all said we wanted after last year, right? "Gee, if they can just be average, that's all they'd need...."

Well, here they are. Maybe a little better than average. But the offense keeps shooting itself in the foot - and I'd argue that the offensive line is s-l-o-w-l-y getting better, and Roders's hesitation on Sunday was very costly. How many sacks did he take when you were screaming "throw it away!"? How many underneath receivers did he bypass - like at the end of the game when both Jones and Jennings were open but Rodgers opted to throw to a double-covered Driver?

He's still a young guy, and my theory is that last year after the season he kept hearing about how he was too careful and robotic, how he checked down too much. So now he's trying to make the big strike, be the big-play QB. And I think that's hurt him and the team. I liked him better when he threw shorter passes and took the five yard gains. I don't know why, but this coaching staff seems like it disdains the shorter gains.

Classic example: second and three, late in the game Sunday. Perfect. There's lots of time on the clock - six minutes, I think - and you're in Viking territory. You need a t.d. to win. Why not call a run on second and three? If you gain a yard or two - a minimal expectation - you set yourself for two shots at a first down with only a yard or two to gain. Then you can play-action or run.

But no. It's a pass call, Lang has a brain fart and Allen rushes in untouched, and now you're third and long.

The other point is the special teams. Of all the criticism of this team, this is the area I believe is the most legitimate area for severe criticism. You keep all those linebackers and Jarrett Bushes because it's all about special teams, and then you suck? You don't bother drafting Kevin Huber from Cinci in the fifth or sixth round, and you have Krapinos? You continue to accrue stupid penalties all over? Every return, it seems?

Idiocy.

[pbmax]

Packers rank tied for fourth in total defense (283.4 yards per game allowed), but if you took away performances against the horrible Detroit Lions and Cleveland Browns, the Packers would rank 21st (338 per game).
You would need to subtract the two best games from EVERY team for this adjustment to make sense. Of course a good team should dominate a bad team. And its a bumper crop of bad teams this year.

The Packer D has performed better than last year except for the Vikings games, and I think (outside of 2-3 blown coverages-inexcusable) they played reasonably well against them the first time.

But the new scheme had aided the run defense more than the pass defense. We still have no pass rush to speak of except for Matthews.

[ThunderDan]

Packers rank tied for fourth in total defense (283.4 yards per game allowed), but if you took away performances against the horrible Detroit Lions and Cleveland Browns, the Packers would rank 21st (338 per game).

If you took away Denvers games against CLE and OAK they would average 306 ypg; a change of 40 yards per game. Which would be 10th in the NFL.

You think they have the best defense in the game but after removing their two stinkers.......

[ThunderDan]

At this point I'd rate my top 6 defenses in no particular order as

Denver
Jets
Indy
New England
Pittsburg
Cincy

In the second tier/group I'd put

Green Bay
Phily
Minnesota
Washington
Dallas
Giants and maybe
Baltimore.......blind faith I guess as they might not deserve to be here


No specific stat formula although I would say that I probably value Points Per Game over yardage

I applaud that you are willing to create a list of who you think are the best defenses in the NFL. :!:

[ThunderDan]

Let's look at this again:

2007 Top 5 YPG D and PPG Ranking
PITT - 16.8 PPG 2nd
TB - 16.9 PPG 3rd
IND - 16.4 PPG 1st
NE - 17.1 PPG 4th
TENN - 18.6 PPG 8th

2008 Top 5 YPG D and PPG Ranking
PITT- 13.9 PPG 1st
BALT- 15.2 PPG 3rd
PHI- 18.1 PPG 4th
WASH- 18.5 PPG 6th
NYG- 18.4 PPG 5th

Pretty strong correlation between yards given up and points given up.

Let's look at the worst 5 Ds.

2007 Worst 5 YPG D and PPG Ranking
DET- 27.8 PPG 32nd
BUFF- 22.1 PPG 18th
CLE- 23.9 PPG 21st
ATL- 25.9 PPG 29th
CHI- 21.8 PPG 16th

2008 Worst 5 YPG D and PPG Ranking
DET- 32.3 PPG 32nd
KC- 27.5 PPG 29th
SEA- 24.5 PPG 25th
DEN- 28 PPG 30th
STL- 29.1 PPG 31st

[ThunderDan]

Let's look at offenses.

2007 Top 5 Offenses:
NE - 411 YPG 36.8 PPG 1st 16-0
GB - 370 YPG 27.2 PPG 4th 13-3
DAL - 366 YPG 28.4 PPG 2nd 13-3
NO - 361 YPG 23.7 PPG 12th 7-9
IND - 359 YPG 28.1 PPG 3rd 13-3

2008 Top 5 Offenses:
NO - 411 YPG 28.9 PPG 1st 8-8
DEN - 396 YPG 23.1 PPG 16th 8-8
HOU - 382 YPG 22.9 PPG 17th 8-8
ARI - 366 YPG 26.7 PPG 3rd 9-7
NE - 365 YPG 25.6 PPG 8th 11-5