PDA

View Full Version : The State of the Packers...an essay



4and12to12and4
08-13-2006, 08:19 PM
I just wanted to put in my two cents about this game, and didn't know where to post it, so to hell with it, I decided to start a topic and call it "the state of the Packers".

I think that some of us here are probably scared shitless at this point whether we want to admit it or not. Last night had the look of a very good team playing against a very brutal team. (for those whose heads are still spinning, the Packers are the team I referred to as brutal)

So, is that accurate? Are we doomed to watch a team get knocked around and beaten badly every week this year? It's possible, but I say no. Here's my take on the "State of the Packers".

First off, at least the Chargers weren't galloping 40 and 50 yards per play while our defense ran into each other and missed a bunch of tackles. I only saw maybe two badly missed tackles all game. That is GOOD for such a young defense. Sure, the Chargers had a couple of very long drives, but the good thing is that the reason they needed 10 minutes to score is because we were pretty damn tough on first and second down. Especially when they ran on those downs. I know, I know, LT wasn't in there, but in watching, there were about as many holes for their backs as their was for ours. (slight exaggeration). That is huge. Great defenses ALWAYS start with shutting down the run. Once you do that, your LBs and DBs will eventually make plays off the pass game. Our run defense was very respectable.
Secondly, I saw sure tackling. Remember the beginning of last season, we were missing tackles everywhere? Bates said it was because guys weren't going on instinct because their minds were on their assignment. Yet, in this game, I didn't see a defense taking horrible angles and missing tackles all over. For the most part, all of these guys wrapped up their man and didn't allow a ton of YAC. Think about it, it seemed like everyone was just a step too late. Just a step. That is attributed to having to "think" about where to go before you go. That split second makes all the difference. Once this young defense doesn't have to think and can simply react, once these guys are comfortable with what their assignments are, and sure of the guy next to them, those sure tackles will start to become hardnosed, punishing gang-tackles. This may take a while to develop, let's give them time. This young defense will give us reasons to whince this year, it's a new system for many and a new league for some, but the talent is there, and, I bet that they will give us many a reason to cheer also.

Third, I'm convinced that our passing game is fine. We don't need to worry about who our #2 and #3 receivers are going to be. Our passing game had absolutely no right to have ANY success at all last night. We had NO run game to back it up. Favre can get it done with the talent we have out there in the receiving corps. Aaron Rodgers looked better than OK out there. AR looked, IMO, great. His arm is strong, and his biggest weakness last year was his inability to sense pocket pressure. He looks great shifting around in the pocket and had a couple of successful runs. I thought AR showed that he has really turned the corner, and there is simply a confidence and presence about him that wasn't there last year. And as far as Fergy goes, he did about as much as Driver did. He caught a KEY 28 yard catch on Favre's only good drive. At least he didn't have any drops. Jennings had two, so let's go easy on Fergy for at least a week. By the way, he may only had one catch because they only threw it to him once. And I tried to review many plays to see if he was getting open, but he was usually not on the same side of where the play was and was offscreen. Regardless, our QB's look very good, and this should be a strength as was last year. (Even though many claim it wasn't).

This all leads me to THE concern this year. Our season is going to be determined by one thing, our run game. I think that if we can get that, everything else will fall in place. Our drives will be elongated, keeping the defense fresh, and our pass game won't be under 3rd and long pressure every ten yards. And by the way, this defense was ranked #1 against the run last year, and their strength is their 3-4 defense and the deceit it brings because you never know who is going to be assisting on the rush. This is the hardest type of defense our young line could possibly have to deal with, because they never know WHO is coming, and they are still just trying to figure out what to do when they DO know who's gonna be in front of them.

So, yeah, we looked very bad to the naked eye, but knowing what we know about where our team is in terms of youth, scheme, timing, and chemistry, there WERE pos that MM will be able to build on.

I will say this, I think that MM is going to have to realize that for at least the first part of the season, he is going to have to rely on an offense more like Holmgren established. Dink and dunk on first down to open up holes, because the line will need time together before they can "establish" a run game on it's own merit. I hope he makes this adjustment, and if he does, I hope we fans are smart enough to realize he's not "giving up" on the run, because, it is going to take more than three games for these guys to understand this scheme and know where their neighbor is going to be. It looks like a mess out there because this system relies heavily on trusting the guy next to you to and knowing which defender he is going to pick up. And right now, we can't watch Colledge and Spitz and co. and judge how good they CAN be because right now, they are doing good just to know where they are suppose to be.

Think about it. Our very good, established, guards got beaten pretty badly yesterday. So, does that mean they suddenly don't have any talent? Of course not, it's because they too are almost like rookies in this new system. They are also "thinking" rather than "reacting". So, we live and die by our running game and pass protection ... at least these are SOLVEABLE. It's just time that is needed. I believe for the most part the talent is there. So, anyways, after a day of sulking and pondering, this is ... JMHO on the State of the Packers. Feel free to call me a homer and tell me I'm full of shit.

HarveyWallbangers
08-13-2006, 08:41 PM
I think that some of us here are probably scared shitless at this point whether we want to admit it or not.

Not really. I've watched enough preseason football not to get too hyped or down after a preseason game--especially the first one.

4and12to12and4
08-13-2006, 09:07 PM
Yeah, but I have to admit that by halftime I was really feeling overwhelmed with grief and disappointment. This is my first year talking on a forum all offseason, so for me, yesterday had been built up in my mind as better than Christmas, so it was very deflating. In fact, last year, I couldn't even watch preseason, which made it even more exciting for me. So, I thought there were others out there who were on the ledge also.

MadtownPacker
08-14-2006, 02:01 AM
Thanks for the attempt at uplifting your fellow Packerbacker but I will admit, yesterday left me feeling crappy. Nothing but bad reports from all sources makes me wonder but I will wait until week 3 of the preseason before I lose the faith.

woodbuck27
08-14-2006, 02:36 AM
4and12to12and4.

Good essay and all good points. Yes we need the run. Yes we need baby steps at the start of a series but NFL team defenses catch onto that real soon. We need the RUN.

What happened with the Chargers? M3 and the Coaching staff have alot to learn from that. They will we trust.

A 17-3 loss in a Pre Season game. Water off a duck's back. :mrgreen:

GO PACKERS ! FAITH !!

Terry
08-14-2006, 04:13 AM
Excellent essay. Really excellent. And the strategical thinking is really good. Maybe you should fax it to MM and TT. But really, 4and12to12and4, good post!

vince
08-14-2006, 08:04 AM
Brand new blocking scheme...
Brand new head coach...
Youngest team in the league...
No game planning...
Against a solid and unusual 3-4 defense that blitzed a lot...
First preseason game after only 2 or 3 weeks of orientation to a all this...

We all wish it would have gone better, but when you take a look at the the situation, it's easy to see why it didn't...

Keep the faith. The Packers aren't a Superbowl team this year, but we're not as bad as the situation dictated either.

The worst thing that happened was Underwood going down for the year. That sucks.

The rest of this can be fixed with time, practice, game planning, and hard work.

chewy-bacca
08-14-2006, 08:23 AM
A 3-4 is hard to move the ball on when you have tape. With no game plan and blitzing on almost ever down it becomes ugly.

Is so early, its hard to be upset with the game. Sure I would have liked alil better effort and result, but it will come around. I like that it was a wakeup call for the Oline, they needed that, I dont think Favre needs to take as many dirt naps as he did, but I would think that wont happen this week. I think MM will adj. faster.

Also, I think the D will become more agg. as the preseason goes on. I have to think the lack of blitzing was for a reason. As the prop. people fill in, things will come around.

if this was week one reg. season.....sound the alarm. As it is though, its not and this is what the preseason is for. I didnt expect them to be polished.

HarveyWallbangers
08-14-2006, 09:16 AM
Green Bay preseason results the last 5 years:

Won 10-7 vs. San Diego. Finished 4-12.
Lost 21-3 to Seattle. Finished 10-6.
Lost 9-0 to Kansas City. Finished 10-6.
Lost 20-13 to Philadelphia. Finished 12-4.
Lost 10-3 to Cleveland. Finished 12-4.

They haven't scored more than 13 points in a preseason opener the last 5 years. They've averaged 5.8 points/game in their preseason openers the last 5 years. The one year they won, they did crappy. The four years they lost, they made the playoffs. It's one friggin' preseason game, and it's the most meaningless one--with a new coaching staff.

Chester Marcol
08-14-2006, 10:01 AM
The offense will come around. Watching how well Atlanta's o-line works together and seeing glimmers of that on a few plays during our game left me optimistic there. However the defense has the same ole cast on the ends and is running the same scheme. The most telling stat was the Chargers 3rd down conversions. Talk all you want about blitzing, that isn't the answer to establishing a steady rush.


Sure, the Chargers had a couple of very long drives, but the good thing is that the reason they needed 10 minutes to score is because we were pretty damn tough on first and second down.
What? You made some points, but this one has to be called. I'd bet if you read that again you'd rethink that as a positive. There's not one team in the NFL that wouldn't take a 10 minute drive that ends in a score. How were you able to put a positive spin on that and believe that?

So if the Chargers would have scored in 2 minutes that would have been worse? How many years must we live with our defense not getting off the field on 3rd downs? Who cares about 1st and 2nd down stops if we never stop on 3rd down. Has it gotten to the point where we just accept a mediocre line and say blitzing is the answer? You want Slowit back don't you? Getting a good defensive end would have helped our defensive backfield way more than Woodson will ever be able to help.

drayge
08-14-2006, 10:06 AM
Not that I want to dispute your conclusions or get on Fergy, but he was thrown to on the second play of the game and it was incomplete (IMO a drop).

But this was clearly a team with a new gameplan playing base stuff against a veteran team ready for it.

Deputy Nutz
08-14-2006, 10:14 AM
Not that I want to dispute your conclusions or get on Fergy, but he was thrown to on the second play of the game and it was incomplete (IMO a drop).

But this was clearly a team with a new gameplan playing base stuff against a veteran team ready for it.

Fergy didn't drop the ball on the second play, he was about five yards from where the pass landed. Favre thought that Fergy was going to continue his 12 yard IN route, but instead Ferguson cut it off(I don't know why).

I also thought the run defense was solid. The only play I can remember that was pitiful was the 13 yard Touchdown run, but that can pretty much be attributed to Tra Boger, and who ever the outside linebacker was, I believe it was #59. Otherwise the interior of the defensive line played very wel against the run. The Chargers I believe were more into showcasing Rivers in the first half, more than anything else. I think He had 20 plus attempts for over 150 yards.

woodbuck27
08-14-2006, 10:36 AM
" I also thought the run defense was solid. " deputy Nutz

Hey ! The Chargers had two (2X) 18 play series's in that game before scoring a TD and a FG.

They didn't crush us. They only scored 17 points and beat us by two TD's. This is an experienced team coached by a man that has been around awhile. We were outclassed in that game and I like it - that at least Aaron Rodgers and Mike McCarthy are calling " a spade a spade ".

I'm sick of Ted Thompson's attitude. We need more on Offence. Our "D" will pick up as long as it doesn't get worn down.

OUR GM Ted Thompson. He's not the living dead - or is he?

He's certainly not the living end.

4and12to12and4
08-14-2006, 02:20 PM
The offense will come around. Watching how well Atlanta's o-line works together and seeing glimmers of that on a few plays during our game left me optimistic there. However the defense has the same ole cast on the ends and is running the same scheme. The most telling stat was the Chargers 3rd down conversions. Talk all you want about blitzing, that isn't the answer to establishing a steady rush.


Sure, the Chargers had a couple of very long drives, but the good thing is that the reason they needed 10 minutes to score is because we were pretty damn tough on first and second down.
What? You made some points, but this one has to be called. I'd bet if you read that again you'd rethink that as a positive. There's not one team in the NFL that wouldn't take a 10 minute drive that ends in a score. How were you able to put a positive spin on that and believe that?

So if the Chargers would have scored in 2 minutes that would have been worse? How many years must we live with our defense not getting off the field on 3rd downs? Who cares about 1st and 2nd down stops if we never stop on 3rd down. Has it gotten to the point where we just accept a mediocre line and say blitzing is the answer? You want Slowit back don't you? Getting a good defensive end would have helped our defensive backfield way more than Woodson will ever be able to help.

I agree with you. I wasn't happy with those long drives. But, in some ways, yes, I am glad that they weren't 2 minute drives. Because that would have meant that our entire defense would've allowed a running back to break tackles for a huge run, or a slant pattern would've turned into 3 missed tackles, and a huge gain, or one or more of our DB's would've gotten burnt on a long pass. So, yes, I am happy that our defense was tough on 1st and 2nd down, and then Rivers was thowing perfect passes for between 5 and 12 yards to gain the first down, while our DB's were on them in a split second draped all over their backs for no YAC. That is what I am getting at. The drives sucked, but at least they had to work their asses off to finally get into the endzone. And our defense is only gonna get better in time.

ahaha
08-14-2006, 02:44 PM
Green Bay preseason results the last 5 years:

Won 10-7 vs. San Diego. Finished 4-12.
Lost 21-3 to Seattle. Finished 10-6.
Lost 9-0 to Kansas City. Finished 10-6.
Lost 20-13 to Philadelphia. Finished 12-4.
Lost 10-3 to Cleveland. Finished 12-4.

They haven't scored more than 13 points in a preseason opener the last 5 years. They've averaged 5.8 points/game in their preseason openers the last 5 years. The one year they won, they did crappy. The four years they lost, they made the playoffs. It's one friggin' preseason game, and it's the most meaningless one--with a new coaching staff.

Excellent!

I met this Harvey on Sat night, and he really knows his s#@t!

Remember Mike Sherman's first preseason game? The first string defense didn't force a punt, and the offense wasn't much better. Analysts were predicting catastrophe, a mediocre offense and a defense that couldn't stop a Pop Warner team. Yet, we finished 9-7 and showed real promise for the future.

jack's smirking revenge
08-14-2006, 02:45 PM
Very nice essay! I enjoyed your points. My take on this situation is that we all, as Packer fans, need to wratchet down our expectations for 2006. This is NOT a Super Bowl team. We're in a VERY tough division in a tight conference. We'll be lucky if we're a playoff team, extra lucky if we're a division-winning team. That's reality. We've got some amazing talent in some areas, gaping holes in others. Super Bowl teams don't need to be amazing in all areas in our era of parity, but they have to be at least solid throughout. The Packers are far from solid. Their depth is quite suspect. We're one injury away from having a rookie QB (IMHO, Arod will be a rook until he starts a regular season game) guiding the squad, a couple injuries away from having M3 and Jags play offensive line themselves, and a few injuries away from having Kurt Schottenheimer throw on the pads in the Secondary.

The bottom line is this--don't get overly excited about 2006. Don't get sucked into somebody else's hype. This is a team in transition, a team rebuilding, a young team. If we're able to surprise some people this year, then great. If we overachieve and get to the next level beyond regular season, then this team will have amazing experience for 2007 and will be a force to be reckoned with.

To me, 2007 is really the year to look forward to. 2006 is a building block to something greater. I'll watch 2006 with interest and take whatever the Packers will give us, but I'm not expecting them to do anything at all this year (except do better than 4-12).

tyler

4and12to12and4
08-14-2006, 04:16 PM
Thanks. I agree that we need to lower our expectations this year. It's hard for me to do that though, because I want us to have a great season so bad, especially for Favre's sake, if this is his last year. I'd hate for him to have two horrible seasons to end his career. So, I want to remain optimistic regardless of reason. Damnit!!

woodbuck27
08-14-2006, 04:32 PM
The bottom line is this--don't get overly excited about 2006. Don't get sucked into somebody's else's hype. This is a team in transition, a team rebuilding, a young team. If we're able to surprise some people this year, then great. If we overachieve and get to the next level beyond regular season, then this team will have amazing experience for 2007 and will be a force to be reckoned with.

To me, 2007 is really the year to look forward to. 2006 is a building block to something greater. I'll watch 2006 with interest and take whatever the Packers will give us, but I'm not expecting them to do anything at all this year (except do better than 4-12).

tyler

tyler speaks the TRUTH. :mrgreen:

Let's all support one another through all the ups and downs we will feel this season.

Lets flow with the good and the bad. Be Packer fans as the focus of OUR Home here. Support one another.

The rewards are ahead of us. It's ALL about this.

The GREEN BAY PACKERS !!!!!!

MJZiggy
08-14-2006, 08:40 PM
I'm only walking into this expecting the same result as the coach... :mrgreen: