The REAL state of the Pack!

[Patler]

The NFL video was not all bad, but it compared apples to oranges - points on offense to yards on defense.

Called the Packers the "worst defense in 30 years."

Because no team gave up more yards? (NE was better by only 1/2 yard per game.)
Yet,
8 teams gave up more plays on defense than the Packers.
13 teams gave up more points than the Packers.
22 teams were worse in time of possession.
30 teams were worse in takeaways.
31 teams were much worse in interceptions.

Was the Packers defense worse than Tampa Bay, who gave up 135 more points than the Packers?


Realistically, defensive performance is affected by the teams offense, and vice verse.
It is fair to look at the Packer offense. They were:

#1 in points
#3 in yards
#12 in Time of possession
#28 in plays run.

The Packers scored more points than anyone, running fewer plays than only a few teams, and used a mid range amount of game clock time to do it. In other words, they got big yardage on fewer plays, meaning they kept the game clock running Considering points/play and play/game clock time, leads to a conclusion that the Packers kept the game clock running between plays, but scored so quickly that little real time passed. The defense had little time to rest while the offense was scoring.

The offense scored so quickly and so often, that opposing offenses had to really open up to try to catch up or even hold on. That lead to more yards surrendered and more interceptions made by the defense.

Lack of an effective pass rush was a glowing shortcoming, but fix that with a lineman and a linebacker, and the rest might take care of itself.

[Scott Campbell]

Yup.

Yardage is slightly better than useless for measuring a D's effectiveness.

[Upnorth]

Your last statement is 100% accurate in my opinion. What stands out the most for me is #28 in plays run and #12 in TOP. Part of that comes from playing with a lead from the start of the 2nd quarter on very often, but I also wonder how much of that came from getting to the line and then waiting so the defence exposes its design.

[Upnorth]

Yup.

Yardage is slightly better than useless for measuring a D's effectiveness.

And yet the journalists have used it as a way of determining the best O'd and D's for decades.

[Scott Campbell]

And yet the journalists have used it as a way of determining the best O'd and D's for decades.



Well I can damn well guarantee you that the team with the actual worst D in the last 30 years did NOT go 15-1.

[Patler]

And yet the journalists have used it as a way of determining the best O'd and D's for decades.

But in analyzing a team, they tend to do just what the video did, look at points scored on offense and yardage surrendered on defense.

Calling the Packers the worst defense in 30 years based on yardage alone is ridiculous. A flawed defense, for sure; but not the worst in 30 years.

[Upnorth]

Well I can damn well guarantee you that the team with the actual worst D in the last 30 years did NOT go 15-1.

I was not disagreeing with you, but trying to point out the stupidity of the talking heads.

[Guiness]

Some metrics that would seem to make sense at first glance don't always work out that way. And there's the concept of the 'meta-game' that matters.

Years ago I saw it pointed out that teams had a better winning %age when they had a 100 yard rusher than when they had a 300 yard passer. The reason given for this was you ran when you were ahead and passed when you were behind. I suspect (but haven't seen any statistics to back it up) that has changed as the rules and success of the spread formations have changed the meta-game. Scoring often and quickly is the way to go now.

This has changed the way defense is played. The steel curtain, get the stop type of D is not necessarily what DCs are striving for. Bend don't break, prevent the big play and get the ball back in your offense's hands is.

Yards surrendered probably did make sense when you were striving to emulate Pitt's Iron Curtain D. Not so much when you're playing cover-2.

[Scott Campbell]

I was not disagreeing with you, but trying to point out the stupidity of the talking heads.


I understood, and joined you in piling on.

[Upnorth]

Some metrics that would seem to make sense at first glance don't always work out that way. And there's the concept of the 'meta-game' that matters.

Years ago I saw it pointed out that teams had a better winning %age when they had a 100 yard rusher than when they had a 300 yard passer. The reason given for this was you ran when you were ahead and passed when you were behind. I suspect (but haven't seen any statistics to back it up) that has changed as the rules and success of the spread formations have changed the meta-game. Scoring often and quickly is the way to go now.

This has changed the way defense is played. The steel curtain, get the stop type of D is not necessarily what DCs are striving for. Bend don't break, prevent the big play and get the ball back in your offense's hands is.

Yards surrendered probably did make sense when you were striving to emulate Pitt's Iron Curtain D. Not so much when you're playing cover-2.

Based of the logic in this post I assume you are all better from your concussion?

You make a good point and I would like to see changes to winning percentage for 100+yrd rushing teams over the last 5 years. I bet it has a lower correlation now than then.

[Upnorth]

I understood, and joined you in piling on.

So it was Patler who didn't understand again, typical (just kidding).

[LP]

Yup.

Yardage is slightly better than useless for measuring a D's effectiveness.

But it sure is awesome for stirring the pot!

[Lurker64]

The defense was bad last year, but the statistics the NFL trotted out there are misleading for the reasons you post.

The real reason the defense was so terrible last year (and the real reason for a lot of the defensive statistics) is that the Packers played some of the worst third down defense in the entire NFL last year. Winning on defense is ultimately about winning on third down, and at least some of the blame falls on Capers' feet here. He called a great third down D in 2010 and on the super bowl run, but nothing we tried on third down worked.

Most of the time when the Packers stopped another team on a third down last year it was due to a turnover or the other team making an error (such as a QB throwing an inaccurate pass).

Do something to fix the defense on third downs, and the rest will come.

[Fritz]

The NFL video was not all bad, but it compared apples to oranges - points on offense to yards on defense.

Called the Packers the "worst defense in 30 years."

Because no team gave up more yards? (NE was better by only 1/2 yard per game.)
Yet,
8 teams gave up more plays on defense than the Packers.
13 teams gave up more points than the Packers.
22 teams were worse in time of possession.
30 teams were worse in takeaways.
31 teams were much worse in interceptions.

Was the Packers defense worse than Tampa Bay, who gave up 135 more points than the Packers?


Realistically, defensive performance is affected by the teams offense, and vice verse.
It is fair to look at the Packer offense. They were:

#1 in points
#3 in yards
#12 in Time of possession
#28 in plays run.

The Packers scored more points than anyone, running fewer plays than only a few teams, and used a mid range amount of game clock time to do it. In other words, they got big yardage on fewer plays, meaning they kept the game clock running Considering points/play and play/game clock time, leads to a conclusion that the Packers kept the game clock running between plays, but scored so quickly that little real time passed. The defense had little time to rest while the offense was scoring.

The offense scored so quickly and so often, that opposing offenses had to really open up to try to catch up or even hold on. That lead to more yards surrendered and more interceptions made by the defense.

Lack of an effective pass rush was a glowing shortcoming, but fix that with a lineman and a linebacker, and the rest might take care of itself.

Another option would be to play Bo Schembecler football (In the middle of a huge University of Michigan shootout with Colorado years ago, Bo appeared as a halftime commentator, and despite Michigan having scored a bucketload of points in the first half Bo thought they needed to "Run the damn football. Run!")

[pbmax]

And yet the journalists have used it as a way of determining the best O'd and D's for decades.


But in analyzing a team, they tend to do just what the video did, look at points scored on offense and yardage surrendered on defense.

Calling the Packers the worst defense in 30 years based on yardage alone is ridiculous. A flawed defense, for sure; but not the worst in 30 years.

The NFL does not help in this regard. While the relatively recent explosion of stats has changed things, for years the NFL listed the Yards chart as the primary reference for ranking defense. Points against was its own column under W/L in the League's own Press Release. For strictly informational purposes, I once called the NFL Offices in New York when the local paper did not put League stat totals in the agate type section of Sports. Lot's of local games that week or something. They used to run every Wed or Thurs and didn't that week.

A very kind but worried PR guy said he would mail me a copy but that I should not expect it every week. He recommended the Sporting News. I received the entire NFL Stats press release two days later. My parents were mostly concerned about the long distance call. :)

[Bretsky]

But it sure is awesome for stirring the pot!


Yup...that was my "Partial" coming out
I know we weren't the worst in 30 years

But I would say our defense kind of sucked

[MadtownPacker]

Do they think it was that terrible defense that lost the playoff game? :lol:

[Bretsky]

Do they think it was that terrible defense that lost the playoff game? :lol:


Well to be fair...........and I'd have to ask Patler about the stats cuz I'm too lazy to look it up........but it sure seemed like Eli Manning and the G's were successful about 90% of the time on 3rd down conversions.

[Joemailman]

Well to be fair...........and I'd have to ask Patler about the stats cuz I'm too lazy to look it up........but it sure seemed like Eli Manning and the G's were successful about 90% of the time on 3rd down conversions.

Nope. Just 8-16. That game swung on about 5 big plays. 2 long TD passes to Nicks. Arod missing wide open Jennings. Arod getting stripped when Jennings was wide open. Grant's fumble.

[mission]

Do something to fix the defense on third downs, and the rest will come.

[Build the] Pass rush and they will come.

3rd downs are all about pass rush and pass coverage. I don't think we're as bad as it seemed in the secondary. Pass rush will have no one talking about giving up miles of passing yards next year. Hopefully we can breakthrough ...

[Lurker64]

[Build the] Pass rush and they will come.

They also couldn't reliably win on third and short (which they could in 2010) so it's not just one thing.

[Pugger]

The defense was bad last year, but the statistics the NFL trotted out there are misleading for the reasons you post.

The real reason the defense was so terrible last year (and the real reason for a lot of the defensive statistics) is that the Packers played some of the worst third down defense in the entire NFL last year. Winning on defense is ultimately about winning on third down, and at least some of the blame falls on Capers' feet here. He called a great third down D in 2010 and on the super bowl run, but nothing we tried on third down worked.

Most of the time when the Packers stopped another team on a third down last year it was due to a turnover or the other team making an error (such as a QB throwing an inaccurate pass).

Do something to fix the defense on third downs, and the rest will come.

I don't know how much Capers could have done with only one guy who can rush the passer with any consistency last season. It was a big mistake to depend upon Neal to replace Jenkins and think that Jones/Walden/Zombo would be good enough opposite Clay.

[Lurker64]

I don't know how much Capers could have done with only one guy who can rush the passer with any consistency last season. It was a big mistake to depend upon Neal to replace Jenkins and think that Jones/Walden/Zombo would be good enough opposite Clay.

I can't blame Capers for the defense starting out poorly in the first few weeks. I can blame Capers because he was using the same stuff in December that didn't work in September either.

[Pugger]

Well to be fair...........and I'd have to ask Patler about the stats cuz I'm too lazy to look it up........but it sure seemed like Eli Manning and the G's were successful about 90% of the time on 3rd down conversions.


Nope. Just 8-16. That game swung on about 5 big plays. 2 long TD passes to Nicks. Arod missing wide open Jennings. Arod getting stripped when Jennings was wide open. Grant's fumble.

Man, it seemed to me Eli had all day back there on 3rd down time after time in that frustrating playoff game. :-(

Our offense had a bad game twice last year and we lost both games. If you have even a slightly below average defense you can still win ball games when your offense isn't clicking on all cylinders. When our defense couldn't get turnovers they couldn't stop anybody.

[pbmax]

I don't blame Capers for the scheme. The Packers players on D finally stepped up in the Giants game. Raji finally had a monster game holding his ground. The letdown in players concerns me more than Capers.

The rest was injuries.

[Scott Campbell]

It'll be interesting to see what they do about the crappy tackling from the corners. McCarthy pretty well threw down the gauntlet on that issue.

[woodbuck27]

But in analyzing a team, they tend to do just what the video did, look at points scored on offense and yardage surrendered on defense.

Calling the Packers the worst defense in 30 years based on yardage alone is ridiculous. A flawed defense, for sure; but not the worst in 30 years.

Damn with the media.

Someone 'in the media' in an important position to influence others'. Says something 'wild and not true' and all the media goes with 'the wild' and it becomes universallly acepted in 'the media throughout' that... it's 'just' .... that way.

[woodbuck27]

Some metrics that would seem to make sense at first glance don't always work out that way. And there's the concept of the 'meta-game' that matters.

Years ago I saw it pointed out that teams had a better winning %age when they had a 100 yard rusher than when they had a 300 yard passer. The reason given for this was you ran when you were ahead and passed when you were behind. I suspect (but haven't seen any statistics to back it up) that has changed as the rules and success of the spread formations have changed the meta-game. Scoring often and quickly is the way to go now.

This has changed the way defense is played. The steel curtain, get the stop type of D is not necessarily what DCs are striving for. Bend don't break, prevent the big play and get the ball back in your offense's hands is.

Yards surrendered probably did make sense when you were striving to emulate Pitt's Iron Curtain D. Not so much when you're playing cover-2.

Yup.

[Smidgeon]

I don't know how much Capers could have done with only one guy who can rush the passer with any consistency last season. It was a big mistake to depend upon Neal to replace Jenkins and think that Jones/Walden/Zombo would be good enough opposite Clay.

Jones/Walden/Zombo did well the year before. Didn't they combine for 10-12 sacks or something?

[mmmdk]

Here's a stat: 0-1 in playoffs.

[sharpe1027]

Here's a stat: 0-1 in playoffs.

Here's another stat: six drops, tied for the most by any NFL team in a game that season.

If you want to play the "only one game counts" game, then you should be arguing for all offense in the draft. They're the ones that lost that game.

[Bretsky]

I don't blame Capers for the scheme. The Packers players on D finally stepped up in the Giants game. Raji finally had a monster game holding his ground. The letdown in players concerns me more than Capers.

The rest was injuries.


Reality Slap...........we need to find players to replace Cullen Jenkins

[mmmdk]

Here's another stat: six drops, tied for the most by any NFL team in a game that season.

If you want to play the "only one game counts" game, then you should be arguing for all offense in the draft. They're the ones that lost that game.

True! How soon we forget.

[pbmax]

Reality Slap...........we need to find players to replace Cullen Jenkins

Yes. But that wasn't the question. The question was how much blame to lay on the feet of the scheme vs the players. Jenkins did not play base D and his absence did not make Raji play horrible Run D.

[Bretsky]

Yes. But that wasn't the question. The question was how much blame to lay on the feet of the scheme vs the players. Jenkins did not play base D and his absence did not make Raji play horrible Run D.


The Players sucked on the DL. We had a number of last DL on your team guys and unfortunately they were part of the regular rotation

[Lurker64]

Yes. But that wasn't the question. The question was how much blame to lay on the feet of the scheme vs the players. Jenkins did not play base D and his absence did not make Raji play horrible Run D.

I think the real problem with Raji last year was that he played waaaaay too many snaps. We couldn't afford to take him off the field because even at 60% he was better than some of the other schlubs we had on the DL, but no 340 pound man should play as many snaps as he does if you want him to make an impact.

When you sit back it's sort of astonishing how many bad breaks the Packers have had with the DL over the last few years. Harrell's career was ended due to a back injury (on his last play he tore his ACL on a field goal block attempt, for goodness sakes), Jolly ended up in jail for drank, and Neal hasn't been healthy since the third week of his rookie season. If any one of those guys didn't get hurt/stupid the defense would have been able to get a much more functional rotation on the DL last year.

Plus, the fact that Howard Green spent the lockout eating was unfortunate, if predictable.

I mean, even guys like Wynn and Wilson are fine to have on your team if you can keep their snaps appropriately low. Wynn's a guy who should be playing ~10-15 snaps a game in passing situations where you want to play base. Instead we were forced to *start* him.

[Fritz]

Somebody pooped the bed - but who?

I don't blame Ted. I think it was reasonable to expect Neal to step up - he did show flashes - and you couldn't reasonably predict the guy would be hurt again. Plus, had he signed Jenkins, how would he afford Finley, Jennings, et al? As is the pack is up against the cap.

I don't blame Capers. I don't think he was running the same stuff in December as in September. Seemed like he was throwing the kitchen sink on blitzes, but guys just kept letting themselves get blocked.

I don't blame Justin Harrell. The guy had bad, bad luck. Hurting your back is not a good think for anyone, but not especially a guy who has that kind of weight and has guys hitting him all the time. And then tearing, what, an ACL on a field goal try? Bad, bad luck.

It's never any single person, but if I had to single someone out, it'd be Johnny Jolly. He made a mistake, made a bad decision, had to pay. And just when you thought he'd learned his lesson and would be coming back....he effed up again. That was a choice.

Had Jolly kept his cranium out of his rectum, that Packer defense would have been so, so much better, I think. Raji would've been more rested. Wynn could've been used more appropriately.

[Pugger]

I think the real problem with Raji last year was that he played waaaaay too many snaps. We couldn't afford to take him off the field because even at 60% he was better than some of the other schlubs we had on the DL, but no 340 pound man should play as many snaps as he does if you want him to make an impact.

When you sit back it's sort of astonishing how many bad breaks the Packers have had with the DL over the last few years. Harrell's career was ended due to a back injury (on his last play he tore his ACL on a field goal block attempt, for goodness sakes), Jolly ended up in jail for drank, and Neal hasn't been healthy since the third week of his rookie season. If any one of those guys didn't get hurt/stupid the defense would have been able to get a much more functional rotation on the DL last year.

Plus, the fact that Howard Green spent the lockout eating was unfortunate, if predictable.

I mean, even guys like Wynn and Wilson are fine to have on your team if you can keep their snaps appropriately low. Wynn's a guy who should be playing ~10-15 snaps a game in passing situations where you want to play base. Instead we were forced to *start* him.

ALL of this! I agree with Fritz too. Jolly is a moron. But don't forget the misses with Jeremy Thompson and Mike Montgomery. If either one of these 2 panned out it would have helped.

And because of these D line issues our pass rush was anemic. This weakness had a domino effect thru the rest of the defense. :-(

[Scott Campbell]

We don't keep as many DL on the roster since the switch to the 3-4. So when you miss on a guy, it's really magnified.

[gbgary]

Called the Packers the "worst defense in 30 years."


what a ridiculous assessment.

[woodbuck27]

Reality Slap...........we need to find players to replace Cullen Jenkins

I don't know where to drop this but thuis is as good a place as any:

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/04/20/clay-matthews-says-hell-never-get-over-loss-to-the-giants/

Clay Matthews says he’ll never get over loss to the Giants

Posted by Michael David Smith on April 20, 2012, 9:15 PM EDT

"Three months after losing to the Giants in the playoffs, Packers linebacker Clay Matthews (http://www.rotoworld.com/player/nfl/5278/clay-matthews) says he’s not over that loss — and doesn’t think he ever will be." Article

Click on LINK for the rest of this story.