TIME TO BE CONCERNED ?

[Bretsky]

I think not

Even if we go 0-4 in the preaseson, we're fine

It is the preseason; who really cares. Our front line of starters is strong.

If AROD stays healthy this team is winning 12-13 games
If AROD goes down you can put the sharpest dagger through our hearts you can find

We're stil one of the best teams, if not the most talented, in the NFL
The defense stocked up in the draft and will be improved
Our offense will still be explosive

Barring serious injury, we win the division, first round bye in the playoffs, and have as good of a chance of any toward a SB win

Take it to the Bank

[RashanGary]

I think not

Even if we go 0-4 in the preaseson, we're fine

It is the preseason; who really cares. Our front line of starters is strong.

If AROD stays healthy this team is winning 12-13 games
If AROD goes down you can put the sharpest dagger through our hearts you can find

We're stil one of the best teams, if not the most talented, in the NFL
The defense stocked up in the draft and will be improved
Our offense will still be explosive

Barring serious injury, we win the division, first round bye in the playoffs, and have as good of a chance of any toward a SB win

Take it to the Bank


Yeah, certainly not panic time. Hopefully the young defense can get better each game and peak when it matters most.

[OS PA]

I believe we have better talent this year than we had during our Superbowl run. However, aside from the stars on this team, I'm afraid that there is a huge drop off in talent between the first and second stringers in some key positions. Our defensive back depth is very concerning. Our left tackle depth is very concerning. Our running back depth is concerning. I also worry that our OLB depth is bad too. We need to get healthy to provide better depth. I'm afraid that we're one key injury away from being a mediocre team. If Rodgers, Raji, Williams, Newhouse, Woodson or Burnett, or Matthews goes down, I'm afraid we won't be able to come close to replacing them and we'll have a serious sieve in our roster.

[Joemailman]

I'd be concerned if I were Graham Harrell and M.D. Jennings.

[denverYooper]

I'd be concerned if I were Graham Harrell and M.D. Jennings.

It'll be interesting to see how things play out with the QB situation. Moves made at other positions make me think that the Packers are not willing to stand pat in some trouble spots of yesteryear (RB, Defense) and their approach has looked more proactive thus far. I would hope this staff has a better feel on the QB position than any other position on the team.

Of course, if Rodgers goes down for more than a few games, I don't know that many backup QBs could come in and save a season anyway. At that point you might be better off getting BJ Coleman some quality reps if you think he's got moxie. I mean, football is next man up and all but I don't think Colt McCoy would come in and pull out a superbowl.

[Pugger]

I believe we have better talent this year than we had during our Superbowl run. However, aside from the stars on this team, I'm afraid that there is a huge drop off in talent between the first and second stringers in some key positions. Our defensive back depth is very concerning. Our left tackle depth is very concerning. Our running back depth is concerning. I also worry that our OLB depth is bad too. We need to get healthy to provide better depth. I'm afraid that we're one key injury away from being a mediocre team. If Rodgers, Raji, Williams, Newhouse, Woodson or Burnett, or Matthews goes down, I'm afraid we won't be able to come close to replacing them and we'll have a serious sieve in our roster.

But isn't that the case with every other team? Your starters are gonna be better than the backups. In last night's game Cleveland kept many of their starters in with Weedon while we had backups and that was one of the reasons why the game got out of hand. When the starters were still in we went for it on 4th and 2 on our own side of the 50 - something we'd never do in a regular season game. I was most disappointed in Harrell tho. He didn't look very good most of the time. And it isn't as if he's some kid who has no clue what's going on. He's been around for some time now. If we see a repeat performance from Graham next week we may have to look for another alternative for Rodgers' backup. I was hoping we'd see more of Coleman.

[smuggler]

What does Harrell have to fear? Coleman threw one pass and it was nearly a pick-6.

[packrulz]

I think they should get rid of preseason games or at least reduce the amount to two games, they shouldn't expect people to pay to see that kind of crap. I'm not concerned because they aren't trying to win, they're just evaluating and tinkering around with different sets.

[Tony Oday]

Dom doesn't use his defense in the preseason correct?

[pbmax]

Dom doesn't use his defense in the preseason correct?

He did play a lot of base early. Whether that was vanilla by design or by scouting report, it looked a little odd compared to the previous two years. To some degree, I would imagine that might have been for Woodson's benefit.

[QBME]

No concern
Preseason
17 players not suited up
Nobody hurt

Don' worry 'bout a ting, ever little ting gonna be alright...

[KYPack]

I've got my pinky on the panic button.

We've got some key holes in key spots and a chance we can't put enough fingers in there to stop up the leaks.

Anyone who isn't a little worried isn't paying attention.

[RashanGary]

I've got my pinky on the panic button.

We've got some key holes in key spots and a chance we can't put enough fingers in there to stop up the leaks.

Anyone who isn't a little worried isn't paying attention.

Our offense and special teams alone make us a really good team.

The defense is a work in progress. Ever since Collins left, our last line of defense has been consistenly unable to tackle. Collins was the best tackler (IMO) that I've seen. Of course, I'd only count the last 10 years as legitimate football awareness, so it's not like I'm talking 30 years of experience.

McMillan is an instinctive tackler. HE said he just went out and let his instincts take over. That's how Collins played. He just had a nose for sifting through traffic and making tackles he had no business making.

It looks like Capers might be trying to play some tough DB type players with speed (Bush McMillan) close to the line. That gives us more speed than a LB, but excellent tackling in space. Plus we have our usual cover guys behind them. Essentially it's S/LB hybrids in place of the ILBs rather than a pure cover dime. That opens Matthews and Perry to pin their ears back quite often and our tough, speed DBs to bring some lightning fast blitzes that are very hard for lineman to adjust to and excellent tackling in space.

It's a work in progress. The hope is our young guys get better week by week. We drop a couple games early, but peak on defense late in the season.

Capers is going for speed. Young guys with speed. It's going to be a matter of several weeks before they really get it together. In the mean-time, the offense and ST's needs to win some shootouts. The young pass rushers also need to develop over the season. That does happen. They learn. And with the rotations, they should be able to hold up over the season.

We're going all out for the post season this year. Emphasis is on upside and speed that needs experience vs experience with little upside.

[Harlan Huckleby]

They had 18 guys who didn't play.

Harrell was playing with a totally out-of-sync offense. I don't take too much away.

DJ Smith is no Desmond Bishop, there's my concern.

[Joemailman]

They had 18 guys who didn't play.

Harrell was playing with a totally out-of-sync offense. I don't take too much away.

DJ Smith is no Desmond Bishop, there's my concern.

We'll see. I'm sure there were plenty a couple of years ago who thought Desmond Bishop was no Nick Barnett.

I'm interested to see if McMillian gets some reps with 1's this week in nickel, and who gets the most reps with 1's at CB. This is the most important week of practice since whoever starts on Thursday night will probably start on opening day. House perhaps being the exception.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Is McMillan a corner or safey or both? He did look quick.

[Joemailman]

Is McMillan a corner or safey or both? He did look quick.

Safety. I think he played both safety positions with the 2's last night.

[Packers4Glory]

Defense still concerns me a great deal, as well as special teams coverage. I only caught some of the 1st and 2nd last night but nothing I saw changed my concerns coming in. I saw them give up a good return after the Nelson TD.

[pbmax]

Special Teams are still a disaster except when Cobb can shake loose on a return. Francois along can't fix that.

Maybe this is all part of Thompson's plan to start slow again like 2010 and then get hot late. Put everyone on DL who has a bruise and just pretend its been a bad injury year early.

[Smidgeon]

Is McMillan a corner or safey or both? He did look quick.

He was drafted as a safety but has played mostly dime in the slot in camp. Last night, he played both. Dime back first, then deep back after.

[rbaloha1]

Nah. Many starters are out and there is little game planning.

A poor performance against the niners would be an issue.

[rbaloha1]

I'd be concerned if I were Graham Harrell and M.D. Jennings.

Agree. Harrell better improve play. Jennings plays deeps safety but is continually late.

IMO McMillian and Ross are better.

[red]

i'm not all that concerned about the offense, except that it doesn't look like our backup qb has "it"

the defense is another story. we're still seeing the exact same problems that plagued us all last year. wed can not get off the field on 3rd down, and we can not stop any play over the middle, run or pass. so it sure looks to me like that one massive problem from last year still to this point, has not gotten that fixed

[HarveyWallbangers]

I didn't see the game. Did the defense show anything or was it the normal vanilla scheme that we generally play in the preseason? We've lost to Cleveland three straight years in the preseason.

[cheesner]

Panic? Am I the only one to have a somewhat positive reaction to the game?

I thought the weakest part of the game was our offense. Since I anticipate the offense being better than last year, I think we are fine. I was actually encouraged by a few things during the game: McMillan, Hayward, and Perry all three rookies looked good. Worthy and Daniels looked solid - should get better. Muir looked impressive and Raji and Tramon looked more like the 2010 versions. On offense, I think much better of Newhouse. I thought he was solid late last season and didn't think he had much upside. Now I think he may actually step up this season and become a pretty good player. I didn't like the overall team play or the result, but there were some strong individual performances in that game. I'm not worried about the 'team play' because it was only a preseason game with limited planning, scheming and the absence of so many players.

[RashanGary]

I didn't see the game. Did the defense show anything or was it the normal vanilla scheme that we generally play in the preseason? We've lost to Cleveland three straight years in the preseason.

Vanilla, but the run defense legitmately sucked. 5 yards every time. Guys getting pushed around badly.

[smuggler]

I think Brandian Ross is getting cut, so if Jennings is worse....

[Freak Out]

I take it Saturday is looking as consistent as usual?

[sheepshead]

I wonder who TT has on his short list of veteran QB's to look at?

[Joemailman]

I wonder who TT has on his short list of veteran QB's to look at?

http://cache.deadspin.com/assets/images/11/2009/01/medium_rodgers-favre.jpg

[pbmax]

Vanilla, but the run defense legitmately sucked. 5 yards every time. Guys getting pushed around badly.

CJ Wilson was handled by Joe Thomas in the run game definitely, but that's a tough assignment. Last week he faced a backup I think and this week an All-Pro. Somewhere in between is the truth. Would love to see him replaced by anyone better.

[pbmax]

I take it Saturday is looking as consistent as usual?

He got abused once in the run game early. Didn't see much else.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Vanilla, but the run defense legitmately sucked. 5 yards every time. Guys getting pushed around badly.

None of their RBs averaged more than 3.8 yards/carry?

[Joemailman]

Vanilla, but the run defense legitmately sucked. 5 yards every time. Guys getting pushed around badly.


None of their RBs averaged more than 3.8 yards/carry?

In the 1st quarter when both teams had their starters in, Hardesty averaged about 4.5 yards a carry. Nothing longer than 9 yards, but consistent yardage. Raji and Wilson were definitely losing the battle at the line. 2nd team seemed to do better. Muir probably more stout than Raji against the run.

[pbmax]

Blog headline at JSO: McCarthy says Harrell's Night Not as Bad as It Seemed

If he actually said that, that's right up there with Hawk getting the play calls right and being calm.

[denverYooper]

Blog headline at JSO: McCarthy says Harrell's Night Not as Bad as It Seemed

If he actually said that, that's right up there with Hawk getting the play calls right and being calm.

Your favorite, Wilde, described it as "tepid".

[BobDobbs]

Panic? Am I the only one to have a somewhat positive reaction to the game?

I thought the weakest part of the game was our offense. Since I anticipate the offense being better than last year, I think we are fine. I was actually encouraged by a few things during the game: McMillan, Hayward, and Perry all three rookies looked good. Worthy and Daniels looked solid - should get better. Muir looked impressive and Raji and Tramon looked more like the 2010 versions. On offense, I think much better of Newhouse. I thought he was solid late last season and didn't think he had much upside. Now I think he may actually step up this season and become a pretty good player. I didn't like the overall team play or the result, but there were some strong individual performances in that game. I'm not worried about the 'team play' because it was only a preseason game with limited planning, scheming and the absence of so many players.

I just watched the game and I definitely took away some positives. Rodgers looks great, DJ Williams is a legitimate receiving target, and Newhouse is better than anyone else we have put out there at LT.

Tramon looks comfortable, the backup safeties showed some fire, DJ Smith was everywhere, I like Moses, and I think Clay Matthews is going to be a player in this league.

I wasn't too impressed with Perry. Sometimes he show something in pass rush, but in run support he's just kind of pushing on his guy. He needs to drive into them. I think he's soft and I really want him to prove me wrong.

Dline was also uninspiring. I was watching the Dline alot because that's a position that hasn't gotten hit with injuries and has a ton of competition along with a lot of combinations. They really got pushed around. Our two rookies lost their anchor alot, at least they are active. Guy, Merling, and Neal were just kind of there. Hargrove was getting knocked around. Muir was really active and I thought the best of the reserves, but he really tired by the 4th quarter and then was kind of hit or miss. It's not like he played the whole game.

I'm not going to start worrying yet. Next game if we aren't generating pass rush in the first half I'll be worried. That's probably the biggest thing they focused on fixing this postseason. So if we didn't make progress, that's a problem.

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

What I am concerned about:

1) Backup QB: Harrell just looks bad and weak.
2) Depth at OT: Sherrod still no where is to found/Dalko is not ready
3) Still no replacement to Collins: Woodson moving to S in the base will help, but Jennings & and McMillian playing 70% of the time might be a horror show.
4) Dline still sucking: Worthy/Daniels are rooks, Raji not to impressive, everyone else looks just okay.
5) Team confidence: We came out rolling last year, but this years team doesn't have the same swagger. At least not yet, which may actually be a good thing.

[denverYooper]

I wasn't too impressed with Perry. Sometimes he show something in pass rush, but in run support he's just kind of pushing on his guy. He needs to drive into them. I think he's soft and I really want him to prove me wrong.

Dline was also uninspiring. I was watching the Dline alot because that's a position that hasn't gotten hit with injuries and has a ton of competition along with a lot of combinations. They really got pushed around. Our two rookies lost their anchor alot, at least they are active. Guy, Merling, and Neal were just kind of there. Hargrove was getting knocked around. Muir was really active and I thought the best of the reserves, but he really tired by the 4th quarter and then was kind of hit or miss. It's not like he played the whole game.

I'm not going to start worrying yet. Next game if we aren't generating pass rush in the first half I'll be worried. That's probably the biggest thing they focused on fixing this postseason. So if we didn't make progress, that's a problem.

The only problem with the DL rooks is that they are coming into a position that might take them a year to grow into. I like Worthy a lot but he needs a year in the S&C program before he's going to help their cause up front, IMHO. Hopefully one or more of the vets they signed will work out.

As far as Perry, I didn't get to see him play last night but I think he'll at least help out the pass rush some. I thought it was interesting that Walden played a long time last night, too.

[Bretsky]

What does Harrell have to fear? Coleman threw one pass and it was nearly a pick-6.

Free agents and other teams cuts

[hoosier]

I've got my pinky on the panic button.

We've got some key holes in key spots and a chance we can't put enough fingers in there to stop up the leaks.


As Al Pacino would say, who would wanna put their finger in a dyke?

Aside from safety and running back, I would say the holes are going to be few and far between once they get over the run of injuries. If Sherrod can't perform then they have depth problems at the outside OL positions. They also may have those at linebacker. I don't see any glaring problems, just a lack of continuity. But maybe this year will be the reverse of last year: finish the season pulling away.

[rbaloha1]

I think Brandian Ross is getting cut, so if Jennings is worse....

Ross has a nose for the ball with good tackling ability.

[rbaloha1]

CJ Wilson was handled by Joe Thomas in the run game definitely, but that's a tough assignment. Last week he faced a backup I think and this week an All-Pro. Somewhere in between is the truth. Would love to see him replaced by anyone better.

Probably sticks around only until Hargrove returns.

[Lurker64]

Probably sticks around only until Hargrove returns.

The Packers are likely to keep 6 DL, locks are Raji, Worthy, and Pickett. Daniels will probably make the roster, but C.J. Wilson is in the #5 DL spot, not the #6 DL spot. The first guy to get cut to make room for a returning Neal or Hargrove is whoever makes the roster after Wilson (Merling, Muir, Guy, Wynn, etc.)

I think honestly, Wilson is the best option they have at DE opposite Pickett in base defense (which, remember, is a run-stopping formation for the Packers.)

[Patler]

The Packers are likely to keep 6 DL, locks are Raji, Worthy, and Pickett. Daniels will probably make the roster, but C.J. Wilson is in the #5 DL spot, not the #6 DL spot. The first guy to get cut to make room for a returning Neal or Hargrove is whoever makes the roster after Wilson (Merling, Muir, Guy, Wynn, etc.)

I think honestly, Wilson is the best option they have at DE opposite Pickett in base defense (which, remember, is a run-stopping formation for the Packers.)

I wonder if Neal and/or Hargrove even make the team when their suspensions are up? I have heard very little about Neal in camp. The encouraging thing is that he has been healthy, but he doesn't seem to be turning any heads. They may have the same player in Merling. I know they like Hargrove's intensity and personality, but is that enough? It sounds like Daniels might be a similar personality.

By the time the suspensions are up, a rotation of Picket, Raji, Wilson, Worthy, Daniels and Wynnmerlingmuir might not have a glaring need for a replacement.

[Pugger]

I wonder if Neal and/or Hargrove even make the team when their suspensions are up? I have heard very little about Neal in camp. The encouraging thing is that he has been healthy, but he doesn't seem to be turning any heads. They may have the same player in Merling. I know they like Hargrove's intensity and personality, but is that enough? It sounds like Daniels might be a similar personality.

By the time the suspensions are up, a rotation of Picket, Raji, Wilson, Worthy, Daniels and Wynnmerlingmuir might not have a glaring need for a replacement.

MM had said Neal and Hargrove are not getting as many reps as the guys who will be available once the season starts. I suspect we'll be glad to have these two around once their suspensions are up if we have some injuries on that line.

[Smeefers]

I'm not worried at all. Not even a little bit.

Harrell: I'm willing to bet if you put tape up of Rodgers, Flynn and Harrell up to each other in there first year, they'd all pretty much look the same. Give the kid some time before you get rid of him. I remember way back when Rodgers was a rookie, he looked like garbage. Same thing with flynn. Every year that happens, there's talk of signing a veteran. Every year that doesn't happen. Our problem is that we just went from the best back up in the league to just some dude. Everyone else has to deal with that too. It is highly unlikely that any team out there can go win a super bowl with a back up QB.

LT: Sherrod is still out and until he gets healthy and gets some practice time, we're thin here. We're going to stay thin there. If Newhouse were to get hurt, they'd move over Lang and put EDS in at guard. It's not perfect, but it's not like there's no back up. Once again, when you're dealing with worst case scenarios, the outcome is never going to be "they played better than the starter!"

RB: They're all hurt/couldn't play. Not worried at all. It's not like we run the ball anyway. What I'm looking forward to seeing is a comparrison of benson to the guys we got. He's pretty legit. We're going to find out real quick if Starks, green and saine are half way decent backs or just some dudes who suit up. I also think if Benson struggles mightily, that may point more towards our offensive line than to our running backs.

Smith: The dude's not going to be as good as Bishop. We lost our leading tackler from a year ago, that spells trouble. All we can do is hope that he's good enough that the other LB's can cover for his short comings. Pun intended. (He's short.)

CB's: Looking forward to see who pulls out as the other starting corner. Before preseason began, I honestly thought we were going to see a lot of Bush on the field, but God I hope I'm wrong and one of those other fellas wins out. I'm very disapointed in shields.

Overall: It's preseason. It's game tape for coaches to look at so they can decide whether to cut this 3rd stringer or that 3rd stringer. It also allows the 1st and 2nd stringers to battle it out for positions. I'm sure much of the defense was called in a way to see how certain players work on certain match ups. See how they perform when things are unfavorable towards them and what not. These games I take with a grain of salt.

[denverYooper]

I wonder if Neal and/or Hargrove even make the team when their suspensions are up? I have heard very little about Neal in camp. The encouraging thing is that he has been healthy, but he doesn't seem to be turning any heads. They may have the same player in Merling. I know they like Hargrove's intensity and personality, but is that enough? It sounds like Daniels might be a similar personality.

By the time the suspensions are up, a rotation of Picket, Raji, Wilson, Worthy, Daniels and Wynnmerlingmuir might not have a glaring need for a replacement.

I've been thinking the same about Neal. He didn't seem to do much in the scrimmage either. I realize that he's not getting as many reps in practice but his strength was the head-turning part of his game and he didn't seem to be moving even Cleveland's backup OL the way he used to. I sort of wonder if he's not the same without his "medicine".

[Patler]

MM had said Neal and Hargrove are not getting as many reps as the guys who will be available once the season starts. I suspect we'll be glad to have these two around once their suspensions are up if we have some injuries on that line.

Of course, if someone is injured, these two will be welcomed returnees; but, if the original group is healthy, I don't think it is certain one will be released just to make room for either Hargrove or Neal.

[OS PA]

I'm not worried at all. Not even a little bit.

Harrell: I'm willing to bet if you put tape up of Rodgers, Flynn and Harrell up to each other in there first year, they'd all pretty much look the same. Give the kid some time before you get rid of him. I remember way back when Rodgers was a rookie, he looked like garbage. Same thing with flynn.


I think we're all forgetting that the kid, Harrell, is 27 years old.

[Joemailman]

Originally Posted by Smeefers
I'm not worried at all. Not even a little bit.

Harrell: I'm willing to bet if you put tape up of Rodgers, Flynn and Harrell up to each other in there first year, they'd all pretty much look the same. Give the kid some time before you get rid of him. I remember way back when Rodgers was a rookie, he looked like garbage. Same thing with flynn.


I think we're all forgetting that the kid, Harrell, is 27 years old.

Plus he's in his 3rd season with the Packers. By Rodgers' 3rd season, he was a starting-caliber QB. As was Flynn.

[Pugger]

I'm not worried at all. Not even a little bit.

Harrell: I'm willing to bet if you put tape up of Rodgers, Flynn and Harrell up to each other in there first year, they'd all pretty much look the same. Give the kid some time before you get rid of him. I remember way back when Rodgers was a rookie, he looked like garbage. Same thing with flynn. Every year that happens, there's talk of signing a veteran. Every year that doesn't happen. Our problem is that we just went from the best back up in the league to just some dude. Everyone else has to deal with that too. It is highly unlikely that any team out there can go win a super bowl with a back up QB.

LT: Sherrod is still out and until he gets healthy and gets some practice time, we're thin here. We're going to stay thin there. If Newhouse were to get hurt, they'd move over Lang and put EDS in at guard. It's not perfect, but it's not like there's no back up. Once again, when you're dealing with worst case scenarios, the outcome is never going to be "they played better than the starter!"

RB: They're all hurt/couldn't play. Not worried at all. It's not like we run the ball anyway. What I'm looking forward to seeing is a comparrison of benson to the guys we got. He's pretty legit. We're going to find out real quick if Starks, green and saine are half way decent backs or just some dudes who suit up. I also think if Benson struggles mightily, that may point more towards our offensive line than to our running backs.

Smith: The dude's not going to be as good as Bishop. We lost our leading tackler from a year ago, that spells trouble. All we can do is hope that he's good enough that the other LB's can cover for his short comings. Pun intended. (He's short.)

CB's: Looking forward to see who pulls out as the other starting corner. Before preseason began, I honestly thought we were going to see a lot of Bush on the field, but God I hope I'm wrong and one of those other fellas wins out. I'm very disapointed in shields.

Overall: It's preseason. It's game tape for coaches to look at so they can decide whether to cut this 3rd stringer or that 3rd stringer. It also allows the 1st and 2nd stringers to battle it out for positions. I'm sure much of the defense was called in a way to see how certain players work on certain match ups. See how they perform when things are unfavorable towards them and what not. These games I take with a grain of salt.

But Harrell isn't a rookie. He's 27 years old and has been in this offense since 2010.

edit: I see I'm not alone in my thinking here...

[Harlan Huckleby]

Harrell is sort of like an android QB planted by aliens. He certainly looks like a QB, almost too perfectly so. He's calm under pressure. He throws reasonably well, although with a slightly halting action. I guess he's a QB, but something's just not right.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Of course, if someone is injured, these two will be welcomed returnees; but, if the original group is healthy, I don't think it is certain one will be released just to make room for either Hargrove or Neal.

I agree that Neal and Hargrove aren't locks to make the roster when their suspensions are up. Of course, it's nice that they'll be around if we have injuries at DL. I like Muir the most between him, Merling, and Wynn.

[pbmax]

I just wrote a manifesto about keeping 7 DL to both backup all the sub packages AND have an back at end for base but then it occurred to me; there are problems with any such plan. Keep 7 also give the team an option to keep Neal and I don't think they want to part with the most natural 3-4 end they have yet.

But the rest of the D may not let them. The Packers have Perry on the roster to replace an OLB last year, but what about Manning? Do they trust him to replace Bishops roster spot or will he be an extra body at LB? And at safety there are a lot of young players to choose from, plus someone to replace Woodson outside and that doesn't even get into the question about House's health.

6 DL is going to run thin for some of the sub packages, but when only 2 at most are on the field, I don't think they can carry 7.

[pbmax]

I agree that Neal and Hargrove aren't locks to make the roster when their suspensions are up. Of course, it's nice that they'll be around if we have injuries at DL. I like Muir the most between him, Merling, and Wynn.

Has Muir played any end in practice or games, or is he just inside?

[Patler]

I just wrote a manifesto about keeping 7 DL to both backup all the sub packages AND have an back at end for base but then it occurred to me; there are problems with any such plan. Keep 7 also give the team an option to keep Neal and I don't think they want to part with the most natural 3-4 end they have yet.

But the rest of the D may not let them. The Packers have Perry on the roster to replace an OLB last year, but what about Manning? Do they trust him to replace Bishops roster spot or will he be an extra body at LB? And at safety there are a lot of young players to choose from, plus someone to replace Woodson outside and that doesn't even get into the question about House's health.

6 DL is going to run thin for some of the sub packages, but when only 2 at most are on the field, I don't think they can carry 7.

They tend to have, at most, 5 active for games, sometimes only 4. Unless Worthy or Daniels is considered a total developmental project who won't play but merits a roster spot to hold him (like they did with Giacomini, Newhouse, McDonald, etc.) I think keeping 7 might be a little tough. And, as you suggest, some of developmental spots might be tied up with LBs or DBs and the roster might not have room for a 7th DL.

[RashanGary]

Overall: It's preseason. It's game tape for coaches to look at so they can decide whether to cut this 3rd stringer or that 3rd stringer. It also allows the 1st and 2nd stringers to battle it out for positions. I'm sure much of the defense was called in a way to see how certain players work on certain match ups. See how they perform when things are unfavorable towards them and what not. These games I take with a grain of salt.


Ditto on just about every point, especially this one.


I am a bit concerned about the development of the young lineman. I actually think Neal is having a fine camp. Turgo said a week or two ago Neal is looking like his old self and is looking forward to getting him on the field.

Neal is one of the few guys we have who can hunker down and has the pop to push the pocket a little. He's a very good first down player. He could easily replace Wilson or Pickett at end.

I'd still like to see Pickett playing nose. He's more stout than Raji, and more fundamentally sound. Raji, more than anything else, is a burst player. He can wreak havoc as a pass rusher. I'd love to see him rested as a nose tackle and given more opportunities as a 3-tech.


The DL, as much depth has been added, it's young depth, and that's an area where it's very hard to play the run early. Pass rushers can pass rush out of the gate. Hunkering down though, there is technique and man strength that takes a year or two. It's very hard to see how this line rotation is going to shake out.

I do strongly suspect our 3rd down defense is much improved. We do seem to have run defense issues, but we had all defense issues last year. If we can get off the field when we do force a 3rd and 6 or more, that's a big upgrade over last year and our offense/ST's seems ready to rip roar and tear, so even being a top 20 defense would put us in a much better spot than a year ago.

[Lurker64]

I like Muir the most between him, Merling, and Wynn.

I really think that in that battle, Muir has the hardest time winning it since he's a much tougher fit in base than Merling, Wynn, or Guy. If he wins the spot, then it's his, but I think the coaches would prefer somebody else win it. We already have a bunch of NT/3T types.

[RashanGary]

I forget about Muir. As much as he doesn't quite fit the DE type for our scheme, he can hunker down and has the burst to get a little push. If you get Neal back, you could easily go Neal/Pickett/Muir and still get a little push out of your ends while being strong against the run. As poorly as the taller guys are playing, if you want to save Raji for sub packages, that actually looks like one of the most effective base looks we could have.

[Brandon494]

Never ask me this question in the preseason.

[Joemailman]

6 DL is going to run thin for some of the sub packages, but when only 2 at most are on the field, I don't think they can carry 7.

I think they keep 5 RB's and 6 DL to start with because of the health situation at RB. However, if by the time Neal is eligible Starks and Saine are healthy, I think they cut a RB and activate Neal.

[pbmax]

I think they keep 5 RB's and 6 DL to start with because of the health situation at RB. However, if by the time Neal is eligible Starks and Saine are healthy, I think they cut a RB and activate Neal.

I agree and I don't think they are done with him. He is one of the few prototype 3-4 ends on the roster and he has shown a good upside. He just needs to stay on the field.

[wist43]

No, I'm not concerned...

To be sure there are some issues and trouble spots, but getting whooped by Cleveland in the preseason isn't cause to push the panic button.

My main concerns at this point would be OL depth and everywhere on defense. Raji doesn't belong on the nose in a standard 3-4, and Dom Capers running his beloved 2-4 nickel as a base defense is a recipe to give the QB a comfortable pocket, and give up 5-7 yards, or more, on every running play against it. Hell, 2nd and 15, with Dom in that idiotic front is a viable running down for any offense. Never trusted Dom, and never will.

[mmmdk]

Being either 0-4 or 4-0 in preseason matters little; being 0-1 in the regular season after week 1 should get some attention though!

[pbmax]

No, I'm not concerned...

To be sure there are some issues and trouble spots, but getting whooped by Cleveland in the preseason isn't cause to push the panic button.

My main concerns at this point would be OL depth and everywhere on defense. Raji doesn't belong on the nose in a standard 3-4, and Dom Capers running his beloved 2-4 nickel as a base defense is a recipe to give the QB a comfortable pocket, and give up 5-7 yards, or more, on every running play against it. Hell, 2nd and 15, with Dom in that idiotic front is a viable running down for any offense. Never trusted Dom, and never will.

That 2-4 defense did pretty well in 2009 and 2010 against the run. But Raji does need to commit to run D first some times.

[Lurker64]

Being either 0-4 or 4-0 in preseason matters little; being 0-1 in the regular season after week 1 should get some attention though!

They lost six games a couple years ago, then won the superbowl. I wouldn't get panicked if they lose to the 49ers. This team might actually be better off going on the road in the playoffs.

[wist43]

That 2-4 defense did pretty well in 2009 and 2010 against the run. But Raji does need to commit to run D first some times.

Like anything else, teams have caught up to it... to whatever extent. Having only 2 DL on the field is an invite to run - a good OL should get you at least 7-8 yards against that front. Add to that the fact that Raji is getting turned consistently, blitzes are easier to recognize and pick up IMO, and it becomes too predictable with too many smaller players in the front seven.

The Packers get outmuscled up front on a regular basis - I just hate that; and I blame Dom for wanting to play small and soft.

I think the Packers upgraded their front seven in terms of talent, but if all Dom is going to do is put 2 DL on the field all the time, our front seven is going to get pushed around, and be worn down and demoralized - just like last year. Like I said, I've never trusted Dom - even after he calls a nice game, I won't trust him the next week.

[mmmdk]

They lost six games a couple years ago, then won the superbowl. I wouldn't get panicked if they lose to the 49ers. This team might actually be better off going on the road in the playoffs.

Might be spot on, Packers offense is a dome team for sure! On another note though; I still don't buy our defense is "fixed"...and call me old school but defense wins championships. I'm not worried that Packers will not win games this season but it's those games in january & february that counts. Or are Packers just going to settle for the occasional and lone SB win whenever a superstar QB happens to drop by Green Bay? More SB wins please! :mrgreen:

[RashanGary]

No, I'm not concerned...



If he's not, I'm not. Literally.

[MJZiggy]

If he's not, I'm not. Literally.

Good point.

[pbmax]

If he's not, I'm not. Literally.


Good point.

I know what you mean, but the last time he was terrified of Dom and Ted the Packers won a Super Bowl.

[MJZiggy]

I know what you mean, but the last time he was terrified of Dom and Ted the Packers won a Super Bowl.
Good counterpoint.

[red]

jennings and fin returned to practice today. that means the offense will soon be back to normal, so all we need is a slightly improved defense and we should be ready to roll towards 16-0 and another lombardi

[George Cumby]

Never ask me this question in the preseason.

What he said.

[mmmdk]

No, I'm not concerned...

To be sure there are some issues and trouble spots, but getting whooped by Cleveland in the preseason isn't cause to push the panic button.

My main concerns at this point would be OL depth and everywhere on defense. Raji doesn't belong on the nose in a standard 3-4, and Dom Capers running his beloved 2-4 nickel as a base defense is a recipe to give the QB a comfortable pocket, and give up 5-7 yards, or more, on every running play against it. Hell, 2nd and 15, with Dom in that idiotic front is a viable running down for any offense. Never trusted Dom, and never will.

...and there's your oxymoron!

[denverYooper]

jennings and fin returned to practice today. that means the offense will soon be back to normal, so all we need is a slightly improved defense and we should be ready to roll towards 16-0 and another lombardi

Hopefully Jennings makes it through the season. I hope it was the case that the Packers were being cautious, but his concussion(s?) sounded pretty nasty. Also, he mentioned that this was his 2nd but that the Packers had him down for 3 now.

[Upnorth]

Personally I think it is time to be very concerned, at least for the Saskatchewan Roughriders. The Packers on the other hand I will wait until the first game to yell the sky is falling.

[MJZiggy]

At least we know where we stand. Many have the same game plan.

[Patler]

Whether or not to be concerned depends on your expectations. Following 2011, I expect many fans to yell "the sky is falling" if the Packers lose at all before week 6, and whenever the second game of the season is lost.

My only expectation is for them to get into the playoffs. If they do it by going 16-0, great! If they do it by going 9-7, I really don't care.

My one other desire is that their season builds like it did in 2010, so they are playing their best football the second half of the season. I was never comfortable with how well they played offesnsively right out of the gate last year. No team can keep that up for 17 weeks and the playoffs. Consequently, if they are a little out of sync still when the season starts, I really don't care, even if they start out 3-3.

[RashanGary]

Whether or not to be concerned depends on your expectations. Following 2011, I expect many fans to yell "the sky is falling" if the Packers lose at all before week 6, and whenever the second game of the season is lost.

My only expectation is for them to get into the playoffs. If they do it by going 16-0, great! If they do it by going 9-7, I really don't care.

My one other desire is that their season builds like it did in 2010, so they are playing their best football the second half of the season. I was never comfortable with how well they played offesnsively right out of the gate last year. No team can keep that up for 17 weeks and the playoffs. Consequently, if they are a little out of sync still when the season starts, I really don't care, even if they start out 3-3.

More than likely, I think it's the defense that's going to be a work in progress. Each week, those young DL, LB and DB's are going to get a little better.

I think the offense will come out of the gates roaring. I have no problem with that. It's when you play a defense that just got all three of their probowl DL healthy for the first time comes marching in (like the Giants did) that problems begin. Those are the games where your offense is going to struggle. The best against the best. That's when you need to edge it out with ST's and defense. Our defense was awful. I don't think the offense was the problem down the stretch last year. I think it was running into the Giants defense and then not having our defense hold up it's end of the bargain.

[Patler]

More than likely, I think it's the defense that's going to be a work in progress. Each week, those young DL, LB and DB's are going to get a little better.

I think the offense will come out of the gates roaring. I have no problem with that. It's when you play a defense that just got all three of their probowl DL healthy for the first time comes marching in (like the Giants did) that problems begin. Those are the games where your offense is going to struggle. The best against the best. That's when you need to edge it out with ST's and defense. Our defense was awful. I don't think the offense was the problem down the stretch last year. I think it was running into the Giants defense and then not having our defense hold up it's end of the bargain.

I didn't mean to suggest that the offense was the problem last year. Just used it as the example of why I am not concerned now. I don't expect them to come out as strong as they did to start last season, nor do I care at all if the don't for the reasons I said.

There was nothing to be excited about at all on defense last year. I kept expecting it to get better, much better, because they couldn't possibly be that bad for the entire season. But, they were. :(

As for concern now for the defense. None whatsoever. It was so bad last year, I have no expectations, so no worry or concern now. Heck, it might be next year before the yung'uns come together on defense. Any improvement this year will be appreciated.

[Pugger]

With the additions we added this offseason our defense will be better (we can only get better after 2011). It might take a couple of weeks before the young guys get going but our offense can mask some of that early.

[gbgary]

bush penciled as the starter opposite tw is very disturbing.

[BobDobbs]

With the additions we added this offseason our defense will be better (we can only get better after 2011). It might take a couple of weeks before the young guys get going but our offense can mask some of that early.

I think our defense does have to get better as far as yardage is concerned. But, they did cause a lot of turnovers. That turnover differential was a big part of how many points we scored. I think we may actually need the D to step up pretty big right out of the gate. 49ers were one of the best defenses in the league and the Bears always play us tough. Even Seattle in the third week may have a strong defense this year.

I could definitely see us starting slowly on offense and Packerland freaking out.

[denverYooper]

One thing that might help the defense: Benson. *If* he can give the Packers a more reliable ground game, they might be willing and able to throttle back as needed to control the clock.

[Smidgeon]

I didn't mean to suggest that the offense was the problem last year. Just used it as the example of why I am not concerned now. I don't expect them to come out as strong as they did to start last season, nor do I care at all if the don't for the reasons I said.

There was nothing to be excited about at all on defense last year. I kept expecting it to get better, much better, because they couldn't possibly be that bad for the entire season. But, they were. :(

As for concern now for the defense. None whatsoever. It was so bad last year, I have no expectations, so no worry or concern now. Heck, it might be next year before the yung'uns come together on defense. Any improvement this year will be appreciated.

I have very high hopes for this year's draft and FA class. And I have hopes that Shields will get it together. But I don't have a lot of hope it will all come together this year. Rookies often don't contribute significantly the first year. So while I have high hopes for the contributors, I also understand hopes are different from expectations.

[rbaloha1]

bush penciled as the starter opposite tw is very disturbing.

Ditto

[Joemailman]

bush penciled as the starter opposite tw is very disturbing.

It likely won't last long. House and Hayward are both better, but House is injured (hopefully not seriously), and Hayward is a rookie.

[mmmdk]

Might be spot on, Packers offense is a dome team for sure! On another note though; I still don't buy our defense is "fixed"...and call me old school but defense wins championships. I'm not worried that Packers will not win games this season but it's those games in january & february that counts. Or are Packers just going to settle for the occasional and lone SB win whenever a superstar QB happens to drop by Green Bay? More SB wins please! :mrgreen:

DEFENSE [I want a] DEFENSE !!

[wist43]

I'm still not too concerned... but I'm not surprised we lost - not happy about it, but not surprised.

As I said in the game day thread - this team is built soft. My hope is that getting beat up like this; and after getting beat up by New York in the playoffs last year, and also getting smacked around pretty good by the Chiefs, that MM and Capers will get their heads out of their asses and start doing some game planning and coaching.

If there is such a thing as a good loss, this might be it.

[RashanGary]

I'm still not too concerned... but I'm not surprised we lost - not happy about it, but not surprised.

As I said in the game day thread - this team is built soft. My hope is that getting beat up like this; and after getting beat up by New York in the playoffs last year, and also getting smacked around pretty good by the Chiefs, that MM and Capers will get their heads out of their asses and start doing some game planning and coaching.

If there is such a thing as a good loss, this might be it.

This is pretty much how I feel. I did like that they played Pickett and Raji inside quite a bit. If they're going to go small like that, they might as well use the two strongest lineman to do it.

The Packers have big problems against running teams with good defenses. Great defense almost always seems to slow down great offense. The Patriots, since their defensive hay day, have gotten beaten by great defense in the post season year after year after year. The Packers are looking like that sort of team now.

My biggest concern, the one I don't know if we'll have an answer to, is our zone defense. We seem to be built to play man defense. Shields just seems lost in space, but he mans up pretty well. Problem is, we can't just man up against a great running team and turn our backs. Then there is the safeties, they seem lost too. And Perry, obviously he looked lost.

Balanced offenses are going to have their way with us. When Collins was here, he covered the whole deep middle by himself. We could play straight man defense outside with one over and still not get beat. Then we had that 8th guy in the box. Teams couldn't run, and since that 8th guy was Woodson, they couldn't pass either. Now it's a different story. We can't just man up. We have to play good zone defense. Problem is, we've never done it and I don't know if we have the guys to do it.

Maybe Hayward or House come in and prove they can do what Bush or Shields cannot (play zone defense), but that's a pretty big friggin if.

Actually, I take it back. I am concerned. I think we can win a lot of games, but I don't see how we'll ever knock off a SF team like that if our zone defense looks that damn lost all season. They were awful all last season at it, who's to say they won't this year?

[pbmax]

My biggest concern, the one I don't know if we'll have an answer to, is our zone defense. We seem to be built to play man defense. Shields just seems lost in space, but he mans up pretty well. Problem is, we can't just man up against a great running team and turn our backs. Then there is the safeties, they seem lost too. And Perry, obviously he looked lost.

Agree with the problem of zone coverage to combat a run game. Very much takes this defense out of it comfort zone. I want to say there is hope due to the second half, but we'll see. McMillan and Hayward might have something to say about it.

Perry looked lost in coverage and lost his leverage against a receiver twice but otherwise he acquitted himself OK I thought.

[RashanGary]

Agree with the problem of zone coverage to combat a run game. Very much takes this defense out of it comfort zone. I want to say there is hope due to the second half, but we'll see. McMillan and Hayward might have something to say about it.

Perry looked lost in coverage and lost his leverage against a receiver twice but otherwise he acquitted himself OK I thought.

Yeah, I only remmeber two really bad plays too. We can win a lot of games with this defense, even the way it is, but to actually advance to the SB or win it. . . . That's going to be awfully hard. We just don't have an identity. In 2010 our identity was leave Collins alone in the middle, man up outside and play 8 in the box to stop the run. It was a dominant defense for us.

When we tried that last year, after NC went down, we just got destroyed outside. If we try to go back to that, could Burnett cover the middle and shrink that sideline window the way Collins did? I'm going to give a big hell-no to that. So now we have to learn to play sound, disciplined zone defense, with only 7 in the box like the Bears do and still stop the run. . . . . Haha. Doubt it.

[gbgary]

it's one game, the first game. had a chance to win it but didn't. a quality win over the bears will go along way to making everyone feel a lot better. short turnaround. hope no one got hurt today.

[mmmdk]

it's one game, the first game. had a chance to win it but didn't. a quality win over the bears will go along way to making everyone feel a lot better. short turnaround. hope no one got hurt today.

Well I hope the whole teams pride is hurt! Other hurst hopefully not so severe.

[RashanGary]

Cobb should play RB more. He's a far more talented player than any RB we have on the roster. Brian Westbrook was a heck of a RB and he was the same size. . . . Not saying Cobb should be a workhorse or anything, but maybe we should have went to him earlier, instead of a last resort thing. Maybe he should be a bigger part of our backfield. He just brings our talent level up a notch, a big notch.

[Rutnstrut]

It seems to me that this coaching staff really can't/won't make adjustments when the game doesn't go as they plan.

[George Cumby]

No.

That being said......

Perry is a player.

The defensive backfield is a concern.

The team is soft. ( I am now officially joining Wist and Nutz here.)

M3's play calling includes some WTF? moments.

Jmike is what he is. A head-case. He can't catch the balls he needs to in order to prolong a drive. Cya.

It is a long season. 3-3 still doesn't concern me........

[Pugger]

It hurts to lose but SF is a quality team that will be a terror all season. We could be NO and look horrid against Washington and a rookie QB.

[pbmax]

I really want to know what got Jennings benched for a rookie in a confused secondary.

[Packers4Glory]

Defense still concerns me a great deal, as well as special teams coverage. I only caught some of the 1st and 2nd last night but nothing I saw changed my concerns coming in. I saw them give up a good return after the Nelson TD.

yup. nothing new to report on this aspect.

ST, well, thankfully we were allowed a block in the back.

[rbaloha1]

Time to be concerned -- not yet -- only seriously concerned with a Bears loss.

Random thoughts

-- Packer's offense "panics" when it falls behind. MM and AR when they are best with a lead. It was disturbing to watch AR throw deep when it was not there. Must remain disciplined and take what the defense gives you.

-- Stay committed to the run game. MM preaches it but panics and disregards it.

-- Defense is not blessed with smart players.

-- Shields was too tentative.

-- Front was dominated.

-- Slow to adjust to 49er offensive play calls -- CK qb run, toss sweeps to Gore, etc.

-- Continue secondary miscommunications

-- Improved tackling.

-- Despite the defensive problem agree with Woodson the defense is better than 2011.

[LEWCWA]

the 2 inside lb'ers and safteys are terrible. When you are soft up the middle your def. is going to suck. Mathews blows up a running play, but where is the pusuit? Hawk is so slow he has already changed his angle to try and stop the rb 10 yards deep.....fucker is terrible....

[Packers4Glory]

I'm kinda amazed that with all the fat fucks we've had up front (looking at you Raji and Pickett) that we aren't harder to run the ball on. Shit. you gotta be good at SOMETHING up front. Our D-line is atrocious, and we are 2 DB's short of having a decent secondary. IDK even know how to judge the LB crew w/ the soft fatty's up front who suck so bad.

[rbaloha1]

Antonio Pierce, ex Giant stated on espn the Packer receivers did not want go over the middle or get hit -- completely agree.

Packer receivers are best from play action or when A-rod scrambles. It is a concern the receivers are having problems against physical secondaries (i.e. Chiefs, Giants, 49ers.)

[denverYooper]

I'm kinda amazed that with all the fat fucks we've had up front (looking at you Raji and Pickett) that we aren't harder to run the ball on. Shit. you gotta be good at SOMETHING up front. Our D-line is atrocious, and we are 2 DB's short of having a decent secondary. IDK even know how to judge the LB crew w/ the soft fatty's up front who suck so bad.

I thought most of the 49ers rushing success came on runs to the outside, particularly to the right.

[Zool]

Antonio Pierce, ex Giant stated on espn the Packer receivers did not want go over the middle or get hit -- completely agree.

49ers hit someone hard every single play. They are playing the bully and it's working. Losing to a team that just came out of the NFC title game isn't exactly a reason to panic.

[rbaloha1]

49ers hit someone hard every single play. They are playing the bully and it's working. Losing to a team that just came out of the NFC title game isn't exactly a reason to panic.

Not yet -- but the Packers are trending down.

[denverYooper]

Not yet -- but the Packers are trending down.

They sure aren't doing much to dispel the notion that a physical defense and a solid running game can beat them.

It's good that they get this one in now. Hopefully they learn from it.

[LEWCWA]

does hawk ever stand someone up and knock the shit out of them, or blow up a play.....No we get to watch him drag people down 7 yards down the field about 120 times.

[pbmax]

Time to be concerned -- not yet -- only seriously concerned with a Bears loss.

Random thoughts

-- Packer's offense "panics" when it falls behind. MM and AR when they are best with a lead. It was disturbing to watch AR throw deep when it was not there. Must remain disciplined and take what the defense gives you.


That panic produced two good drives in the second half and only one in the first. It has nothing to do with having or not having the lead. Its playing a defense that can handle the Packer offense regardless of the score.

It amazes me that people make such a distinction between leading and coming from behind. Even more startling that people think coming from behind is the greater trait.

If your offense is always coming from behind to win, what the hell were you doing wrong the other 55 minutes?

[rbaloha1]

That panic produced two good drives in the second half and only one in the first. It has nothing to do with having or not having the lead. Its playing a defense that can handle the Packer offense regardless of the score.

It amazes me that people make such a distinction between leading and coming from behind. Even more startling that people think coming from behind is the greater trait.

If your offense is always coming from behind to win, what the hell were you doing wrong the other 55 minutes?

We have a different philosophical look.

Coming from behind is a great trait since it is a requirement to remain great.

A-rod had bad body language the entire game and appeared unconfident. No swagger.

[mraynrand]

It amazes me that people make such a distinction between leading and coming from behind. Even more startling that people think coming from behind is the greater trait.

There's an absolute distinction between playing ahead or coming from behind. When you are ahead as a team, with a two score + lead late, you start playing the clock - allowing certain kinds of completions but preventing the quick strike. you want to run the clock and get out of there. The Niners were in that mode for stretches. even if they weren't, when you get up 23-7 and are dominating a team, you tend to let up, and the other team can sneak back closer. So a lot of times, QBs pick up lots of yardage passing to catch up - and the defense gives it to them, because they want to run the clock, win and go home.

[mraynrand]

A-rod had bad language the entire game

time to wash out his mouth with a bar of soap

[pbmax]

There's an absolute distinction between playing ahead or coming from behind. When you are ahead as a team, with a two score + lead late, you start playing the clock - allowing certain kinds of completions but preventing the quick strike. you want to run the clock and get out of there. The Niners were in that mode for stretches. even if they weren't, when you get up 23-7 and are dominating a team, you tend to let up, and the other team can sneak back closer. So a lot of times, QBs pick up lots of yardage passing to catch up - and the defense gives it to them, because they want to run the clock, win and go home.

At the end of the game, sure. but no one remembers what got the come from behind team behind in the first place. My point is not that there shouldn't be different strategies near the end of the game for leading versus trailing.

The point is that not needing to come from behind is far more valuable than lots of come from behind wins.

[rbaloha1]

At the end of the game, sure. but no one remembers what got the come from behind team behind in the first place. My point is not that there shouldn't be different strategies near the end of the game for leading versus trailing.

The point is that not needing to come from behind is far more valuable than lots of come from behind wins.

There has to be different strategies since the clock comes into play when coming from behind late in the 4th quarter.

[sheepshead]

Not yet -- but the Packers are trending down.
One game does not a trend make.

[rbaloha1]

One game does not a trend make.

Dude -- Chiefs and Giants as well.

[Freak Out]

I really want to know what got Jennings benched for a rookie in a confused secondary.

No doubt?

[RashanGary]

the 2 inside lb'ers and safteys are terrible. When you are soft up the middle your def. is going to suck. Mathews blows up a running play, but where is the pusuit? Hawk is so slow he has already changed his angle to try and stop the rb 10 yards deep.....fucker is terrible....

If a person can sum up the defenses shortcomings in 75 words or less, I think this about takes the cake.

Smith had some thump to him though. We'll see if he can clean up his assignments a little.

[pbmax]

Well, I was constructing a huge argument about what might be causing the safeties trouble but JSO has done more work than me so: http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/169126126.html

http://media.jsonline.com/images/play90912.jpg

If their breakdown is to be believed (and I believe most of it except that I am sure Hawk's primary responsibility was the back out of the backfield as soon as Walker went in motion to the other side) then MD Jennings was the safety that did not get the coverage adjustment that Burnett called. Or he just got blinded by fear of Davis.

[Packers4Glory]

Last yr and the start of this yr 2 things are painfully obvious.

1. It's hard to replace an interior rusher like Jenkins.

2. It's even harder to replace Collins at safety. Good safeties are tough to find, much less all-pro types.


those are the 2 big changes from a defense that was one of the better units in football the Super Bowl season to where we stand today. The issues in the secondary are very troubling in that they can't seem to communicate and get on the same page in coverage. I expect to see our receivers running free, but not as free as the 49ers seemed to be for much of the game.


overall the game was a pretty big shit sandwich.

[sheepshead]

Dude -- Chiefs and Giants as well.

So you were expecting 19-0 last year?

[Bossman641]

If the Packers lose Thursday I will be concerned. If they take care of business the loss to SF is no big deal. Just sucks to have "almost" a must win-game in week 2.

There are certainly things to build on.
- Newhouse was very solid.
- CM3 clearly won't have issues rushing from ROLB
- Perry seems to be able to get a pretty good push
- Cobb in the backfield should give opposing defenses fits

Things I'm wondering / concerned about
- Where was Green? Do they not trust him to pass block
- Was sort of expecting this against SF but why can't we run? I feel as though Sitton/Bulaga should be able to get a good push but it doesn't happen. Figure we will get a much clearer picture on Thursday.
- Will the secondary ever figure out how to play a zone

[Bossman641]

A couple other things. I'm not sure who was at fault, but the 49er's had way too much success running to the edges.

And my #1 gripe, the tackle attempt (if you can even call it that) by Burnett on Gore's TD run was dog shit. For all the talk about wrapping up and not going for kill shots Burnett came in out of control and wildly threw 1 shoulder at Gore.

[Smidgeon]

I'm still not too concerned... but I'm not surprised we lost - not happy about it, but not surprised.

As I said in the game day thread - this team is built soft. My hope is that getting beat up like this; and after getting beat up by New York in the playoffs last year, and also getting smacked around pretty good by the Chiefs, that MM and Capers will get their heads out of their asses and start doing some game planning and coaching.

If there is such a thing as a good loss, this might be it.

Getting pretty tired of this myself. What does it take to turn this around? Coaching? Players with that mindset?

[Smidgeon]

Last yr and the start of this yr 2 things are painfully obvious.

1. It's hard to replace an interior rusher like Jenkins.

2. It's even harder to replace Collins at safety. Good safeties are tough to find, much less all-pro types.


those are the 2 big changes from a defense that was one of the better units in football the Super Bowl season to where we stand today. The issues in the secondary are very troubling in that they can't seem to communicate and get on the same page in coverage. I expect to see our receivers running free, but not as free as the 49ers seemed to be for much of the game.


overall the game was a pretty big shit sandwich.

How many sacks did the Pack have yesterday? 4? 2.5 by Matthews and 1.5 by Woodson? Did I miss any?

[RashanGary]

A couple positives from the game IMO:


1. The 49ers came a little faster at the Packers than they expected. With AR dicking around so much at the line, the defense is probably used to a little more time to get their shit together. Smith did very little changing at the line, and the defense looked rushed to get their assignments down.

Possible solutions - Less changing of plays presnap against up tempo offense or putting a lot of emphasis on getting the calls changed a lot quicker.


2. I think the Packers learned a valuable lesson about attacking man coverage. The Packers love to push the ball down field, but the 49ers were showing cover 2 but playing man.

Possible Solutions:

A. You can run, especially outside runs where the CB is leaving a void. A late shift of the TE into the backfield, then a quick snap gives the offense a chance to block the LB and the RB a chance to get the wide open edge. Well, we can't run, so throw that out of the book.

B. You can protect a little longer and get big plays (against a team like SF, that's not happening, but we sure tried.)

C. You can do what we did in the early 2nd half before the 49ers made it a desperation game on our part. You can attack the edge of the field with a guy like Randall Cobb (or Green if he has the kind of speed/open field vision he's shown in flashes.)



The bottom line. . . We're not a good running team, and teams like SF are beasts at stopping it. Throw that out the window. Not only do the 49ers stop the run, but they also get excellent pressure, making it really hard to wait for the big play. AR is so good down field, I understand it's hard to go away from that identity. But. . . . When you're facing the best, sometimes you have to set aside your ego, that you can force your strength down their throat, and realize they match up well against you. In that case, you take what's given to you, and force the team to abandon their game-plan.

We just didn't adjust, not until the 2nd half, and by then it was too late. I think MM may have learned something from this game, he may have learned a way to attack man defense with good pass rush by hitting the defenses soft spot, even if we can't do it in the traditional way, running the ball. If we're marching down the field on 12 play drives, the LBs are going to be forced to crash down to the flat, the same way the would against a good running team, and it will open up the inside passes, and maybe force them out of their gameplan.

It's all about breaking your ego and doing the simple things, even if they aren't as spectacular or fun.

[pbmax]

2. I think the Packers learned a valuable lesson about attacking man coverage. The Packers love to push the ball down field, but the 49ers were showing cover 2 but playing man.

That was Cover 2, there were often 2 deep safeties. And playing man underneath it (either just on the outside or all across the field) is common. That's not something that gets misread. The Packers talked all week (or at least reporters covered it as such) about getting off press or man to man coverage. Executing that might be another situation.

What I did not see was the extent that San Fran played bump and run or press. Did they play it across the field?

Most of Rodgers pressures, and I think 2 of the 3 sacks came from unblocked rushers, not waiting for deep routes. Outside of that last desperate heave to Nelson, Rodgers had time when throwing to Jones and Nelson (middle of field on 3 and 1).

Didn't get the sense they were using Cobb wide. Thought they were trying to get him on ILBs in the middle.

[pbmax]

NFL Gamebooks are supposed to provide snap counts for individual players and be available the day after a game. But the Packers GameBook isn't updated yet.

Curious how many snaps Driver saw versus Cobb.

http://www.nfl.com/liveupdate/gamecenter/55515/GB_Gamebook.pdf

[Bossman641]

NFL Gamebooks are supposed to provide snap counts for individual players and be available the day after a game. But the Packers GameBook isn't updated yet.

Curious how many snaps Driver saw versus Cobb.

http://www.nfl.com/liveupdate/gamecenter/55515/GB_Gamebook.pdf

Driver only got 3 snaps - the final 3 of the game

[denverYooper]

Didn't get the sense they were using Cobb wide. Thought they were trying to get him on ILBs in the middle.

Ya, so I wonder if that was in the original game plan or if it is just something that that they went to out of desperation. Of course, it helped that Cobb caught everything that came his way.

[mission]

Driver only got 3 snaps - the final 3 of the game

Because Jennings waved himself out of the game? Anyone heard that explained yet??

[mraynrand]

For all the talk about wrapping up and not going for kill shots Burnett came in out of control and wildly threw 1 shoulder at Gore.

I'm seeing that all over the NFL

[Bossman641]

Because Jennings waved himself out of the game? Anyone heard that explained yet??

Groin injury - that's all I've heard

[Guiness]

Groin injury - that's all I've heard

That would be bad.

Not as bad as in hockey, but those can really linger and make you really ginger on that first step.

[Brandon494]

Still not concerned, the 49ers are arguably the best team in the NFL right now and as bad as we played it still only a one score game. With that being said something has to change in this defense for us to have any chance of winning a championship this season.

[packers11]

On the last play... If they wanted the 1 on 1 bomb to Jordy. Why wouldn't they just put Finley there. Finley would have caught that ball. He has the best jump ball on the team thats why teams respect him so much inside the redzone when he lines up wide... If he were to get double covered (usually what happens when he lines up wide) then someone would be open in the slot (Jennings, Jordy) ... I'm actually surprised they do not use that game plan more often like they did in 2009 and 2010 with Finley...

[Brandon494]

Sorry but at this point I would trust Jordy over Finley catching the ball.

[MadtownPacker]

Sorry but at this point I would trust Jordy over Finley catching the ball.
Racist.

Fuck, after a long day if hearing shit from 49ers fan I just gotta say the niners are better and that fucking pisses me off.

[RashanGary]

PB,

I listened to Carlos Rogers today on Rome. He said they were showing a lot of cover 2 looks, then dropped the 2nd safety down after the snap, and went man. He said that, with the pressure took AR out of his game.

At the very end of the game, was it mostly man with 2 over? Sure, but when we really lost the game, the early part of it, they were mixing it up on AR by showing zone, but playing man with 1 over.

[Packers4Glory]

Racist.

Fuck, after a long day if hearing shit from 49ers fan I just gotta say the niners are better and that fucking pisses me off.
Well. Hopefully we are better next time when it really counts. Being better week 1 doesn't win super bowls. Lots of time to get it fixed

[pbmax]

PB,

I listened to Carlos Rogers today on Rome. He said they were showing a lot of cover 2 looks, then dropped the 2nd safety down after the snap, and went man. He said that, with the pressure took AR out of his game.

At the very end of the game, was it mostly man with 2 over? Sure, but when we really lost the game, the early part of it, they were mixing it up on AR by showing zone, but playing man with 1 over.

Well that maybe the clue we have been looking for if indeed that was what they were running. Because after the game Rodgers still didn't recognize it if we take him literally.

Could be that he's calling it 2 deep because that's where they start out as a look and he knew the safety was on the move after the snap. At least I hope he knows it after film. But I am damn tired of that kind of look causing confusion. Might have to listen to him on Wilde tomorrow.

[pbmax]

From McGinn in his Rating the Packers:


The 49ers played a lot of Cover-2 Man

I am going to have to order the All-22 package.

[Bossman641]

From McGinn in his Rating the Packers:



I am going to have to order the All-22 package.

Seen a couple quotes from players that the Niners were playing cover 2 and dropping their LB very deep. These are the looks that the offense has to be able to run against.

[rbaloha1]

Seen a couple quotes from players that the Niners were playing cover 2 and dropping their LB very deep. These are the looks that the offense has to be able to run against.

Exactly. Appears MM blames the back more than the o-line for the poor running performance.

[RashanGary]

Well that maybe the clue we have been looking for if indeed that was what they were running. Because after the game Rodgers still didn't recognize it if we take him literally.

Could be that he's calling it 2 deep because that's where they start out as a look and he knew the safety was on the move after the snap. At least I hope he knows it after film. But I am damn tired of that kind of look causing confusion. Might have to listen to him on Wilde tomorrow.

I was confused by that too. AR said that. Then, after the game, I think it was Greg Jennings, maybe it was someone else, but someone on the Packers said they played more man than they expected. I'm all sorts of confused by that.

Who knows when what happened, or what was the surprise, but clearly both happened. I'm pretty sure of that.

[RashanGary]

Oh, PB, here's the Cobb thing

http://www.packers.com/media-center/videos/Cobb-saw-the-field-open-up/15260059-7f9b-4566-8ced-8464ae6c8f41


He says they played a lot of man defense. I have no clue. . . . . I'm sure AR is right and Cobb/Carlos Rogers are right too. I do think Carlos Rogers was on point when he said he thought he caught AR off guard by showing zone, then playing man post snap and sliding the safety down.

[pbmax]

Oh, PB, here's the Cobb thing

http://www.packers.com/media-center/videos/Cobb-saw-the-field-open-up/15260059-7f9b-4566-8ced-8464ae6c8f41


He says they played a lot of man defense. I have no clue. . . . . I'm sure AR is right and Cobb/Carlos Rogers are right too. I do think Carlos Rogers was on point when he said he thought he caught AR off guard by showing zone, then playing man post snap and sliding the safety down.

I think they expected the man coverage unless every report this week was wrong. Rodgers might not have seen or expected 2 deep safeties to be replaced by a single high. But what I want to know is how much of each. Which is why the all22 package is going into the budget.

[RashanGary]

Just listened to Jordy, said SF made them do it in small chunks, took away the big play, stifled it. Jordy said it's tough to go the field one small play after another, especially when that same team closes on the ball and tackles better than any team in the league as well. . . .

It's true. I do think the Packers need to put a little more emphasis on that type of game though. Sometimes they're going to have to play it. They can't have their way with all of the defenses in this league, particularly the ones you have to beat if you want another ring.

[RashanGary]

I think they expected the man coverage unless every report this week was wrong. Rodgers might not have seen or expected 2 deep safeties to be replaced by a single high. But what I want to know is how much of each. Which is why the all22 package is going into the budget.

Maybe Carlos Rogers was talking about the interception or a couple of big plays they made. . . . Yeah, I'm not sure what the hell happened out there.

The look on AR's eyes, he looked like a guy who was caught off guard by something, or just plain deflated after getting outplayed.

[RashanGary]

all22 package? What in the name of "U71" is that?

[denverYooper]

all22 package? What in the name of "U71" is that?

NFL Game Rewind with coaches film. All 22 players, not just TV angles.

[rbaloha1]

Just listened to Jordy, said SF made them do it in small chunks, took away the big play, stifled it. Jordy said it's tough to go the field one small play after another, especially when that same team closes on the ball and tackles better than any team in the league as well. . . .

It's true. I do think the Packers need to put a little more emphasis on that type of game though. Sometimes they're going to have to play it. They can't have their way with all of the defenses in this league, particularly the ones you have to beat if you want another ring.

Its called taking what the defense gives you -- BTW Jordy you ain't no top 10 NFL receiver -- beat your man -- mano to mano.

[pbmax]

all22 package? What in the name of "U71" is that?

https://gamerewind.nfl.com/nflgr/secure/packages?ttv=0&ttp=3

And by the way, Holy Crap, you can get the Packer regular season for $35.

[denverYooper]

https://gamerewind.nfl.com/nflgr/secure/packages?ttv=0&ttp=3

And by the way, Holy Crap, you can get the Packer regular season for $35.

Doesn't come with the stag film does it?

I'd think about that one if it did.

[mmmdk]

https://gamerewind.nfl.com/nflgr/secure/packages?ttv=0&ttp=3

And by the way, Holy Crap, you can get the Packer regular season for $35.

It's a stampede! :lol:

[wist43]

Now I'm concerned.

After watching the Bear game it's obvious that MM and Capers have learned nothing from the ass whoopin's the Chiefs, Giants and Niners put on us going back to last year.

Capers absolutely has to go... his 1 man D-line alignments, 3 man rushes, 2-5 base - I've had enough of his gimmicks. He got away with it against the Bears who possess one of the worst OL's in the league, but against an offense with a good OL his gimmicks are exposed for what they are - gimmicks.

As for MM's vaunted scrum left, scrum right, scrum up the middle running game?? It's not a running game - it's akin to the old vibrating football game where you line your guys up on the field and flip the switch - your RB was as likely to vibrate backward as forward. It's pathetic.

I saw way too much of the same old shit out there... the Niners game was the measure of where this team is. A finesse team that can't run the ball, can't stand up to a bully, and has a Def. Coord who wants to play the real game as if it were 7 on 7 passing practice.

My biggest concern is Capers. We have enough talent to beat up on the bottom feeders of the league, but against the elite teams, we don't measure up. The Niners exposed us for what we are, and Capers learned nothing from it.

[mraynrand]

Victory Heals all wounds

MrAynRand is a fool

[Harlan Huckleby]

MrAynRand is a tool

fixed