Negatives

[Patler]

I figured we might as well have a counterpoint to the "Positives" thread. Some are new, some are old but are now becoming real obstacles. Identify the fundamental things you have seen that are a concern as the team moves forward. Some of mine:

- This is not a physically tough team right now. It routinely comes out on the short end of physical play. The O-line gets shoved around, the receivers are not standing up to physical play and, while playing better, the defense still seems to get "out toughed", yielding extra yards to running backs time and time again after initial contact.

- Bulaga may not be the player we thought he had become. He has not played particularly well in any of the three games. He sure has not been the borderline all-pro people thought he was. He looks a fraction slow, and is even getting beaten on power moves by rushers who should not have a strength advantage on him.

- MM had an off-season to adjust the offense to counter what defenses had learned to do against the Packers. There were even vague references to the new looks they would have. But, other than the creative uses of Cobb, we have not seen anything to counter defenses focused on taking away the long plays. A gimmick play to Cobb now and then will not get it done. NFL scemes are ever evolving and changing. MM had done it in the past, but right now seems caught in the ruts of what worked so well for three-fourths of the year last year.

- MM seems to have lost all confidence in anything except a fast strike offense. He just can;t seem to help himself, and by and large the failure of the slow developing passing plays have cripppled drive after drive.

- Rodgers has not demonstrated the patience the commentators claim he has. Can he stay with a steady diet of runs and short passes until defenses commit to stopping them? It doesn't seem so.

- Cobb is a fumble machine on kicks. He can score a TD on any punt/kick, or give the ball right back to the opponent

[Bossman641]

I agree with you regarding the physical play of the O, but disagree on the D. They may not be the Ravens, but they have made huge strides from last year. Lynch is a tough runner who is going to fall forward. To hold him to 98 yards on 25 carries, with a long of only 9 is an accomplishment. Even Shields made a few nice tackles.

The offensive philosophy needs to be readdressed. Rodgers and MM are caught looking for big plays. Until the other teams show they will stop it I'd dump the ball off to the RB's for 5-6 yards at a time.

Where is Alex Green? At least give him a few chances to catch the ball out of the backfield and see what he can do.

[pbmax]

I am concerned about Bulaga, he has had lapses in each game unlike last year where he was almost unnoticeable.

The D line, unless in base and while Raji is at nose is going to yield yards when asked to 2 gap. They aren't going to dominate in the run game and in this, they have not replaced Jolly or Jenkins versus the run. Merling and Wilson might be able to, but are so limited, they aren't on the field enough to impact it. That said, of all concerns on defense, the run game is last on my list. As long as they don't bleed big runs and can keep the average close to 4, they will get to play pass defense and sub packages. Improved pressure and a healthy backend will close that deal. They did this versus Forte and Lynch and almost did it with Gore as well.

Mostly worried that Rodgers looks like early 2009 version of himself. Not sure if its by design or if he is holding the ball too long, but everything about the pass game versus two deep looks tentative. Could it be Rodgers disinclination to throw into coverage, and then he holds the ball looking for something more open? Possibly. But it cannot be that complicated. No one is playing exotic coverage here. It has to be covered in the playbook.

I think we are seeing growing pains with McAdoo and Clements. And with the cycle of game film, I would expect a new approach eventually, but mostly after the 4th game. But this seems an opportunity lost with a 10 day gap between games. I think Patler has a point that McCarthy was really counting on an up tempo offense being a counter to what he was likely to see this year.

But what is clear is that he is seeing something that more resembles 2009 than 2011. And he needs to get the offense and Rodgers aligned first. He needs an adjustment similar in nature if not in execution to the changes before the Cowboys games in 2009.

[Patler]

I am concerned about Bulaga, he has had lapses in each game unlike last year where he was almost unnoticeable.

The D line, unless in base and while Raji is at nose is going to yield yards when asked to 2 gap. They aren't going to dominate in the run game and in this, they have not replaced Jolly or Jenkins versus the run. Merling and Wilson might be able to, but are so limited, they aren't on the field enough to impact it. That said, of all concerns on defense, the run game is last on my list. As long as they don't bleed big runs and can keep the average close to 4, they will get to play pass defense and sub packages. Improved pressure and a healthy backend will close that deal. They did this versus Forte and Lynch and almost did it with Gore as well.

Mostly worried that Rodgers looks like early 2009 version of himself. Not sure if its by design or if he is holding the ball too long, but everything about the pass game versus two deep looks tentative. Could it be Rodgers disinclination to throw into coverage, and then he holds the ball looking for something more open? Possibly. But it cannot be that complicated. No one is playing exotic coverage here. It has to be covered in the playbook.

I think we are seeing growing pains with McAdoo and Clements. And with the cycle of game film, I would expect a new approach eventually, but mostly after the 4th game. But this seems an opportunity lost with a 10 day gap between games. I think Patler has a point that McCarthy was really counting on an up tempo offense being a counter to what he was likely to see this year.

But what is clear is that he is seeing something that more resembles 2009 than 2011. And he needs to get the offense and Rodgers aligned first. He needs an adjustment similar in nature if not in execution to the changes before the Cowboys games in 2009.

Bulaga simply doesn't look like the same player. I can't figure it out. Is he nursing an undisclosed injury? Doubtful, because he hasn't missed practices. He looks stiff one play, slow the next.

Are the replacement officials interfering with the Packers plans? MM has mentioned several times that the slowness in getting the ball set, the many flags and constant discussions and debates between officials after a play has taken away the effectiveness of what they want to do with no-huddle.

Unlike many, I don't get too concerned about true coverage sacks. Normally Rodgers steps up a little, and the loss in yardage isn't all that much. My bigger concern is that Rodgers looks hesitant, indecisive. Is there really no place to throw the ball?

[Patler]

I agree with you regarding the physical play of the O, but disagree on the D. They may not be the Ravens, but they have made huge strides from last year. Lynch is a tough runner who is going to fall forward. To hold him to 98 yards on 25 carries, with a long of only 9 is an accomplishment. Even Shields made a few nice tackles.

I acknowledged the defense is playing better, and individuals like Shields and Hawk especially, but its not just what they did against Lynch that prompted my comment. Its their overall toughness, whether due to individuals or schemes. It's almost an attitude as much as anything. Too many plays drag on because they engage the ball carrier, but don't get him down. Half yard here, full yard there. Seldom do they hit a guy and drive him back, or take him directly down. Too many scrums. Perhaps better than last year, but still a long way to go.

[Joemailman]

The play of the WR's has been a huge disappointment. The only receivers who came to play last night were Jones and Finley. If Jennings wants to be paid like Larry Fitzgerald, he better start playing like him. If Finley had dropped the pass in the end zone that Driver did last night, we'd probably have about 5 anti-Finley threads going right now. The season is close to being on the line. The "Great Packer Receivers" need to start showing up.

[Patler]

The play of the WR's has been a huge disappointment. The only receivers who came to play last night were Jones and Finley. If Jennings wants to be paid like Larry Fitzgerald, he better start playing like him. If Finley had dropped the pass in the end zone that Driver did last night, we'd probably have about 5 anti-Finley threads going right now. The season is close to being on the line. The "Great Packer Receivers" need to start showing up.

Yet Finley did have one drop, didn't he? Or was it two? Where was Finley for most of the night? Even the announcers asked that early in the second half. Nelson did nothing. Jennings did little. The three big names were taken out of the game almost completely.

[mmmdk]

Yet Finley did have one drop, didn't he? Or was it two? Where was Finley for most of the night? Even the announcers asked that early in the second half. Nelson did nothing. Jennings did little. The three big names were taken out of the game almost completely.

Pass/catch was defended on Finley...but wait there's a job for you as a replacement ref in the NFL - they don't see shit either. :lol: The rest of the post I agree 100% with. :tup:

[Patler]

Receivers have to defeat the coverage, and if you are a top receiver in the league you should do it on occasion even against the good cover guys. You know, "make a play", even if not a spectacular one. Finley did have one or two, and Jennings had the reception and "run" to the goal line. Nelson did little of nothing. Jones probably stepped up the most.

[mmmdk]

Receivers have to defeat the coverage, and if you are a top receiver in the league you should do it on occasion even against the good cover guys. You know, "make a play", even if not a spectacular one.

Cornerbacks have to cover the routes, and if you are a top cornerback in the league you should do it on occasion even against the good receiving guys. You know, "make a play", even if not a spectacular one.


:lol:

[mraynrand]

- This is not a physically tough team right now. It routinely comes out on the short end of physical play. The O-line gets shoved around, the receivers are not standing up to physical play and, while playing better, the defense still seems to get "out toughed", yielding extra yards to running backs time and time again after initial contact.

At the end of the first half, I would have agreed about the offense. At the end of the game, I disagree. Stubby did a great job of getting his guys to come out in the second half and physically beat the crap out of the Seahawks.

[Patler]

At the end of the first half, I would have agreed about the offense. At the end of the game, I disagree. Stubby did a great job of getting his guys to come out in the second half and physically beat the crap out of the Seahawks.

Ya, but that was just a single half. They got shoved around pretty good by the 49ers, and even by the Bears in spite of winning. We'll have to wait to see where it goes from here. Build on the second half of last night, or revert back to the first ten quarters of the year?

[Freak Out]

Rodgers looks far to tentative....he could be suffering from shell shock considering how many times he was sacked last night. Some of it was his fault by not throwing the ball away on occasion, but holy shit it was like the Packers were playing the Rams of the 60s and 70s.

[Smidgeon]

- Bulaga may not be the player we thought he had become. He has not played particularly well in any of the three games. He sure has not been the borderline all-pro people thought he was. He looks a fraction slow, and is even getting beaten on power moves by rushers who should not have a strength advantage on him.

I was wondering about Bulaga after one of the other games, but I chalked it up internally to just an off game.

I now wonder if he'll be the Sitton of last year. We find out afterward he was struggling with injuries all year. He isn't cutting it right now. Hopefully his second half performance is the norm.

[denverYooper]

I was wondering about Bulaga after one of the other games, but I chalked it up internally to just an off game.

I now wonder if he'll be the Sitton of last year. We find out afterward he was struggling with injuries all year. He isn't cutting it right now. Hopefully his second half performance is the norm.

If that's the case, they should have sent more help to his side earlier. Or at the very least ran at his side to back off the crashing DEs.

[mmmdk]

If a banana republic can ban Suzanne Collins then ban the NFL. And "To kill a mocking bird" is totally misread by a nation then that nation should be put down.

[denverYooper]

I figured we might as well have a counterpoint to the "Positives" thread. Some are new, some are old but are now becoming real obstacles. Identify the fundamental things you have seen that are a concern as the team moves forward. Some of mine:

- This is not a physically tough team right now. It routinely comes out on the short end of physical play. The O-line gets shoved around, the receivers are not standing up to physical play and, while playing better, the defense still seems to get "out toughed", yielding extra yards to running backs time and time again after initial contact.


As far as the receivers go, it seems they're often getting flat out mugged. I mean, part of the book on this O seems to be to beat up on those guys to get in their heads. Sort of like GB has done to Cutler. And it's working so far. The announcers last night were talking about Jennings saying that he didn't like to get bumped.

Jones has looked decent lately, I think, because he's a house and for all the crap he gets, doesn't get intimidated by physical play. To his credit also, Finley seems to be dealing with it much better than he used to.

[Patler]

As far as the receivers go, it seems they're often getting flat out mugged. I mean, part of the book on this O seems to be to beat up on those guys to get in their heads. Sort of like GB has done to Cutler. And it's working so far. The announcers last night were talking about Jennings saying that he didn't like to get bumped.

Jones has looked decent lately, I think, because he's a house and for all the crap he gets, doesn't get intimidated by physical play. To his credit also, Finley seems to be dealing with it much better than he used to.

Jennings talked in an interview last year about how much he hates contact. Mentioned it several times in the interview. I thought it very stupid at the time, as he was inviting guys to mess with him.

I agree about Jones and Finley. The biggest disappointment so far has been Nelson, who has the size to play a physical game, but hasn't.

[wist43]

We got lucky and won a SB - teams hadn't caught up to what we were doing on offense yet, and every player on the roster played to their ceiling for that stretch of games. Take the money and run... we stole one.

The jig is up now though, and the flaws have been exposed.

This team is soft, weak, feminine, dainty, girlish, and wimpy to its core. The coaches coach that way, and the players play that way. It is the mindset of the team. Even if we had any bullish run blockers on the roster, which we don't, the coaches coach them to simply wall defenders off as opposed to moving a guy off the line. There's no trapping, no pulling, no sweeps. The entire run playbook consists of scrum left, right, and up the middle - it's easy to stop, and it's a joke.

As for defense, we've improved the personnel, but we still have Capers calling the shots. We've faced 1 average offense (SF), and 2 poor offenses. I fully expect NO, even with all of the problems that they've been having, to put up some gaudy numbers against this defense. Capers is all about being cute and trying gimmicks - he coaches a soft philosophy, which fits right in with the Tinker Bell offense.

I had hoped that MM and Capers would have learned from last year and made the necessary adjustments - but it's obvious they learned nothing. Even with the fancy pants philosophy, we still have a lot of skill position talent, and might be a borderline playoff team - but we're not going anywhere even if we make the playoffs. Tough, physical teams will simply beat us up, and there's nothing we can do about that - we're simply too weak a team.

[wootah]

MAYDAY! MAYDAY!

http://www.ecriplume.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/philippulus.jpg

[wist43]

Well, it's no secret I love smashmouth football - I wanted to go a 3-4, and I wanted a power running team.

I got my wish on the 3-4, but they hired Mr. "2-4 nickel" - "1-10 dime" Capers, and it was fancy pants football on both sides of the ball.

Football is a rough and tumble game - the Packers philosophy is finesse. Now that teams have caught up to our passing game, we're going to struggle mightily against good teams. We'll probably look awesome against bad defenses, but against the upper echelon teams we're definitely undermanned.

[packrulz]

Shouldn't the Packers be taught to knock down a hail Mary pass? I mean, why catch it at all?

[Gunakor]

Shouldn't the Packers be taught to knock down a hail Mary pass? I mean, why catch it at all?


I've seen plenty of batted balls fall into the waiting hands of the trailing WR too. It shouldn't matter what you were supposed to do when you pick it clean out of the air and come down with it pinned against your chest.

[Teamcheez1]

I've seen plenty of batted balls fall into the waiting hands of the trailing WR too. It shouldn't matter what you were supposed to do when you pick it clean out of the air and come down with it pinned against your chest.

It probably would have never even gotten to McMillan if Shields hadn't been blatantly pushed. I think he felt if he missed batting the ball down it could have been caught by Tate. Or maybe he just wanted the INT.

[mraynrand]

Well, it's no secret I love smashmouth football - I wanted to go a 3-4, and I wanted a power running team.

I got my wish on the 3-4, but they hired Mr. "2-4 nickel" - "1-10 dime" Capers, and it was fancy pants football on both sides of the ball.

Football is a rough and tumble game - the Packers philosophy is finesse. Now that teams have caught up to our passing game, we're going to struggle mightily against good teams. We'll probably look awesome against bad defenses, but against the upper echelon teams we're definitely undermanned.

Maybe you missed the second half where the offense kicked the crap out of Seattle's D. Maybe you missed the entire game, where our D kicked the crap out of their offense and allowed essentially one play the entire game. Geesus some times you are totally irascible.

[denverYooper]

Maybe you missed the second half where the offense kicked the crap out of Seattle's D. Maybe you missed the entire game, where our D kicked the crap out of their offense and allowed essentially one play the entire game. Geesus some times you are totally irascible.

Who is the last power running team to win a Superbowl? The 2000 Ravens?

[mmmdk]

Due to the MNF disgrace I'll be posting a whooole lot more on PR...you can all "thank" Golden Gate Goodell for that!

[denverYooper]

Due to the MNF disgrace I'll be posting a whooole lot more on PR...you can all "thank" Golden Gate Goodell for that!

Yeah, it sure seems to have done a lot for discussion board traffic.

[Smidgeon]

Yeah, it sure seems to have done a lot for discussion board traffic.

Which I accept as a good outcome. More to read and engage in is always good.

[ThunderDan]

Which I accept as a good outcome. More to read and engage in is always good.

Hey, that should be in the positives thread! :lol:

[Patler]

Shouldn't the Packers be taught to knock down a hail Mary pass? I mean, why catch it at all?

In retrospect, his best option with both hands under the ball may have been to "scoop" it over his head and launch it ten rows into the bleachers. That is purely with the benefit of hindsight. I'm certainly not criticizing him for intercepting it.

While Jennings couldn't have done this because of the scrum in front of him, some coaches do teach players not to complete the interception, and instead throw it directly to the ground at their feet, simply to prevent having it stolen from them. For example, had Shields not been interfered with and gotten his hands on the ball in front of the scrum, he could have grabbed it and thrown it at his feet. But even that has risks. A few years ago a player did that, it hit another player on the ground and bounced into the arms of a third player outside of the endzone, who strolled in for a TD.

Massive players all in a group fighting for an oblong ball, odd things will happen even without help from the officials.

[rbaloha1]

Shouldn't the Packers be taught to knock down a hail Mary pass? I mean, why catch it at all?

That is a perfect case scenario. IMO MD did the right thing under game conditions. It was an incorrect call and not a bad play by Jennings.

[run pMc]

I thought Bulaga historically struggles with speed rushers. If there's a reason he's at RT and not LT, it's probably because he doesn't have the feet. Irvin and Clemons are quick -- Irvin is WR fast -- and with a road game in a very loud stadium, being a fraction slow on the get-off can be tough to recover from. Running ball and using draws/screens to slow that down is the way to go and M3 waited to long to adjust.

Rodgers held the ball too long, but I'm guessing the pass patterns were too slow developing. Plus, the replacement refs have not been enforcing the 5 yard contact rule anywhere close to the regular refs. When you have 6'-2" corners who can mug wideouts beyond 5 yards, that makes it hard to gain separation and really helps the pass rush.

Driver dropped a tough catch in the end zone and had to settle for a Crosby FG...catching that would have made the difference in the ballgame. Don't recall too many other drops, but the WR's didn't have a great game. They struggle against aggressive press/bump coverage and this was no exception.

Kind of perfect storm of things conspiring against GB...maybe it was just a bad matchup? If this game were in Lambeau I think the result would have been different...that crowd was noisy but after playing yearly in the Metrodome they should be used to it.

Benson is what he is...not going to break off many long runs. M3 is going to have to ride him and the short passing game to loosen up defenses. The quick strike downfield stuff is being defended (effectively) with press-man/2 deep safety shell looks. M3 and Co. have had enough time to figure out ways to counter this...time to do it. Benson/Starks/Green will play a role in that, but they have to be able to get more than 2.5ypc and convert 1st downs.

Wondered about MDJennings just batting the ball down too, or batting it out of bounds...but regardless that was an interception. So many wrong things about that last play. Won't even get into it here other than to say
the Replacement refs are just terrible. Game not being controlled by them, flags seem more arbitrary than ever. Missed the OPI call on Rice and flagged Shields, and the roughing call on Walden was iffy. The call on Chancellor that kept a TD drive going was pretty iffy too.

The D played well overall. I think that stringing together some 10-play TD drives will benefit the defense. They can't give up any yards if they aren't on the field. Lynch is a tough runner to bring down, but like AP in MN, he's the focus of their offense and if you can limit him that offense can get bogged down. Would like to see more from Worthy, but it's early. Perry was ok. Heyward has shown some savvy. McMillian hasn't been a liability.

[denverYooper]

Not that it mitigates some of Bulaga's other struggles this year, but on one of the sacks, Irvin's hands were clearly up in Bulaga's face and neck. That probably should have been called.

[Patler]

Not that it mitigates some of Bulaga's other struggles this year, but on one of the sacks, Irvin's hands were clearly up in Bulaga's face and neck. That probably should have been called.

I remember that one, and at the time I thought he has had several like that, with guys getting their hands high and knocking him off balance backwards.

So, all you old O-linemen, is that a technique problem, letting the pass rusher get his hands inside and high on him like that?

[wist43]

Maybe you missed the second half where the offense kicked the crap out of Seattle's D. Maybe you missed the entire game, where our D kicked the crap out of their offense and allowed essentially one play the entire game. Geesus some times you are totally irascible.

Okay ayn, I went back thru the DVR and watched the whole game.

After further review, the ruling on the field stands - the Packers are still a fancy pants football team.

------------------------------------------------------------

Aside from the OL being obviously effeminate, some things that stood out were,

1) 3rd and 5 from the Seahawk 5 yd line, under 2 min. in the 1st half, and Fancy Pants Capers (his new official nickname) rolls out his vaunted 1-10 dime defense.
Result - Lynch runs for an easy 1st down, and we don't get the ball back in good field position to end the 1st half.

2) 1st and 10 for the Seahawks, after the our TD, and the roughing penalty on Walden - Fancy Pants Capers goes into his fancy pants 2-4 nickel.
Result - Lynch runs twice for 11 yards. Easy 1st down; Wilson scrambles for another easy 1st down.

3) 4th and 2 from the Packer 17 after Fancy Pants Capers lets them waltz down the field - Fancy Pants Capers lines up in his fancy pants 2-4 nickel again.
Result - duh, run by Lynch, easy 1st down.

Those are just a few examples of Capers flag football philosophy.

-----------------------------------------------------------

As for the OL, there's just no defending that mess. Bulaga was nothing short of dreadful. Saturday weighs 150 lbs, and plays like he weighs 96 lbs. Newhouse was a complete disaster. 8 sacks in the 1st half?? Go ahead and try to defend that ;)

The Packers are a fundamentally flawed football team. They're philosophically soft on both sides of the ball, and simply can't match up with tough, physical teams. Against other fancy pants teams?? we're as good as anyone else I suppose - but tough, physical teams know full well they can simply beat the hell out of us physically and walk off the field with a win.

[Rutnstrut]

I have said this before here and got attacked for it but what the hell. Rodgers seems so worried about throwing picks that he doesn't try throws he could make. He holds the ball way to long, and ends up getting sacked. He doesn't need to be a "gunslinger" but he needs to gamble once in a while, it seems he doesn't trust his accuracy. For some reason he also seems less willing to pull it down and run.

[mraynrand]

Okay ayn, I went back thru the DVR and watched the whole game.

After further review, the ruling on the field stands - the Packers are still a fancy pants football team.

------------------------------------------------------------

Aside from the OL being obviously effeminate, some things that stood out were,

1) 3rd and 5 from the Seahawk 5 yd line, under 2 min. in the 1st half, and Fancy Pants Capers (his new official nickname) rolls out his vaunted 1-10 dime defense.
Result - Lynch runs for an easy 1st down, and we don't get the ball back in good field position to end the 1st half.

2) 1st and 10 for the Seahawks, after the our TD, and the roughing penalty on Walden - Fancy Pants Capers goes into his fancy pants 2-4 nickel.
Result - Lynch runs twice for 11 yards. Easy 1st down; Wilson scrambles for another easy 1st down.

3) 4th and 2 from the Packer 17 after Fancy Pants Capers lets them waltz down the field - Fancy Pants Capers lines up in his fancy pants 2-4 nickel again.
Result - duh, run by Lynch, easy 1st down.

Those are just a few examples of Capers flag football philosophy.

-----------------------------------------------------------


How many points did they score on these drives?

[run pMc]

I have said this before here and got attacked for it but what the hell. Rodgers seems so worried about throwing picks that he doesn't try throws he could make. He holds the ball way to long, and ends up getting sacked. He doesn't need to be a "gunslinger" but he needs to gamble once in a while, it seems he doesn't trust his accuracy. For some reason he also seems less willing to pull it down and run.

Sorry to hear you've been attacked on this. I think he's much less of a risktaker than his predecessor...going back to his Cal days he's pretty risk averse. I wonder if that's something he was coached to do -- checkdown or throw away instead of risking the INT. I think any NFL QB is going to have a little bit of guts and moxie, so I'm thinking it's that as much as not wanting to rack up lots of negative stats and put your defense in a hole.

Also thinking the "pull down and run" is something he does judiciously. Seems like he scrambles less than he used to...but he will rollout or move around to avoid the rush and buy time for a downfield strike. Every coach and half the crowd holds their breath when the QB takes off running. I think he's still considered a threat to take off a couple times a game, but he's not exactly Vick or Newton. I would rather not see Harrell come into the game unless it's for the victory formation.

Agree he's been holding the ball too long. I think that's gotta be play calling (not enough short/intermediate routes) and the way the refs are not enforcing the 5 yard contact rule. Can't throw it if the WR's aren't open. Personally, I think his accuracy isn't quite as sharp as it was last year, so maybe there's some hesitancy there as well. You'd think with the use of a 2.5s alarm clock in camp that he'd be getting rid of the ball quick.

[wist43]

How many points did they score on these drives?

Consider that the 3rd and 5 where Fancy Pants allowed the easy 1st down, when a stop would have had them punting out of their own endzone - count that as a minimum of -3 pts that we never got a shot at.

The other easy 1st downs changed the field position to the point where we couldn't get back into field goal range, punted out of our own end zone, and put Seattle in position to heave a prayer into the end zone, so that's 7 pts that lost us the game; and a shot at a minimum of another FG that could have won the game. So, -10 pts there.

13 point swing right there - at a minimum.

----------------------------------------------------------

Ball control, don't make mistakes, play tough defense teams don't need the scoreboard to roll like a pinball machine. They can simply control the game with defense and field position. We're 0-2 against such teams this year - going back to the Chiefs game last year, our record is 3-4; and in all 4 losses we were simply beat up physically.

We play the Saints this week... the scoreboard should roll like a pinball machine, and Packer nation will certainly be happy with that; but our shortcomings will still be there and will be on full display when the Texans beat the living hell out of us.

[denverYooper]

It's pretty hard to get too down on the defense this year. Last year they would have given up 300 yards to Russel Wilson. It doesn't actually look like Keystone Kops on the backend any more.

You can attribute it to playing bad opponents, but they were even bad against bad teams last year, routinely giving up real estate to mediocre and rookie QBs.

[wist43]

It's pretty hard to get too down on the defense this year. Last year they would have given up 300 yards to Russel Wilson. It doesn't actually look like Keystone Kops on the backend any more.

You can attribute it to playing bad opponents, but they were even bad against bad teams last year, routinely giving up real estate to mediocre and rookie QBs.

I'm onboard with the improved personnel, and the back end has been cleaned up a little; but they've certainly had numerous breakdowns already this year - Vernon Davis catching a ball in the middle of the field, and not a Packer in sight; Randy Moss so alone in the end zone, that he had to be wondering if the play had been blown dead and he was the only one still playing; and Golden Tate's easy catch Monday night.

We've faced 1 average offense, and 2 lousy offenses... SF and Seattle pushed us around with ease b/c of Fancy Pants Capers gimmick alignments. Capers refusal to recognize that the game is more than a 7 on 7 passing drill will cost us all season long, and will certainly result in more losses. Capers is a huge problem, and needs to go.

[King Friday]

Capers is a huge problem, and needs to go.

He won us a Super Bowl. His defense has played well enough to win 3 games this year if the offense realized there was more to the game than 30 yard pass plays.

We could do a lot worse.

[Joemailman]

I'm onboard with the improved personnel, and the back end has been cleaned up a little; but they've certainly had numerous breakdowns already this year - Vernon Davis catching a ball in the middle of the field, and not a Packer in sight; Randy Moss so alone in the end zone, that he had to be wondering if the play had been blown dead and he was the only one still playing; and Golden Tate's easy catch Monday night.

We've faced 1 average offense, and 2 lousy offenses... SF and Seattle pushed us around with ease b/c of Fancy Pants Capers gimmick alignments. Capers refusal to recognize that the game is more than a 7 on 7 passing drill will cost us all season long, and will certainly result in more losses. Capers is a huge problem, and needs to go.

You really are a bit of a joke. Seattle pushed the Packers defense around? Seattle had 250 yards and would have had 230 yards and 7 points but for a TD gift wrapped by the officials. Packers defense has a chance to be as good as in 2010. Of course if that happens and they make another Super Bowl run, I'm sure you'll just disappear from this forum for a while.

[mraynrand]

Consider that the 3rd and 5 where Fancy Pants allowed the easy 1st down, when a stop would have had them punting out of their own endzone - count that as a minimum of -3 pts that we never got a shot at.

The other easy 1st downs changed the field position to the point where we couldn't get back into field goal range, punted out of our own end zone, and put Seattle in position to heave a prayer into the end zone, so that's 7 pts that lost us the game; and a shot at a minimum of another FG that could have won the game. So, -10 pts there.

13 point swing right there - at a minimum.

----------------------------------------------------------

Ball control, don't make mistakes, play tough defense teams don't need the scoreboard to roll like a pinball machine. They can simply control the game with defense and field position. We're 0-2 against such teams this year - going back to the Chiefs game last year, our record is 3-4; and in all 4 losses we were simply beat up physically.

We play the Saints this week... the scoreboard should roll like a pinball machine, and Packer nation will certainly be happy with that; but our shortcomings will still be there and will be on full display when the Texans beat the living hell out of us.

So, the answer to my question is zero - zero points allowed on the drives you're talking about. The Defense allowed one play all night. One.

Wist, you're making the mistake of fighting the previous war.

[wist43]

So, the answer to my question is zero - zero points allowed on the drives you're talking about. The Defense allowed one play all night. One.

Wist, you're making the mistake of fighting the previous war.

The answer to your question was 13 pts.

At the end of the KC game last year, when our defense couldn't stop the Chiefs from running out the clock by moving the chains - how many pts did Capers give up?? The answer is zero. Same logic.

[wist43]

You really are a bit of a joke. Seattle pushed the Packers defense around? Seattle had 250 yards and would have had 230 yards and 7 points but for a TD gift wrapped by the officials. Packers defense has a chance to be as good as in 2010. Of course if that happens and they make another Super Bowl run, I'm sure you'll just disappear from this forum for a while.

If our offense is "all that"; and our defense is "all that"; and Seattle's offense is, well putrid - how could we possibly have been in a position to lose the game in the first place??

Get rid of the 2-4 nickel nonsense; the 1-10 dime nonsense; and the 3 man rush nonsense, and I can live with Capers as our DC; but that simply won't happen b/c Capers prefers gimmicks to sound defense.

I ask ya, what moron in Odin's hell would field a 1-10 dime against Seattle on 3rd and 5 from their own 5?? Pete Carroll had to have been laughing when he saw what Capers was lined up in... Lynch for 7 yds, move the chains, move the clock, and into the locker room for some half time refreshments.

[Joemailman]

If our offense is "all that"; and our defense is "all that"; and Seattle's offense is, well putrid - how could we possibly have been in a position to lose the game in the first place??

Because right now our offense isn't "all that". Why are you ranting against Capers and the defense when the defense is outperforming the Packers offense? Packers right now have the #3 defense and the #25 offense. The defense is carrying this team right now, but your tunnel vision prevents you from seeing that.

[George Cumby]

Here is the box score:

http://scores.espn.go.com/nfl/boxscore?gameId=320924026

I have deleted some of the less telling stats (sorry about the fucked up formatting):

Team Stat Comparison
GB SEA
1st Downs 22 14
Passing 1st downs 11 4
Rushing 1st downs 6 6
3rd down efficiency 7-15 2-11
Total Plays 68 51
Total Yards 268 238
Yards per play 3.9 4.7
Total Drives 9 11
Passing 184 111
Comp - Att 26-39 10-21
Sacks - Yards Lost 8-39 1-19
Rushing 84 127
Rushing Attempts 21 29
Yards per rush 4.0 4.4
Penalties 10-127 14-118
Turnovers 0 0
Possession 33:39 26:21

Look at ToP, first downs, YpCarry. Qualitatively, Packers were beat up, quantitatively, not so much, except in the SACKS. As soon as M3 got his head out of his ass, the sacks stopped. Had that adjustment been made in the second as opposed to the third quarter, the Pack walks away in a two-three score game. So although I too have concerns about this team's toughness, that concern may be overblown.

[wist43]

Because right now our offense isn't "all that". Why are you ranting against Capers and the defense when the defense is outperforming the Packers offense? Packers right now have the #3 defense and the #25 offense. The defense is carrying this team right now, but your tunnel vision prevents you from seeing that.

No, it is you guys who don't get it.

It is akin to Jay Cutler shouting at and pushing his Left Tackle, J'Marcus Webb on national TV - Webb didn't make a mental mistake, he got beat physically. That happens. If he missed an assignment, and had repeatedly missed the assignment - then yes, Cutler has a legitimate gripe.

The same holds true for Capers - his sin would be analogous to Webb making a mental mistake and blowing an assignment. If Capers lines them up in a proper alignment, and Lynch pounds thru us for 7 yards - I can live with that to some degree. Getting beat physically happens. What shouldn't be tolerated is mental mistakes and idiotic calls.

Capers calling a 1-10 dime on that 3rd and 5 from their 5 yd line was nothing short of moronic - and that's why he deserves to be called out for it. TT went out and got him a bevy of front seven players for a reason - our front seven sucked last year. Capers takes that influx of talent and sits 'em on the bench on a critical 3rd down?? It cost us a legitimate chance at points, and that's absolutely unacceptable.

[mraynrand]

] At the end of the KC game last year, when our defense couldn't stop the Chiefs from running out the clock by moving the chains - how many pts did Capers give up?? The answer is zero. Same logic.

It's different when you're trailing and need the ball back. The Packer defense got the ball back for the offense time and time again, trailing 7-0, 7-3, 7-6. Your 13 points is bullshit. Stew in your anger, but the defense gave up one play. :taunt:

[Fritz]

Wist, when someone pointed out the wrongheadedness of your claim, you simply switched tour focus to a single play, as if that would validate your sweeping generalization. But it doesn't. And your "Capers prefers gimmicks" line is foolish - as if Capers actually thinks, "I know a base defense is the right call here, but I prefer gimmicky defenses!" This is akin to the moronic argument a few years ago that Ted cut perfectly good players simply because they weren't his picks.

[3irty1]

There is a lot of blame to go around the offense this year but the last game is mostly on MM. We're all familiar with his tenancy to overhaul the offense every 6 weeks or so but the playcalling has been questionable lately. Those shrimpy seattle passrushers can't zip past our tackles if it wasn't perpetually 3rd and 10 or worse. Those guys shouldn't have even been on the field enough to get 8 sacks because of the liability they represent against the run. A team like Seattle can't afford to hemorrhage rushing yards as proven by the turnaround in the second half. That final score could have been 28 - 7.

Another big negative for me is Ced Benson. I love how quickly he gets up to speed and he is a fine runner but he doesn't do the small things well. His ball security is an issue, and he is profoundly worthless in pass protection. Benson is as good a pass catcher as we've had at the running back position but we're better off with a back who can reliably pick up a blitz and buy us time to go down field than we are with a back who can catch dumpoffs when things break down. I think he's a big factor for the overall lack of offensive potency we are used to.

[3irty1]

No, it is you guys who don't get it.

It is akin to Jay Cutler shouting at and pushing his Left Tackle, J'Marcus Webb on national TV - Webb didn't make a mental mistake, he got beat physically. That happens. If he missed an assignment, and had repeatedly missed the assignment - then yes, Cutler has a legitimate gripe.

The same holds true for Capers - his sin would be analogous to Webb making a mental mistake and blowing an assignment. If Capers lines them up in a proper alignment, and Lynch pounds thru us for 7 yards - I can live with that to some degree. Getting beat physically happens. What shouldn't be tolerated is mental mistakes and idiotic calls.

Capers calling a 1-10 dime on that 3rd and 5 from their 5 yd line was nothing short of moronic - and that's why he deserves to be called out for it. TT went out and got him a bevy of front seven players for a reason - our front seven sucked last year. Capers takes that influx of talent and sits 'em on the bench on a critical 3rd down?? It cost us a legitimate chance at points, and that's absolutely unacceptable.

Capers made that call based on the down and distance. 3rd and 5 is a passing situation. Taking out that many down lineman might dare them to run but the play will have to be zone and it'll have to be inside because of all the speedy and confusion from the defense. Of course if you can't stop an inside zone even when you know its coming then that's no good either.

[mraynrand]

There is a lot of blame to go around the offense this year but the last game is mostly on MM. We're all familiar with his tenancy to overhaul the offense every 6 weeks or so but the playcalling has been questionable lately. Those shrimpy seattle passrushers can't zip past our tackles if it wasn't perpetually 3rd and 10 or worse. Those guys shouldn't have even been on the field enough to get 8 sacks because of the liability they represent against the run. A team like Seattle can't afford to hemorrhage rushing yards as proven by the turnaround in the second half. That final score could have been 28 - 7.

Stubby was being Stubby. By God, he was going to pass the ball. In the first half, Seattle looked like a defense playing up by three TDs with 4 minute left in the fourth quarter. Why respect the run, when the other team refuse to run the ball. They just absolutely teed off on the pass. Stubby watched Cobb pick up 20 on a draw, but refused to try that again. Sometimes Stubby is so Stubby, it's becomes a total clusterstubby.

[denverYooper]

Stubby was being Stubby. By God, he was going to pass the ball. In the first half, Seattle looked like a defense playing up by three TDs with 4 minute left in the fourth quarter. Why respect the run, when the other team refuse to run the ball. They just absolutely teed off on the pass. Stubby watched Cobb pick up 20 on a draw, but refused to try that again. Sometimes Stubby is so Stubby, it's becomes a total clusterstubby.

Absolutely. Seattle clearly came into the game expecting what the Packers were bringing and they were selling out on the pass. Lo and behold M3 played right to it.

I was actually sort of surprised that they changed up their attack in the 2nd half because they've gotten stuck in whole games with the "by god we're going to pass" mentality.

It's going to be a different story if they meet again this year. The Packers will destroy them if they meet again.

[mraynrand]

http://i453.photobucket.com/albums/qq254/mraynrand/StubbyRunGame.jpg

[denverYooper]

One more negative from the game: the equipment staff. It looked like Green Bay was on skates out there, slipping all over the place.

[wist43]

Capers made that call based on the down and distance. 3rd and 5 is a passing situation. Taking out that many down lineman might dare them to run but the play will have to be zone and it'll have to be inside because of all the speedy and confusion from the defense. Of course if you can't stop an inside zone even when you know its coming then that's no good either.

There is never - NEVER EVER - an instance in which having only 1 DL on the field can be justified.

That said, 3rd and 5 from their 40 yard line with just under 2 minutes to go might be a passing down; but 3rd and 5 from their own 5 yard line, in a game in which the opponent is clearly adhering to the philosophy of run, play solid defense, and win the field position battle - is not a passing down.

They may pass, try something short; but in all likelihood they are going to run it so as not to risk a turnover with their rookie QB; they will gladly punt in that situation and let their defense go out and sack Rodgers another 8 times. I put the odds of run/pass in that situation at 90/10 - and of course we saw what happened. Easy 1st down.

When I was watching the rewind (I missed the game live), before they ever snapped the ball, I was shaking my head and thinking WTF??!! They ran the ball for the easy 1st down - the next words out of my mouth were "fucking idiot".

You guys just give Capers a pass as if everything he does is brilliant - I got news for ya, Capers' defense set a league record for pass defense futility last year. Yes, the front seven sucked, and it wasn't all his fault, but to set a league record in futility should be an embarrassment for the coach who oversaw it - yet, no criticism of Capers is allowed??

His gimmicks are a problem, and it is hurting the team.

[mraynrand]

There is never - NEVER EVER - an instance in which having only 1 DL on the field can be justified.

I guess that settles that!

[denverYooper]

Seattle has sort of a gimmicky D. They played with 2 DL on a lot of snaps and use a lot of S/CB and DE/LB tweeners.

[3irty1]

There is never - NEVER EVER - an instance in which having only 1 DL on the field can be justified.

Well there's your problem.

[Bossman641]

There is never - NEVER EVER - an instance in which having only 1 DL on the field can be justified.

That said, 3rd and 5 from their 40 yard line with just under 2 minutes to go might be a passing down; but 3rd and 5 from their own 5 yard line, in a game in which the opponent is clearly adhering to the philosophy of run, play solid defense, and win the field position battle - is not a passing down.

They may pass, try something short; but in all likelihood they are going to run it so as not to risk a turnover with their rookie QB; they will gladly punt in that situation and let their defense go out and sack Rodgers another 8 times. I put the odds of run/pass in that situation at 90/10 - and of course we saw what happened. Easy 1st down.

When I was watching the rewind (I missed the game live), before they ever snapped the ball, I was shaking my head and thinking WTF??!! They ran the ball for the easy 1st down - the next words out of my mouth were "fucking idiot".

You guys just give Capers a pass as if everything he does is brilliant - I got news for ya, Capers' defense set a league record for pass defense futility last year. Yes, the front seven sucked, and it wasn't all his fault, but to set a league record in futility should be an embarrassment for the coach who oversaw it - yet, no criticism of Capers is allowed??

His gimmicks are a problem, and it is hurting the team.

Last year is done. Capers got plenty of blame for the performance last year.

[Zool]

There is never - NEVER EVER - an instance in which having only 1 DL on the field can be justified.

That said, 3rd and 5 from their 40 yard line with just under 2 minutes to go might be a passing down; but 3rd and 5 from their own 5 yard line, in a game in which the opponent is clearly adhering to the philosophy of run, play solid defense, and win the field position battle - is not a passing down.

They may pass, try something short; but in all likelihood they are going to run it so as not to risk a turnover with their rookie QB; they will gladly punt in that situation and let their defense go out and sack Rodgers another 8 times. I put the odds of run/pass in that situation at 90/10 - and of course we saw what happened. Easy 1st down.

When I was watching the rewind (I missed the game live), before they ever snapped the ball, I was shaking my head and thinking WTF??!! They ran the ball for the easy 1st down - the next words out of my mouth were "fucking idiot".

You guys just give Capers a pass as if everything he does is brilliant - I got news for ya, Capers' defense set a league record for pass defense futility last year. Yes, the front seven sucked, and it wasn't all his fault, but to set a league record in futility should be an embarrassment for the coach who oversaw it - yet, no criticism of Capers is allowed??

His gimmicks are a problem, and it is hurting the team.

I'd love to hear your assessment of Belicheck who's D last year was exactly 93 passing yards behind the Packers D for the season. Their run D was actually worse than the Packers D.

[wist43]

So, when Capers came out in that 1-10 front, on that 3rd down inside their own 10 yd line - not one of you thought, "WTF"??

What are you guys looking at when you watch the games?? Seriously, do any of you even look at formations, personnel, down-distance?? Would you think something amiss if it were 1st and goal from the 1 yd line, and Capers came out in that alignment?? Would you even notice??

Capers call there was nothing short of moronic - I knew it the second I saw what personnel he had on the field... given Capers track record of trying to be cute, personnel are the first thing I look at on every play. He simply can't be trusted to do the right thing.

[Joemailman]

We got lucky and won a SB - teams hadn't caught up to what we were doing on offense yet, and every player on the roster played to their ceiling for that stretch of games. Take the money and run... we stole one.

The jig is up now though, and the flaws have been exposed.

Your true colors are showing. When the Packers win the Super Bowl, you give them no credit, and you bash them the rest of the time. I know Bears fans who give the Packers more credit than you do. Never mind that in their run to the Super Bowl, they beat the shit out of the Giants late in the season, beat the Bears in the NFC Title Game, and beat the Steelers in the Super Bowl. Those were just finesse teams, right?

[wist43]

Your true colors are showing. When the Packers win the Super Bowl, you give them no credit, and you bash them the rest of the time. I know Bears fans who give the Packers more credit than you do. Never mind that in their run to the Super Bowl, they beat the shit out of the Giants late in the season, beat the Bears in the NFC Title Game, and beat the Steelers in the Super Bowl. Those were just finesse teams, right?

I gave them credit... it was a fun ride.

I stated what it was though - we got on one hell of run, everyone played to their ceiling; teams hadn't caught up to our offense yet; we still had Jenkins; Green played okay and gave us just enough up front... and it was enough to win it all.

TT did nothing to address the front seven last offseason - in fact, he was content to let us go backward by letting Jenkins walk... the end result of ignoring the front seven was last seasons debacle on defense. I don't think I'm going out on a limb by saying the 2011 Green Bay Packers defense sucked to high heaven. The front seven was so weak that Capers perhaps had an argument for only trotting 2 DL out there on the field, b/c there weren't any other NFL worthy DL on the roster.

Fast forward to today, TT did a nice job of bolstering the front seven; the offense has regressed; the OL is pathetic and can't run the ball to save a starving child in Africa; and Capers is negating the influx of front seven talent by playing gimmick defensive fronts. Don't see how saying any of that should be controversial.

So I guess you would fall into the crowd that doesn't look at personnel and alignments while watching the game?? ;)

[Joemailman]

So I guess you would fall into the crowd that doesn't look at personnel and alignments while watching the game?? ;)

I fall into the crowd that that doesn't care what alignment they use as long as the results are there, and the Packers defense has played very well the last 2 games. You want to see the Packers play their base 3-4 all day. I don't care whether they play 3-4, 1-10 or 10-1 as long as they're getting the job done. The last 2 games they've gotten the job done.

[th87]

I gave them credit... it was a fun ride.

I stated what it was though - we got on one hell of run, everyone played to their ceiling; teams hadn't caught up to our offense yet; we still had Jenkins; Green played okay and gave us just enough up front... and it was enough to win it all.

TT did nothing to address the front seven last offseason - in fact, he was content to let us go backward by letting Jenkins walk... the end result of ignoring the front seven was last seasons debacle on defense. I don't think I'm going out on a limb by saying the 2011 Green Bay Packers defense sucked to high heaven. The front seven was so weak that Capers perhaps had an argument for only trotting 2 DL out there on the field, b/c there weren't any other NFL worthy DL on the roster.

Fast forward to today, TT did a nice job of bolstering the front seven; the offense has regressed; the OL is pathetic and can't run the ball to save a starving child in Africa; and Capers is negating the influx of front seven talent by playing gimmick defensive fronts. Don't see how saying any of that should be controversial.

So I guess you would fall into the crowd that doesn't look at personnel and alignments while watching the game?? ;)

Jenkins missed like the last 6 games of 2010. The defense didn't drop off.

[wist43]

I'm sure you're right, the Packers didn't miss Jenkins last year ;)

[Pugger]

wist must be the most Negative Nellie I've ever read on any Packer forum. Criticizing the defense this year when the offense is the one being offensive. Brilliant.

[Bossman641]

Let's just play 3-4 every down and run toss sweeps out of the pro formation. Go 1967!!!!!

[KYPack]

Let's just play 3-4 every down and run toss sweeps out of the pro formation. Go 1967!!!!!

Don't forget 65 toss power trap as the counter play! Go 1969.

[pbmax]

Stubby was being Stubby. By God, he was going to pass the ball. In the first half, Seattle looked like a defense playing up by three TDs with 4 minute left in the fourth quarter. Why respect the run, when the other team refuse to run the ball. They just absolutely teed off on the pass. Stubby watched Cobb pick up 20 on a draw, but refused to try that again. Sometimes Stubby is so Stubby, it's becomes a total clusterstubby.

Its a little of both. Seattle was the first team not to stay deep like it was a Hail Mary on each play. JSO called it "daring them to pass" as opposed to the Bears and 49ers daring them to run. So by alignment, it was a defense they should have been able to torch with the pass. But you are correct that they played pass rush all the way with their ends. Its one of the few times they shouldn't have tried to take what the defense was giving them.

[pbmax]

I think a lot of the offensive issues start with Rodgers but not his mechanics or reading of defenses. I think he is worried about pass protection and it causes him to be unsure of his pocket and timing, very much like 2009. He may have started out afraid of Newhouse, but now Bulaga and Saturday have given him reason for concern. They need a clean game to reset the (internal) clock.

[wist43]

wist must be the most Negative Nellie I've ever read on any Packer forum. Criticizing the defense this year when the offense is the one being offensive. Brilliant.

I'm only criticizing Capers when he comes out and does dumb shit like that 3rd and 5.

When Chicago came out after half time and ran the ball - like they should have been doing from the opening kickoff, Capers didn't play any gimmicks, he stayed in the 3-4. We still couldn't stop the Bears running game - the Bears stopped the Bears running game; but at least he played chess the way you're supposed to play chess.

[th87]

I'm sure you're right, the Packers didn't miss Jenkins last year ;)

Strawman.

Also, I'm pretty sure SB winning coaches with 20 years of NFL experience know a little more about what "should" be done.

[mraynrand]

Its a little of both. Seattle was the first team not to stay deep like it was a Hail Mary on each play. JSO called it "daring them to pass" as opposed to the Bears and 49ers daring them to run. So by alignment, it was a defense they should have been able to torch with the pass. But you are correct that they played pass rush all the way with their ends. Its one of the few times they shouldn't have tried to take what the defense was giving them.

Good point about the receivers. I was mostly thinking of the mentality of the linemen and LBs - nobody was even thinking run. I think Cobb's run illustrated that. Hopefully Stubby will be Stubbilicious today and not repeat the Seattle Clusterstubby of a first half.

[pbmax]

Packers Defense by Halves versus the Bears:

50 offensive plays Total (all pass atts, no FG or punts)
23 rush
27 pass

1st half
18 total/9 rush/9pass

13-0 Packers favor, Bears 47 net yards and 4 first downs

2nd half
32 total/14 rush/18 pass

10-10 tie in half, Bears 121 net yards, 7 first down


wist's cranky recollections aside (Bears ran more in the first half), if you judge by results, play the sub Defenses and let the Bears run to nowhere.

[rbaloha1]

Who cares about the number of d-linemen? This season the schemes are working. Defense is much improved due to Hawk and Pickett steeping it up and rookies.

[packer4life]

Who cares about the number of d-linemen? This season the schemes are working. Defense is much improved due to Hawk and Pickett steeping it up and rookies.

This statement is enough to disprove the last 3 novels wist has written on this topic.

[wist43]

Strawman.

Also, I'm pretty sure SB winning coaches with 20 years of NFL experience know a little more about what "should" be done.

Not a strawman, you brought it up - I simply point out the ridiculous semblance of defense the Packers played last year - record setting futility btw; and you say, "it's all good".

TT didn't give Capers much to work with last year - again, don't think that's a controversial statement. Only you homers get your panties in a bunch. It's pretty ridiculous for you guys to be defending last years pass defense - again, what part of record setting futility don't you understand??

[th87]

Not a strawman, you brought it up - I simply point out the ridiculous semblance of defense the Packers played last year - record setting futility btw; and you say, "it's all good".

TT didn't give Capers much to work with last year - again, don't think that's a controversial statement. Only you homers get your panties in a bunch. It's pretty ridiculous for you guys to be defending last years pass defense - again, what part of record setting futility don't you understand??

Sigh. Another strawman. Never did I say it was all good - we were garbage on defense. But you tried to make the argument that not having Jenkins is what killed our defense. I pointed out that we played well without Jenkins in 2010 - implying then that our woes in 2011 were not solely because of the loss of Jenkins. Jenkins was erroneously deemed expendable by TT because of our performance without him in 2010. He was wrong, but our defense's problems were far bigger than that.

[wist43]

Sigh. Another strawman. Never did I say it was all good - we were garbage on defense. But you tried to make the argument that not having Jenkins is what killed our defense. I pointed out that we played well without Jenkins in 2010 - implying then that our woes in 2011 were not solely because of the loss of Jenkins. Jenkins was erroneously deemed expendable by TT because of our performance without him in 2010. He was wrong, but our defense's problems were far bigger than that.

lol... now you're saying exactly what I've been saying, but accuse me of floating another strawman?? Good grief. I've never said that losing Jenkins was the sole reason for our futility, and I never said we didn't maintain at least a half way decent level of play when he was out prior to our SB run.

Our defense stunk to bloody heaven last year - and homer Packer fans can't stand to hear that. I state it as fact, and everyone attacks me simply b/c they don't like the messenger. Doesn't make it less true, and doesn't mean I'll back off of telling it the way it is. After discussing some of Capers idiotic alignments with some posters, I've come to the conclusion that most of these folks can't tell the difference between a football and soccerball.

[th87]

lol... now you're saying exactly what I've been saying, but accuse me of floating another strawman?? Good grief. I've never said that losing Jenkins was the sole reason for our futility, and I never said we didn't maintain at least a half way decent level of play when he was out prior to our SB run.

Our defense stunk to bloody heaven last year - and homer Packer fans can't stand to hear that. I state it as fact, and everyone attacks me simply b/c they don't like the messenger. Doesn't make it less true, and doesn't mean I'll back off of telling it the way it is. After discussing some of Capers idiotic alignments with some posters, I've come to the conclusion that most of these folks can't tell the difference between a football and soccerball.

My only post on this thread was to point out that we did okay without Jenkins in 2010. I don't disagree with the rest of your statement - the defense was a joke last year, and I doubt you'll find anyone who disagrees.

What people do disagree with is your specific criticism of what should be done in-game. You, as far as I know, are not qualified enough to make those judgments. As far as I know, they saw more film than you to decide to use a certain alignment, etc. It is fair to say that the defense needs to play better, and do appear to do better in man, but those are just guesses on my part. For NFL professionals whose jobs and income depend on analyzing what to do in game situations, I'm sure they've thought of whatever it is you're suggesting.

[wist43]

My only post on this thread was to point out that we did okay without Jenkins in 2010. I don't disagree with the rest of your statement - the defense was a joke last year, and I doubt you'll find anyone who disagrees.

What people do disagree with is your specific criticism of what should be done in-game. You, as far as I know, are not qualified enough to make those judgments. As far as I know, they saw more film than you to decide to use a certain alignment, etc. It is fair to say that the defense needs to play better, and do appear to do better in man, but those are just guesses on my part. For NFL professionals whose jobs and income depend on analyzing what to do in game situations, I'm sure they've thought of whatever it is you're suggesting.

That's a cop out... coaches do stupid shit all the time within games - if their shit didn't stink, sports reporters, analysts, sports radio hosts... none of 'em would have a job, and we should all be watching like drones.

I know a fair amount about the game; and when it comes to the zig or zag of it all... it isn't that difficult to figure it out. This isn't rocket science, and noticing and commenting on the fact that rushing 2 is useless doesn't require a PhD in x's and o's.

[Zool]

I still want my question answered

[mraynrand]

I still want my question answered

You want answers?

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_wbzD1aEI3yw/TC63b9T4QbI/AAAAAAAACfA/vkFKOiBeTY0/s1600/afewgoodmen.jpg

[th87]

That's a cop out... coaches do stupid shit all the time within games - if their shit didn't stink, sports reporters, analysts, sports radio hosts... none of 'em would have a job, and we should all be watching like drones.

I know a fair amount about the game; and when it comes to the zig or zag of it all... it isn't that difficult to figure it out. This isn't rocket science, and noticing and commenting on the fact that rushing 2 is useless doesn't require a PhD in x's and o's.

The sports commentary industry is predicated on people complaining about what didn't (past tense) work - there's a lot of money in that. And there will be a lot of instances of things not working, because the other guys are getting paid to beat you too. So we put on our expert hats, and proclaim, "See? They should've rushed four, and if they did, they would've won." This assumes that these people who have been immersed in football their entire lives somehow didn't consider the simple modification of rushing four.

That's absurd to me. These people are generally very good at what they do (it's a multimillion dollar industry where every potential edge is investigated), and if they felt that rushing two was the correct course of action, I'd like to think that there was some very good reason they decided to go that way. Otherwise, why would they? You seem to think that Capers is either a blind zealot of his "cutesy" schemes, a complete idiot, or both. And I don't think you get to the level he's at by being those things. If it was so easy, everyone would do it.

So without their qualifications, all we can comment on are the results. It does seem that the Capers defense can't play zone. It does seem that the NFL has caught up to our defense. And based on this, we can definitely opine that this isn't working, and that we need to go in a different direction. But we are not honestly qualified to criticize in-game tactics (for an accomplished coach, anyway) - they are simply privy to much more information and knowledge than us.

[3irty1]

3rd and 5 is not the same as 3rd and 1. Its a passing situation. That one DL look is still just a nickle package. At most we would have had 2 DL there anyways in a 2-4 nickle. There is an advantage to the 1-5 psycho too though, its too confusing for a man-to-man power running scheme, it has too much speed to beat outside, and is probably indicating a blitz so there is no way of knowing which gaps are the right ones. Solid defensive call IMO.

[wist43]

3rd and 5 is not the same as 3rd and 1. Its a passing situation. That one DL look is still just a nickle package. At most we would have had 2 DL there anyways in a 2-4 nickle. There is an advantage to the 1-5 psycho too though, its too confusing for a man-to-man power running scheme, it has too much speed to beat outside, and is probably indicating a blitz so there is no way of knowing which gaps are the right ones. Solid defensive call IMO.

As I said in another post, 3rd and 5 at the 40 yd line may be a passing situation, but 3rd and 5 inside their own 10 yd line, with the clock winding down in the half, with a rookie QB and a shaky passing game... is absolutely a run down for them, and you saw what happened, they simply plowed ahead for 7 yds and ran the half out.

Besides that, since when does a passing down necessitate only having 1 or 2 DL on the field?? That's my chief complaint about all of these soft packages - Capers is saying right up front that coverage trumps pressure. Philosophically, that's backward. You may get the occassional coverage sack, but for the most part you're telling the QB he can have a comfortable pocket and clean feet - a good QB will take that over pressure every time.

Defense should be about getting pressure up front first and foremost. If you're lacking front seven talent, then you need to find ways around that with the last resort being dropping 8 in coverage and hope for the best. Remember the term "prevent defense"?? Capers soft alignments are straight out of that philosophical school. As the old saying goes, "the only thing the prevent defense does, is prevent you from winning".

[Patler]

I don't know, but it seems to me that 3rd and 5 just about anywhere except inside the redzone where the field compresses, becomes a very makeable running down with only one DL on the field, unless some of your linebackers are really DL in disguise, as Kampman was and as Perry might be, and/or you have run-stuffing inside linebackers. When your linebackers are small and/or "tweeners" at best. I expect most O-linemen start salavating with a running play called or as an option when they break huddle and see a gimmick defense like that.

[pbmax]

We don't know what their tendency was in similar situations. It could be they expected Wilson to have some sort of self run pass option and did not want him to outflank the D lineman.

Lynch is a beast, but how often does he get the ball on 3rd and 5? Most rookies don't audible out of pass plays, but perhaps Wilson did, or had a package call on that play.

[rbaloha1]

Agree with Aikman -- Packers are better in man to man. It was disturbing to see the zone give up too many easy completions along with the communication breakdowns. These are correctable.

However when the game was on the line, the secondary and linebackers adjusted drop angles which lead to more incompletions.

Overall the defense is vastly improved from last season.

[pbmax]

Agree with Aikman -- Packers are better in man to man. It was disturbing to see the zone give up too many easy completions along with the communication breakdowns. These are correctable.

However when the game was on the line, the secondary and linebackers adjusted drop angles which lead to more incompletions.

Overall the defense is vastly improved from last season.

Well, its not just man to man. The packers gave up plenty of catches in one on one match ups, including the 80 yard TD and several of Colston's catches across the middle.

I think everyone is talking about pressing and/or bumping on the outside and its hard to argue something else may have been called for given the game. I think Capers wanted to elongate the time the coverage could hold because while the Saints couldn't run the ball, they could pass block. If he knew this (and I haven't looked up the stats to confirm), he may have wanted to have more time in sound coverage for the pass rush to work while also dedicating resources to Graham and Sproles.

What's clear is that is the Packers line up off coverage or in zone, they are more likely to make mistakes. In the case of the Saints, going to Aikman's point, if you allow free release, then the timing of their offense is not disrupted until the pass rush gets there.

[mraynrand]

I think everyone is talking about pressing and/or bumping on the outside and its hard to argue something else may have been called for given the game. I think Capers wanted to elongate the time the coverage could hold because while the Saints couldn't run the ball, they could pass block. If he knew this (and I haven't looked up the stats to confirm), he may have wanted to have more time in sound coverage for the pass rush to work while also dedicating resources to Graham and Sproles.

excellent analysis, Mr. Spock. repped

[Brandon494]

Well, its not just man to man. The packers gave up plenty of catches in one on one match ups, including the 80 yard TD and several of Colston's catches across the middle.

I think everyone is talking about pressing and/or bumping on the outside and its hard to argue something else may have been called for given the game. I think Capers wanted to elongate the time the coverage could hold because while the Saints couldn't run the ball, they could pass block. If he knew this (and I haven't looked up the stats to confirm), he may have wanted to have more time in sound coverage for the pass rush to work while also dedicating resources to Graham and Sproles.

What's clear is that is the Packers line up off coverage or in zone, they are more likely to make mistakes. In the case of the Saints, going to Aikman's point, if you allow free release, then the timing of their offense is not disrupted until the pass rush gets there.

Per Tom Silverstein
The big reason was because the Saints used a lot of bunch formations. The Packers had some rules for how to play them when their splits are a certain way. When the splits were narrower than usual, they went to zone so they didn’t get picked. Wider, they went to man-to-man. The Saints are really good in dissecting defenses and making them react to the Saints. With the size of their receivers, you can’t let yourself get picked all day long or you wind up giving up even bigger plays. The problem was no pass rush.

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/172006201.html

[pbmax]

Per Tom Silverstein

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/172006201.html

Great find Brandon.

[mraynrand]

The big reason was because the Saints used a lot of bunch formations. The Packers had some rules for how to play them when their splits are a certain way. When the splits were narrower than usual, they went to zone so they didn’t get picked. Wider, they went to man-to-man. The Saints are really good in dissecting defenses and making them react to the Saints. With the size of their receivers, you can’t let yourself get picked all day long or you wind up giving up even bigger plays. The problem was no pass rush.

Aren't picks illegal?? Those darn Saints, they always have some illegal scheme up their sleeves!

[rbaloha1]

Aren't picks illegal?? Those darn Saints, they always have some illegal scheme up their sleeves!

Saints are a dirty team reflective of Coach Peyton. Its no wonder the league was trying to frame them with bounty gate.

[3irty1]

As I said in another post, 3rd and 5 at the 40 yd line may be a passing situation, but 3rd and 5 inside their own 10 yd line, with the clock winding down in the half, with a rookie QB and a shaky passing game... is absolutely a run down for them, and you saw what happened, they simply plowed ahead for 7 yds and ran the half out.

Besides that, since when does a passing down necessitate only having 1 or 2 DL on the field?? That's my chief complaint about all of these soft packages - Capers is saying right up front that coverage trumps pressure. Philosophically, that's backward. You may get the occassional coverage sack, but for the most part you're telling the QB he can have a comfortable pocket and clean feet - a good QB will take that over pressure every time.

Defense should be about getting pressure up front first and foremost. If you're lacking front seven talent, then you need to find ways around that with the last resort being dropping 8 in coverage and hope for the best. Remember the term "prevent defense"?? Capers soft alignments are straight out of that philosophical school. As the old saying goes, "the only thing the prevent defense does, is prevent you from winning".

Downlinemen do not equal pass rushers. Clay Matthews is almost never a down lineman. You don't have to be a down lineman to get pressure. A 1-5 or 2-4 nickle subpackage does not mean they are rushing 1 or 2. You know this.

And even if it wasn't by in large a passing situation, a package like that has advantages against the run too. Even with the size mismatch you can force the offense to guess correctly against a run blitz.

[Joemailman]

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/172006201.html


A: Tom Silverstein - They're not playing well and it's quite possible they're not that good. They caught lightning in a bottle in 2010, weren't as good as their record last year and are just plain struggling this year. They're very lucky to be 2-2. I think not having Jennings at 100% hurts, the transition to Cedric Benson has taken some time and Rodgers is just not playing as well as last year. There are a lot of things wrong with this team.

They're lucky to be 2-2? What has this moron been watching the last 2 weeks? An incredible string of bad luck is the only thing preventing this team from being 3-1.

[George Cumby]

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/172006201.html



They're lucky to be 2-2? What has this moron been watching the last 2 weeks? An incredible string of bad luck is the only thing preventing this team from being 3-1.

Actually only one goat-fucked call away from 3-1.

[Brandon494]

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/172006201.html



They're lucky to be 2-2? What has this moron been watching the last 2 weeks? An incredible string of bad luck is the only thing preventing this team from being 3-1.

Yes we are lucky that the Saints missed that FG, we could have easily lost that game.

[Pugger]

Yes we are lucky that the Saints missed that FG, we could have easily lost that game.

Had they gotten that FG we still had over 2 minutes for Rodgers to move this team into scoring position to retake the lead.

[Brandon494]

Had they gotten that FG we still had over 2 minutes for Rodgers to move this team into scoring position to retake the lead.

True but we also fumbled inside the red zone and dropped easy INTs, can't make those mistake and expect to win many football games.

[wist43]

Downlinemen do not equal pass rushers. Clay Matthews is almost never a down lineman. You don't have to be a down lineman to get pressure. A 1-5 or 2-4 nickle subpackage does not mean they are rushing 1 or 2. You know this.

And even if it wasn't by in large a passing situation, a package like that has advantages against the run too. Even with the size mismatch you can force the offense to guess correctly against a run blitz.

You are all over the place trying to defend an alignment that failed miserably all in an effort to poke me in the eye... give it up. Capers approach that you're getting a hard on over failed, and it failed quite predicably. The reason you need to have 3 down linemen in that situation is to deal with run or pass.

1 DL is an invitation to run. The situation had run written all over it; Seattle ran it for the 1st down with ease. Having a bunch of 240 lbs LB's and 195 lbs DB's wandering around the LOS is in no way going to be able to deal with 300 lbs OL firing off the ball.

It was a stupid call on Capers part and can't be defended - fuck man, give it up.

[Joemailman]

Yes we are lucky that the Saints missed that FG, we could have easily lost that game.

The only reason the Saints were in a position to kick that field goal was because the officials somehow missed an obvious fumble by Sproles. Overall, the Packers have been far more unlucky than lucky.

[Zool]

The only reason the Saints were in a position to kick that field goal was because the officials somehow missed an obvious fumble by Sproles. Overall, the Packers have been far more unlucky than lucky.

Golden Taint agrees.

Tho if Sproles could catch a cold, they would have kept the drive going.

[Pugger]

True but we also fumbled inside the red zone and dropped easy INTs, can't make those mistake and expect to win many football games.

I doubt Rodgers would have fumbled like Harrell did...

[Zool]

I still want the answer to my Patriots vs Packers last year in relation to the apparent horrible coaching the Packers D is receiving.

[mmmdk]

Face it; Packers has regressed to a team that depends on being lucky/unlucky to determine the outcome of their games.

With any "Luck" this sunday, you'll know what I mean.

[3irty1]

You are all over the place trying to defend an alignment that failed miserably all in an effort to poke me in the eye... give it up. Capers approach that you're getting a hard on over failed, and it failed quite predicably. The reason you need to have 3 down linemen in that situation is to deal with run or pass.

1 DL is an invitation to run. The situation had run written all over it; Seattle ran it for the 1st down with ease. Having a bunch of 240 lbs LB's and 195 lbs DB's wandering around the LOS is in no way going to be able to deal with 300 lbs OL firing off the ball.

It was a stupid call on Capers part and can't be defended - fuck man, give it up.

I'm not trying to make it personal at all, I really don't have a problem with that defensive call and I gave you all the reasons why. True there is a size disadvantage but for the offense it still means getting a hat on a hat for a blocking scheme to work and that's not easy to do when you don't know where the hats will be. In my experience Packer fans are a bit spoiled when it comes to these situations from the Mike Sherman years when the packers were an elite power running team and could take 3 or 4 yards whenever they needed them. Very few teams in the NFL will even attempt to run on 3rd and 3 much less 3rd and 5 and those teams are the top one or two power running teams of the day. I won't argue that it was an invitation to run, because 5 yards when you need it against any defense of NFL players is a big gamble--especially when the defensive formation dictates that you run an inside zone play. I think this is a common theme with Capers, he often invites teams to run.

Had they come out in the 3-4 or 5-2 or whatever you would have wanted and they pass to convert on 3rd and 5 I would be the one critisizing Capers--but I wouldn't make ignorant sweeping statements that nickle packages are a gimmick and there is no place in football for 1 and 2 DL formations.

[Patler]

Face it; Packers has regressed to a team that depends on being lucky/unlucky to determine the outcome of their games.

With any "Luck" this sunday, you'll know what I mean.

I'm not prepared to say they have "regressed" quite yet. Teams go through ups and downs in performance. Last year, I hoped they would struggle a bit toward midseason, so they could be ascending again toward playoffs. Instead, they played at an almost unsustainable level on offense for almost the entire year.

This year, STs are playing well, and they have the components to be better defensively than last year. The offense is inconsistent. The next four weeks should be a good indication if it is the normal ups and downs that teams face, or true regression from a team that maybe played way over its head last year.

[Joemailman]

I'm not prepared to say they have "regressed" quite yet. Teams go through ups and downs in performance. Last year, I hoped they would struggle a bit toward midseason, so they could be ascending again toward playoffs. Instead, they played at an almost unsustainable level on offense for almost the entire year.

This year, STs are playing well, and they have the components to be better defensively than last year. The offense is inconsistent. The next four weeks should be a good indication if it is the normal ups and downs that teams face, or true regression from a team that maybe played way over its head last year.

Any team that goes 15-1 in the NFL played over its head. Reality sets in the next year. JSO ran a story earlier this year where they pointed out that teams that win 14 or more games one year, on average win 4 fewer the next year.

People need to realize that what Rodgers did last year was probably an anomaly. From 2008-2010, Rodgers averaged 29 TD passes per season. He's currently on pace for 28. If Rodgers throws about 30 this year, many will see that as a regression from last year, when in reality it's an indication of how good a QB he is. Which is pretty damn good.

[denverYooper]

I'm not prepared to say they have "regressed" quite yet. Teams go through ups and downs in performance. Last year, I hoped they would struggle a bit toward midseason, so they could be ascending again toward playoffs. Instead, they played at an almost unsustainable level on offense for almost the entire year.

This year, STs are playing well, and they have the components to be better defensively than last year. The offense is inconsistent. The next four weeks should be a good indication if it is the normal ups and downs that teams face, or true regression from a team that maybe played way over its head last year.

The Packers have also faced one of the toughest 4 game starts in the league. Even New Orleans, at 0-4, is no cakewalk. Their schedule looks a lot harder now that the NFC West teams are all playing pretty well.

In the last game, Rodgers only threw one pass over 20 yards, so it seems that they are beginning to accept life in the short-intermediate game for now. It should be interesting to see what that means going forward, but I think their offense will settle into a groove and the "blueprint" used to beat them will become obsolete. Also, the real refs coming back will theoretically not mess with the fast break game that the Pack's O likes to run.

Funny thing is that the O playing more of a short game will likely make the D better, if for no other reason than they'll get more rest.

[wist43]

I still want the answer to my Patriots vs Packers last year in relation to the apparent horrible coaching the Packers D is receiving.

Zool, I have no idea what is going on with the Patriots - can't remember the last NE game I watched for more than a couple minutes. Can't offer an opinion on something I know nothing about.

[Patler]

People need to realize that what Rodgers did last year was probably an anomaly. From 2008-2010, Rodgers averaged 29 TD passes per season. He's currently on pace for 28. If Rodgers throws about 30 this year, many will see that as a regression from last year, when in reality it's an indication of how good a QB he is. Which is pretty damn good.

That is the biggest part of it. No way could Rodgers be expected to duplicate the way he played last year, but he could come close again some year. He was virtually flawless in 2011. However, I hope Rodgers and the Packer offense have grown beyond his averages of 2008-2010, to something in the 30-32 average per year for the next 5-6 years.

I remember Aikman going on and on one game last year, marveling at how Rodgers was playing. He commented about how in spite of the #s, Rodgers was really playing much better than Brees, Brady, etc. He said time and time again; "It really isn't as easy as Rodgers is making it look." It was after he had done quite a few Packer games.

[George Cumby]

That is the biggest part of it. No way could Rodgers be expected to duplicate the way he played last year, but he could come close again some year. He was virtually flawless in 2011. However, I hope Rodgers and the Packer offense have grown beyond his averages of 2008-2010, to something in the 30-32 average per year for the next 5-6 years.

I remember Aikman going on and on one game last year, marveling at how Rodgers was playing. He commented about how in spite of the #s, Rodgers was really playing much better than Brees, Brady, etc. He said time and time again; "It really isn't as easy as Rodgers is making it look." It was after he had done quite a few Packer games.

A lot of people here hate on TA for hating on the Packers. My observation is very differenet in that he speaks very highly of the team from TT on down. My general sense is that was an attitude change after you-know-who left town.

[Zool]

A lot of people here hate on TA for hating on the Packers. My observation is very differenet in that he speaks very highly of the team from TT on down. My general sense is that was an attitude change after you-know-who left town.

I think it's collateral damage from him being in the booth with Joe Buck, who is of course the anti-christ and should be burned on a crucifix.

[mraynrand]

Zool, I have no idea what is going on with the Patriots - can't remember the last NE game I watched for more than a couple minutes. Can't offer an opinion on something I know nothing about.

Are you crazy? This is the internet! Of course you can!!

[pbmax]

Are you crazy? This is the internet! Of course you can!!

Already done: http://www.johnlandis.net

[mraynrand]

Already done: http://www.johnlandis.net

"What about the Patriots?"

"Our patriots? should be blandly poetical."

It's like a replacement Google with an attitude

[George Cumby]

I think it's collateral damage from him being in the booth with Joe Buck, who is of course the anti-christ and should be burned on a crucifix.

repped