Kick-off and Punt Coverage, Worst Since 1949 & 1989

[Patler]

Wow, I knew it was bad, especially the kick-off coverage, but this surprised me:


Green Bay's coverage units were particularly brutal. Opponents averaged 26.0 yards per kickoff, the most allowed by a Packers team since 1948. Foes also averaged 13.1 yards on punt returns, the most against a Green Bay team since 1989.

Read more from Journal Sentinel: http://www.jsonline.com/tablet/sports/packers-struggle-for-consistency-b99191228z1-242525791.html#ixzz2rn2icXkn
Follow us: @JournalSentinel on Twitter

[red]

our ST coach isn't responsible for that area of the team

it was someone or something else that was responsible

[bobblehead]

The general theme is set. We suck at taking on blockers and making tackles both on ST and Defense. I have said it 20 times if I have said it once...we need to change the way we practice (and it will help with the injuries as well).

[Guiness]

13 yards on punt returns??? That seems insanely bad.

I feel Mathsay is a very good punter, so am curious how much he is to blame for this. One thing I noticed is that the Packers rank third lowest in PR attempts (made against them) Mathsay forces a lot of fair catches. Then I looked at punting attempts, and the Packers are also third lowest there! lol

[red]

13 yards on punt returns??? That seems insanely bad.

I feel Mathsay is a very good punter, so am curious how much he is to blame for this. One thing I noticed is that the Packers rank third lowest in PR attempts (made against them) Mathsay forces a lot of fair catches. Then I looked at punting attempts, and the Packers are also third lowest there! lol

yeah, i don't think you can put much blame on mathsay, i mean he's not like a young jon ryan when he's drilling low flying 70 yard punts where the coverage doesn't have a chance

plus the fact that the kickoff coverage is even worse makes me think its the coverage units, not the kickers

[Patler]

I just looked at his game by game breakdowns. In the last two games of the season, he punted 7 times. Three of the seven were returned for a total of 90 yards.

Masthay had four tackles on 19 kickoffs and 20 punts that were returned. I don't know the breakdown, but that seems like too many.

[Guiness]

I just looked at his game by game breakdowns. In the last two games of the season, he punted 7 times. Three of the seven were returned for a total of 90 yards.

Masthay had four tackles on 19 kickoffs and 20 punts that were returned. I don't know the breakdown, but that seems like too many.

I thought he made a tackle during the wild card game as well, but don't see it on the stat sheet.

[red]

so our punter is making tackles 20% of the time

thats horrible

[HarveyWallbangers]

I'm guessing the kickoff coverage stat is completely overblown because of the new kickoff rules.

[red]

I'm guessing the kickoff coverage stat is completely overblown because of the new kickoff rules.

i don't know, even if that were the case we ranked near dead last out of all 32 teams in that category this year

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

I'm guessing the kickoff coverage stat is completely overblown because of the new kickoff rules.

That was my first though too. Sample size is probably to small for a real comparison to previous years. I'm sure its still bad, but probably not as bad as it might seem.

[red]

shouldn't the new kickoff rules have helped the kicking teams more then the return teams?

i would think the rules would have reduced kick return yardage, not set it to all time record highs

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

shouldn't the new kickoff rules have helped the kicking teams more then the return teams?

i would think the rules would have reduced kick return yardage, not set it to all time record highs


You're right if you are talking about total yardage, but not averages which is what Palter presented. For example, say team A returns 20 punts for an 8 yard average and team B returns 40 punts also for an 8 yard average. Then say the next return for each team (number 21 of team A and number 41 for team B) was a 60yard return. The new average for team A is 10.5 yard average and team B's new average is 9.3 yard average.

The team with fewer opportunities to return punts will have its average affected more by a few big returns.

[red]

that makes sense

but we had the second most KO returns allowed. so wouldn't our big returns allowed have been diluted?

punts i can understand it on, we were 3rd lowest for returns allowed

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

that makes sense

but we had the second most KO returns allowed. so wouldn't our big returns allowed have been diluted?

punts i can understand it on, we were 3rd lowest for returns allowed

Well maybe so, but the average is being compared to other packers team of the past (teams that didn't have the rule change all together=a lot more returns). I'm willing to bet even though we allowed the second most KO returns this year, its still considerably less than packer teams of the past. Either way we can agree the sp. teams still suck...lol

[red]

the bitch of it is, we don't even use those rules to our advantage

crosby has more then enough leg to kick it deep into the endzone, or out of the back of the endzone. yet we're one of the teams that chooses to be cute and kick the ball high and to the goal line, forcing the other team to bring it out so we can stop them short of the 20

problem is, we rarely stop a team short of the 20

we would have been much better off letting mason kick deep and just let teams start at the 20

why wouldn't you try and limit the amount of returns when your coverage units are massive liabilities?

who's call is that? is that slocum or m3?

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

Exactly why I was yelling at the TV when Hester was killing us this year. I wish we would do more of that too

[channtheman]

Slocum will get that fixed.

[Guiness]

Slocum will get that fixed.

QF...QF? Quoted for something, not sure what!

[Freak Out]

Wow, I knew it was bad, especially the kick-off coverage, but this surprised me:

If that type of performance doesn't get someone fired I don't know what will. Unbelievable.

[HarveyWallbangers]

According to Football Outsiders DVOA rankings, it looks like our punt coverage was actually in the top 10 in the league. Our kickoff coverage was 4th worst in the league for KOR avg and 3rd worst according to DVOA. However, we had the second most kickoffs returned in the league. It just seemed like this year that kickoff return average was up with the new rules, so if you had the second most returns against you, it would seem to skew the DVOA stats--especially in a division that includes the top two in kickoff return yardage and two of the top five in kickoff return average (Patterson, Hester). It seemed like we were okay in punt coverage and bad (but not historically bad) in kickoff coverage. I do think injuries affected the coverage teams.

[HarveyWallbangers]

We did well against Hester in kickoff coverage (~23 yards/return), but his two punt returns netted big yardage (~30 yards/return).

[Patler]

You're right if you are talking about total yardage, but not averages which is what Palter presented. For example, say team A returns 20 punts for an 8 yard average and team B returns 40 punts also for an 8 yard average. Then say the next return for each team (number 21 of team A and number 41 for team B) was a 60yard return. The new average for team A is 10.5 yard average and team B's new average is 9.3 yard average.

The team with fewer opportunities to return punts will have its average affected more by a few big returns.

Well, you can also argue that with fewer returns the chance of giving up a long return is less, and the impact of a mishandled kick resulting in an inordinately short return is greater with fewer returns.

An average is an average, and so long as the sample size is significant the comparison has merit. If they gave up one long return in 20 opportunities, if they had been given 40 opportunities they probably would have given up 2 long returns and the average stayed about the same. After all, they didn't suck just a couple times, they sucked most of the year.


With respect to the new rules for kickoffs, for what its worth, in 1948, Packer opponents returned only 22 kickoffs for 611 yards. (27.8 yard average). One was returned for a TD (I don't know the length). In 2013, the Packers covered 61 returns. If a team was disadvantaged by a small sample size, it was the team in 1948, not this year. You might have to go back even further to find kick coverage worse than 2013.

Besides, with how prolific scoring has become, even with the new kickoff rules, the Packers are covering more KO returns now than the teams until the mid '90s or so. The difference in the number of returns caused by the rule change is not that significant.

[Bretsky]

It must be the injuries....seriously...Patler's stats back up what I've been seeing as a bad trend

I don't get how one can defend the guy....and MM...............well...........pull head out of hole.............

[red]

According to Football Outsiders DVOA rankings, it looks like our punt coverage was actually in the top 10 in the league. Our kickoff coverage was 4th worst in the league for KOR avg and 3rd worst according to DVOA. However, we had the second most kickoffs returned in the league. It just seemed like this year that kickoff return average was up with the new rules, so if you had the second most returns against you, it would seem to skew the DVOA stats--especially in a division that includes the top two in kickoff return yardage and two of the top five in kickoff return average (Patterson, Hester). It seemed like we were okay in punt coverage and bad (but not historically bad) in kickoff coverage. I do think injuries affected the coverage teams.

i don't know what the hell DVOA stands for, but going off of cold hard stats, we gave up on average 13.1 yards per punt return. which based on average per return ranks us at #29 of of 32 team, 4th from last

thats gotta be some really goofy math to somehow take that number and turn it into a number that somehow ranks us in the top 10 for punt coverage units

its funny looking up the stats, the next worst team average wise, the giants (13.6), gave up 3 punt returns for td's, we gave up none. in fact our longest return against us was 49. so there were no big giant returns to help skew those numbers. we were just consistently bad

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

Well, you can also argue that with fewer returns the chance of giving up a long return is less, and the impact of a mishandled kick resulting in an inordinately short return is greater with fewer returns.

An average is an average, and so long as the sample size is significant the comparison has merit. If they gave up one long return in 20 opportunities, if they had been given 40 opportunities they probably would have given up 2 long returns and the average stayed about the same. After all, they didn't suck just a couple times, they sucked most of the year.


With respect to the new rules for kickoffs, for what its worth, in 1948, Packer opponents returned only 22 kickoffs for 611 yards. (27.8 yard average). One was returned for a TD (I don't know the length). In 2013, the Packers covered 61 returns. If a team was disadvantaged by a small sample size, it was the team in 1948, not this year. You might have to go back even further to find kick coverage worse than 2013.

Besides, with how prolific scoring has become, even with the new kickoff rules, the Packers are covering more KO returns now than the teams until the mid '90s or so. The difference in the number of returns caused by the rule change is not that significant.


Not sure were you find all those stats, but I would love to see the number of kicks covered spread out over the last 20-30 years. 61 kicks covered this year doesn't mean much to me because I'm not sure how many kicks were normally covered before the rule changes compared to now. Another thing I wonder is a lot of kicks are taken out from 5 yards deep into the end zone. Maybe that's also why I don't feel like its as bad as it sounds. I wonder what the opponents average starting field position was compared to years past?

[Carolina_Packer]

The general theme is set. We suck at taking on blockers and making tackles both on ST and Defense. I have said it 20 times if I have said it once...we need to change the way we practice (and it will help with the injuries as well).

By saying we, do you mean Green Bay or NFL teams collectively? Did your point have to do with the reduction in the amount of practice under the new CBA, or the way the Packers currently conduct their practices? If the former, then wouldn't that affect all teams in a similar way?

Green Bay needs good, tough football players who take coaching well, are assignment sure, and aren't treated as a second-tier marginal type of players on the team, and find guys who take pride in being on special teams. That said, you can't change all the players on special teams and start over, so it would be far more practical to fire the coordinator. They clearly need another messenger.

[bobblehead]

By saying we, do you mean Green Bay or NFL teams collectively? Did your point have to do with the reduction in the amount of practice under the new CBA, or the way the Packers currently conduct their practices? If the former, then wouldn't that affect all teams in a similar way?

Green Bay needs good, tough football players who take coaching well, are assignment sure, and aren't treated as a second-tier marginal type of players on the team, and find guys who take pride in being on special teams. That said, you can't change all the players on special teams and start over, so it would be far more practical to fire the coordinator. They clearly need another messenger.

I meant green bay, and i think that MM and the CBA form a horrendous storm of non contact.

[HarveyWallbangers]

i don't know what the hell DVOA stands for, but going off of cold hard stats, we gave up on average 13.1 yards per punt return. which based on average per return ranks us at #29 of of 32 team, 4th from last

thats gotta be some really goofy math to somehow take that number and turn it into a number that somehow ranks us in the top 10 for punt coverage units

its funny looking up the stats, the next worst team average wise, the giants (13.6), gave up 3 punt returns for td's, we gave up none. in fact our longest return against us was 49. so there were no big giant returns to help skew those numbers. we were just consistently bad

Might have to do with the fact that only 20 punts were returned against us--which happened to be 3rd fewest in the NFL behind San Diego and Chicago. The league average seems to be around the mid to upper 30s. And that number only includes 5 that were touchbacks out of 64 punts. About 1/3 were fair caught and about 1/3 were downed inside the 20 (I'm assuming most of those were not returned).

When there are so few returns, a couple of big ones can really change the stats. Kind of like a backup RB with few touches can have an impressive yards/carry based off busting a long run or two.

Our punting net average was around league average.

[Patler]

Not sure were you find all those stats, but I would love to see the number of kicks covered spread out over the last 20-30 years. 61 kicks covered this year doesn't mean much to me because I'm not sure how many kicks were normally covered before the rule changes compared to now. Another thing I wonder is a lot of kicks are taken out from 5 yards deep into the end zone. Maybe that's also why I don't feel like its as bad as it sounds. I wonder what the opponents average starting field position was compared to years past?

Annual stats are available on several sites. I often go to http://www.pro-football-reference.com becasue they have a nice simple format.

Immediately before the rule change, generally the Packers covered 70-80 returns each year. If you go to pre-1995 the league was more defensive, with fewer scores and fewer kickoffs. The further back you go, you have fewer games/year and even fewer kickoffs.

[Bretsky]

Might have to do with the fact that only 20 punts were returned against us--which happened to be 3rd fewest in the NFL behind San Diego and Chicago. The league average seems to be around the mid to upper 30s. And that number only includes 5 that were touchbacks out of 64 punts. About 1/3 were fair caught and about 1/3 were downed inside the 20 (I'm assuming most of those were not returned).

When there are so few returns, a couple of big ones can really change the stats. Kind of like a backup RB with few touches can have an impressive yards/carry based off busting a long run or two.

Our punting net average was around league average.


Are you arguing since there are less returns against us because our punter is way above average it's more acceptable to have a crappy average yards per return ?

My thought would beif there are so few returns, we should let them bust out way less

The RB comparison...a lot of times when these second tier RB's bust one out..it's because they are in with a team expecting a pass and are surprised.

Not that I'm comparing our special teams coverage units to be second tier

IMO they are not that good.

[Patler]

The longest punt return against the Packers was the last game of the year, for 49 yards. There were others for 41, 38, 35, 32 and 23 yards. 6 returns for 218 yards, 14 returns for 43 yards.

[Pugger]

The general theme is set. We suck at taking on blockers and making tackles both on ST and Defense. I have said it 20 times if I have said it once...we need to change the way we practice (and it will help with the injuries as well).

With the limits on padded practices how do we change the way we practice? :?:

[Cleft Crusty]

With the limits on padded practices how do we change the way we practice? :?:

I'm not sure better STs practice all that much more.

The difference probably is due primarily to how the STs are built and what they draw from - teams that are strong defensively, perhaps moreso the 3-4 defenses that are LB rich, will probably be better equipped to run and tackle on STs. The Packers trot out a lot of TEs, WRs, and RBs on STs, this year in particular because of injuries at the LB position, and the difference in the ability to pursue and tackle is just going to be decidedly different. Also, if you draft defensive backs that cover more than tackle, like House for example, their skill set will affect what they can do on STs as well.

I think the Packers STs performance is a direct reflection of the type of players that they drafted.

[Bretsky]

The longest punt return against the Packers was the last game of the year, for 49 yards. There were others for 41, 38, 35, 32 and 23 yards. 6 returns for 218 yards, 14 returns for 43 yards.

ON the other hand I recall Seattle had about the top unit covering punts in the NFL; through about eight games they had given up about ten yards.

[Bretsky]

The longest punt return against the Packers was the last game of the year, for 49 yards. There were others for 41, 38, 35, 32 and 23 yards. 6 returns for 218 yards, 14 returns for 43 yards.

6 of the 20 went for over 20 yds

[HarveyWallbangers]

Are you arguing since there are less returns against us because our punter is way above average it's more acceptable to have a crappy average yards per return ?

My thought would beif there are so few returns, we should let them bust out way less

The RB comparison...a lot of times when these second tier RB's bust one out..it's because they are in with a team expecting a pass and are surprised.

Not that I'm comparing our special teams coverage units to be second tier

IMO they are not that good.

No, I'm arguing that it's a small sample size. 20 punts returned against. Perhaps we had pretty good coverage since so few punts were returned against us. I seem to remember the likes of Bush and House screaming down the field to force a fair catch or down a punt inside the 20 quite often. The net average was around league average and the DVOA metric had us even higher. I don't think punt coverage was as much of an issue as some are making it out to be nor do I think it can be measured by punt return yardage against only.

[bobblehead]

With the limits on padded practices how do we change the way we practice? :?:

One guys idea of padded practice might/probably is very different than another guys. Padded does not necessarily mean much/heavy contact.

[Bretsky]

No, I'm arguing that it's a small sample size. 20 punts returned against. Perhaps we had pretty good coverage since so few punts were returned against us. I seem to remember the likes of Bush and House screaming down the field to force a fair catch or down a punt inside the 20 quite often. The net average was around league average and the DVOA metric had us even higher. I don't think punt coverage was as much of an issue as some are making it out to be nor do I think it can be measured by punt return yardage against only.


Ya think our punter has a stronger than average leg with better than average hang time ??
And if the punder has a short field, he should be forcing a fair catch...but that's not a coverage catch.

[woodbuck27]

our ST coach isn't responsible for that area of the team

it was someone or something else that was responsible

Our ST coach is handcuffed by excessive injuries and has to try and coach ST KO and punt returns with something equivalent to CFL rejects.

Is that the TRUTH?

[woodbuck27]

I'm not sure better STs practice all that much more.

The difference probably is due primarily to how the STs are built and what they draw from - teams that are strong defensively, perhaps moreso the 3-4 defenses that are LB rich, will probably be better equipped to run and tackle on STs. The Packers trot out a lot of TEs, WRs, and RBs on STs, this year in particular because of injuries at the LB position, and the difference in the ability to pursue and tackle is just going to be decidedly different. Also, if you draft defensive backs that cover more than tackle, like House for example, their skill set will affect what they can do on STs as well.

I think the Packers STs performance is a direct reflection of the type of players that they drafted.

Then you've actually checked the games Stat's and ST packages?

Who (names of roster players) played on these KO and Punt coverage packages in the majority of games?

Based on your exact findings:

Does it matter who's trotted out there on ST's as it matters who makes the tackles?

Which LB's, WR's and RB's were on KO and Punt return packages?

How often did players on the packages at these positions (LB,WR and RB) make tackles compared to the majority of the position players that made the tackles?

Based on your findings and accurate answers to the above questions.

Please return to this thread with your conclusions based on the facts.

Thanks.

GO PACK GO !

[Cleft Crusty]

Please return to this thread with your conclusions based on the facts.

Thanks.

GO PACK GO !

Do your own research

[Iron Mike]

Do your own research


Please return to this thread with your conclusions based on the facts.

Thanks.

GO PACK GO !

'Bout time for a huge diatribe on how Cleft Crusty should be permabanned from PR......