Where do we think the Packers rate in the NFC ???

[Bretsky]

I OFTEN listen to the NFL network and find their viewpoints and input superior to the muck we read in the press.

It seems like many in here want to believe we're right in the wheel house with San Fran and Seattle as one of the best teams in the NFL

Lately I've been hearing most on the NFL Network mentioning several teams before bringing Green Bay into the discussion among the top teams in the NFL

Among the teams consistently mentioned as being better teams than Green Bay are Carolina, Seattle, and even teams like Arizona and Phily.

Several view us as being right about even with Da Bears and in the third tier of NFC teams.

So where exactly do the Packers fall ?

Are we in the elite tier in the NFC ?

Do we even fall into the second tier ?

[Joemailman]

I guess I see them at the top of the second tier. Just below Seattle and San Francisco, but ahead of New Orleans, Philly, etc. This assumes a healthy Rodgers all year long. They can move into the top tier with improved safety play.

[red]

tier two imo

but i don't know if we're at the top like joe says. i think we're pretty even with NO. the others in that group (philly, carolina) i think we can beat maybe 6 or7 times out of 10 times

[Bretsky]

I would consider us as tier 2; but an average team in tier two. Not really on the brink of tier 1. And a team that could fall into the bottom of tier two very easy......but also perhaps rise as well to be knocking on San Frans door with the right picks.

The homer in me wants to say we're the 3rd best team in the NFC.

What has bothered me lately is most analysts think we're closer to the Bears than the Niners. They think we could fall out of the playoffs easier than rise to the creams of the crop. They automatically mention the Panthers and Saints as being clearly better....then the Eagles seem to be the next popular choice.............and the perception is the Bears and Packers are very very close

I don't like to think of myself as a homer...but I think we're better than what I just described. But of course...theyare not bias'd like me

[red]

I would consider us as tier 2; but an average team in tier two. Not really on the brink of tier 1. And a team that could fall into the bottom of tier two very easy......but also perhaps rise as well to be knocking on San Frans door with the right picks.

The homer in me wants to say we're the 3rd best team in the NFC.

What has bothered me lately is most analysts think we're closer to the Bears than the Niners. They think we could fall out of the playoffs easier than rise to the creams of the crop. They automatically mention the Panthers and Saints as being clearly better....then the Eagles seem to be the next popular choice.............and the perception is the Bears and Packers are very very close

I don't like to think of myself as a homer...but I think we're better than what I just described. But of course...theyare not bias'd like me

well,we haven't drafted well the last few years, and some of our better players have been allowed to leave lately. you could easily say our talent level is dropping

while those of the bears and lions might be increasing. so i can see a quick slip to tier 3

[bobblehead]

I think you are over valuing 2 teams. Tier one is: Seattle, SF, GB, NO, Carolina and potentially AZ. Any of those teams could make the NFCC next year. If you think Seattle is waltzing right back to the superbowl you are nuts (and ignoring history). The media prefers a storyline over reality, but the reality is that any of those teams could be the NFC champs.

[Bretsky]

My thoughs aside, nearly every non bias'd analyst on the NFL network puts Seattle and San Francisco in their own tier above the rest of the NFL

[Bretsky]

I have a hard time thinking Arizona, Carolina, and New Orleans are close to Seattle and San Francisco right now

Settle tore New Orleans apart the last two times they played. It was like a college vs. high school team. I definitely think New Orleans was better than Arizona, and pretty even if not better than Carolina. But Seattle owned New Orleans last year.

the road in 2014 will be different; I get that..........this is more a thread about the current state of the NFC. Certainly it can change

[Bretsky]

I think you are over valuing 2 teams. Tier one is: Seattle, SF, GB, NO, Carolina and potentially AZ. Any of those teams could make the NFCC next year. If you think Seattle is waltzing right back to the superbowl you are nuts (and ignoring history). The media prefers a storyline over reality, but the reality is that any of those teams could be the NFC champs.

If you are going to theorize who could be NFC champs, and if you are going to throw all those teams in the box I think you should definitely add Philadelphia and the Bears as well.

[smuggler]

I think we're the number three team. I have confidence in our squad, at full health, putting up a good fight against Seattle and San Fran, and being favored to win against any other team in the NFC and (excepting perhaps Denver) the entire league.

[bobblehead]

My thoughs aside, nearly every non bias'd analyst on the NFL network puts Seattle and San Francisco in their own tier above the rest of the NFL

Because they played the NFCC game THIS year. Next year will likely be different and the announcers will be giddy for 2 other teams. NO has an elite QB and a top notch defense. Seattle schooled them this year, but are you so sure they will next year? AZ beat seattle late in the year. If Hyde hadn't eaten fried chicken at halftime we would have beaten SF. Carolina's defense scares me more than Seattle and SF. GB has the best QB in the NFC. I just don't see it as a 2 man race.

Go find the thread from training camp where we all predicted the division winners and the playoffs. See how close we all came.

[Bretsky]

This thread is not about predicting nest year; it's about sentiment of where things are now. I have no problem with anybody arguing everything can change next year. But the evidence we currently have showed us Seattle wiping New Orlean out twice last year. I hope next year will be different.

I predicted Green Bay to go 11-5 last year; that record probably would have been within a game one way or the other had Rodgers stayed healthy.

I also viewed Green Bay as the third best team in the NFL when healthy; but deep down I know I'm a homer and wonder if I overvalue how good they really are.

[pbmax]

My thoughs aside, nearly every non bias'd analyst on the NFL network puts Seattle and San Francisco in their own tier above the rest of the NFL

They won the last game by a FG. That's pretty close to same tier with two starters on D lost in the freaking game.

[pbmax]

This thread is not about predicting nest year; it's about sentiment of where things are now. I have no problem with anybody arguing everything can change next year. But the evidence we currently have showed us Seattle wiping New Orlean out twice last year. I hope next year will be different.

I predicted Green Bay to go 11-5 last year; that record probably would have been within a game one way or the other had Rodgers stayed healthy.

I also viewed Green Bay as the third best team in the NFL when healthy; but deep down I know I'm a homer and wonder if I overvalue how good they really are.

Cards are getting love because of record in tough division and defeating the Seachickens on the road. Which, I might remind everyone, the Packers did the year before. But that was one year and they are dependent on an ancient Carson Palmer. No guarantee this year.

Carolina made noise in the playoffs and have a monster D. Right now, they have zero WRs for their passing game and are short in the secondary too.

We'll see, but no one wants to be the top tier of the offseason.

[call_me_ishmael]

Low end of tier two. They get beat 9/10 times to San Fran and Seattle. They are less talented than teams like the Lions, but they are better coached. They are not as good as the Saints. They split games with Carolina because they have elite D, Packers have elite O.

San Fran and Seattle are much better than everyone else in the NFC. The next tier down is NO and Carolina. Then GB, Detroit, Atlanta, etc.

[HarveyWallbangers]

A healthy Packers team can compete with any team in the NFC. Seattle might be in its own tier after the Super Bowl blowout, but they are likely to suffer from the Super Bowl hangover. They aren't invincible. They clearly have holes in their passing offense. And things change every year. I'll be interested in seeing how the roster looks after the draft.

[vince]

A healthy Packers team can compete with any team in the NFC. Seattle might be in its own tier after the Super Bowl blowout, but they are likely to suffer from the Super Bowl hangover. They aren't invincible. They clearly have holes in their passing offense. And things change every year. I'll be interested in seeing how the roster looks after the draft.
It would be great of Bulaga could put together a string of health. He's all-pro caliber right tackle IF healthy. If the line can stay relatively healthy all year, I think the offense will be tough to stop. A WR and TE is really all the more anyone could ask for. They'll fill the center position. Shit they filled it with EDS. They'll do it again.

They maybe need a couple pieces on defense but it's very possible those pieces could be added through the draft. If the draft is a decent one - and I'm reading that it's supposed to be very deep this year - and you get three or four quality contributors - it's not too hard to predict which areas they'd be likely to fill - you could have a pretty complete team - depending on injury which if it happens to Rodgers, Matthews, Sitton, Shields, and maybe a couple others depending on how the rest of the offseason goes. would be a huge factor again.

[gbgary]

when healthy we're a top 5 team.

[ThunderDan]

If you are going to theorize who could be NFC champs, and if you are going to throw all those teams in the box I think you should definitely add Philadelphia and the Bears as well.

I don't get the Bear love at all.

In 2012 they go 10-6 and miss the playoffs and Lovie gets fired,

IN 2013 they go 8-8 and miss the playoffs with a choke job against GB in the last week of the season. They are 2 games worse than the last year and only in the playoff hunt in 2013 because Detroit imploded and ARod got hurt.

[ThunderDan]

I don't get the Bear love at all.

In 2012 they go 10-6 and miss the playoffs and Lovie gets fired,

IN 2013 they go 8-8 and miss the playoffs with a choke job against GB in the last week of the season. They are 2 games worse than the last year and only in the playoff hunt in 2013 because Detroit imploded and ARod got hurt.

In fact if ARod doesn't go down in the first CHI/GB game the Bears aren't even a 500 team in 2013.

[ThunderDan]

I see the emergence of the GB running game as a reason to keep them in the top tier. No one and I mean no one will want to play GB will a healthy ARod and Lacy/Starks combo. If the D can make an improvement to middle of the pack next year we are in a good position to make the Super Bowl.

[mraynrand]

I don't get the Bear love at all.

In 2012 they go 10-6 and miss the playoffs and Lovie gets fired,

IN 2013 they go 8-8 and miss the playoffs with a choke job against GB in the last week of the season. They are 2 games worse than the last year and only in the playoff hunt in 2013 because Detroit imploded and ARod got hurt.

At the end of 2012, I thought they were on a path to be a 3-5 win team in 2013. They straightened out the offense and I'm worried they might have similar success this year with the defense. So far, I'm not impressed with their off season moves. Wait and see I guess.

[Pugger]

If you are going to theorize who could be NFC champs, and if you are going to throw all those teams in the box I think you should definitely add Philadelphia and the Bears as well.


The Bears? Please. If you are going in include the Bears then add the Lions. :lol:

I do think Philly belongs in the conversation, however.

[Joemailman]

The Bears defense was so bad last year they went out and signed M.D. Jennings. They have a QB who was not as good his backup last year, who is now gone. I don't get the Bear love.

[mraynrand]

The Bears defense was so bad last year they went out and signed M.D. Jennings. They have a QB who was not as good his backup last year, who is now gone. I don't get the Bear love.

Cutler is a flawed human being, but the Chicago offense has multiple weapons; the rookie WR they drafted last year could be as good as Jeffery. In many ways, they are a mirror image of the Packers: Good offense, suspect defense. The difference is that the Packers just have better defensive personnel, APRH. But the Chicago front office looks much improved.

[red]

The Bears defense was so bad last year they went out and signed M.D. Jennings. They have a QB who was not as good his backup last year, who is now gone. I don't get the Bear love.

and we lost that shit safety and have replaced him with nothing

at this point wouldn't that make us worse off at the position

as for the bears only being 8-8 last year, i guess injuries only matter when making excuses about why the packers sucked last year

the bears are closer to us then people want to believe

now having said that, i have no doubt the bears will go 2-14 next season and make me look like a complete asshole

[Joemailman]

Cutler is a flawed human being, but the Chicago offense has multiple weapons; the rookie WR they drafted last year could be as good as Jeffery. In many ways, they are a mirror image of the Packers: Good offense, suspect defense. The difference is that the Packers just have better defensive personnel, APRH. But the Chicago front office looks much improved.

Cutler is a flawed quarterback. His receivers were as good as any team in the NFL last year, yet he was 13th in passer rating. As long as he is running the offense, the Bears will not be in the top tier.

[mraynrand]

and we lost that shit safety and have replaced him with nothing

at this point wouldn't that make us worse off at the position

nope. + by - And the Packers have enough guys on the squad right now to field a functional secondary, better than last year, APRH

[mraynrand]

Cutler is a flawed quarterback. His receivers were as good as any team in the NFL last year, yet he was 13th in passer rating. As long as he is running the offense, the Bears will not be in the top tier.

I go further; Cutler is a flawed human being. There is something wrong with him as a leader of men; something wrong with his psyche. So I think he will always self-destruct at some point. But his physical talent is undeniable, and I think the offensive coaching staff will get the best out of him. He was hurt last year as well. If the front office straightens out the defense, they could be a real threat. A lot now depends on whether you get the 22 sack Jared or
http://www.fresnostatenews.com/archive/2008/04/Subway_3-0035.jpg

[red]

nope. + by - And the Packers have enough guys on the squad right now to field a functional secondary, better than last year, APRH

how can they be a better unit then they were last year when they are the exact same people?

unless it really is + by -, and IF hayward can comeback from his injury, and IF hyde is moved to and can play safety.

but if the plan is hyde at safety, and hayward can't come back, then we're in big trouble imo

[mraynrand]

how can they be a better unit then they were last year when they are the exact same people?

unless it really is + by -, and IF hayward can comeback from his injury, and IF hyde is moved to and can play safety.

but if the plan is hyde at safety, and hayward can't come back, then we're in big trouble imo

Packers started the year with McMillian and Jennings in bigger roles and Burnett and Richardson out with injury. Start this year with Burnett and Richardson and you're already much improved over the 2013 opener. Right now their safety depth is Banjo. I don't assume they will 'switch' either Hayward or Hyde to a safety role, but will use them in packages to effectively do the same. I would assume they will address safety depth in the draft and perhaps pick up a veteran yet to be released.

[pbmax]

and we lost that shit safety and have replaced him with nothing

at this point wouldn't that make us worse off at the position



No, because Richardson at the LOS and Burnett deep is not ideal but played better then when Jennings was in there. You would worry about being in 2 deep though.

[Pugger]

and we lost that shit safety and have replaced him with nothing

at this point wouldn't that make us worse off at the position

as for the bears only being 8-8 last year, i guess injuries only matter when making excuses about why the packers sucked last year

the bears are closer to us then people want to believe

now having said that, i have no doubt the bears will go 2-14 next season and make me look like a complete asshole

Wouldn't you call that addition by subtraction? ;-) We'll get a safety in this draft and that kid will be light years better than the poor kid the bares took from us.

[bobblehead]

They won the last game by a FG. That's pretty close to same tier with two starters on D lost in the freaking game.

the 2 highest paid starters. The 2 most effective starters. But don't trifle me with details, TT sucks because the D isn't gettin er done.

[bobblehead]

The Bears? Please. If you are going in include the Bears then add the Lions. :lol:

I do think Philly belongs in the conversation, however.

I agree about philly, but I want to see Chip Kelly's offense with an offseason of preparation.

[Packgator]

Current Las Vegas odds to win NFC....

Seahawks...... +200
49ers............ +300
Packers......... +500
Eagles........... +800
Saints........... +900
Panthers....... +1200
Cowboys....... +1500
Falcons......... +1500
Bears........... +2000
Giants.......... +2000
Lions............ +2000
Cardinals...... +2000
Redskins...... +2700
Rams........... +3000
Bucs............ +3700
Vikings.........+4500

[Striker]

I'd say top of tier 2, tier 1.5 if possible.

[Tony Oday]

Top Team in the NFC. AR with a whole off-season with Lacy should keep DC up at night. We were Hyde holding on to a pick away from beating SF and I think SEA was a fluke last year.

[mraynrand]

I'd say top of tier 2, tier 1.5 if possible.

Pier 1!

[Pugger]

Top Team in the NFC. AR with a whole off-season with Lacy should keep DC up at night. We were Hyde holding on to a pick away from beating SF and I think SEA was a fluke last year.

I donno with that defense I'd call the seachickens season last year a fluke. They may be well pressed to repeat this year.

[Bretsky]

The Bears? Please. If you are going in include the Bears then add the Lions. :lol:

I do think Philly belongs in the conversation, however.


I am fine to add the Lions....as well as the Falcons....as two teams that could bounce back hard.

But the Bears were right on the border last year; they lost Peppers and added two pass rushers that should be collectively a lot better than him

[wist43]

You guys probably need to rethink your voting - I'm in the majority ;)

[Guiness]

Eagle rated 4th by Vegas...I wonder how much that changes with DeSean gone?

[Bossman641]

Assuming healthy? Packers are third best in nfc with ability to beat anyone

[wist43]

Assuming healthy? Packers are third best in nfc with ability to beat anyone

I agree... it all comes down to Capers, and he's perfectly capable of putting together a winning gameplan on any given Sunday - but of course he's more than capable of throwing an enormous mess out there too.

[Smeefers]

You guys probably need to rethink your voting - I'm in the majority ;)

A lot of us agree with a lot of your points in principle. Its when you start demanding complete regime changes, go to the extremes, and demand player replacement regardless of salary cap implications that people have a hard time swallowing your arguments. You also tend to beat dead horses well past the point of death which gets people argumentative. Screaming about the 2-4 does nothing for me. Putting forth the idea of the 3-3 and giving personnel suggestions has lead to stimulating debate.

[woodbuck27]

It would be great of Bulaga could put together a string of health. He's all-pro caliber right tackle IF healthy. If the line can stay relatively healthy all year, I think the offense will be tough to stop. A WR and TE is really all the more anyone could ask for. They'll fill the center position. Shit they filled it with EDS. They'll do it again.

They maybe need a couple pieces on defense but it's very possible those pieces could be added through the draft. If the draft is a decent one - and I'm reading that it's supposed to be very deep this year - and you get three or four quality contributors - it's not too hard to predict which areas they'd be likely to fill - you could have a pretty complete team - depending on injury which if it happens to Rodgers, Matthews, Sitton, Shields, and maybe a couple others depending on how the rest of the offseason goes. would be a huge factor again.

Hi Vince.

Great to see your alive. I hope your very well.

[wist43]

A lot of us agree with a lot of your points in principle. Its when you start demanding complete regime changes, go to the extremes, and demand player replacement regardless of salary cap implications that people have a hard time swallowing your arguments. You also tend to beat dead horses well past the point of death which gets people argumentative. Screaming about the 2-4 does nothing for me. Putting forth the idea of the 3-3 and giving personnel suggestions has lead to stimulating debate.

I could say our team colors are green and gold, and the homers on this forum would be up in arms.

I offer up the 3-3 and 4-2 alignments and give the reasons why they would be superior to the 2-4, and max musters the troops and they launch into a defense of the 2-4. If I'm the only one making these observations, and most everyone else is attacking changes, and defending Capers and the 2-4, I am left to carry on the fight alone.

As for regime change - when have I once said MM or TT should be fired?? Capers needs to go, but I should think that obvious.

As for personnel changes - I like the personnel outside of a few guys. As I've said all along, and some of you actually agree, the personnel do not fit a traditional 3-4 - hence, it only makes sense to use them according to their strengths. It is true that Capers doesn't use the 3-4 much - but what he does is actually worse; much, much worse than using the 3-4, i.e. the 2-4.

And therein lies our problems on defense, at least in large part. We have consistently put up very dismal numbers and results on defense over the past 3 years - and we have predominantly been running the 2-4 as our base. The 2-4 is at the core of our defensive problems - hence, it should be the focus of discussion.

[red]

I'm usually the one wanting TT and M3 fired

[bobblehead]

I could say our team colors are green and gold, and the homers on this forum would be up in arms.

I offer up the 3-3 and 4-2 alignments and give the reasons why they would be superior to the 2-4, and max musters the troops and they launch into a defense of the 2-4. If I'm the only one making these observations, and most everyone else is attacking changes, and defending Capers and the 2-4, I am left to carry on the fight alone.

As for regime change - when have I once said MM or TT should be fired?? Capers needs to go, but I should think that obvious.

As for personnel changes - I like the personnel outside of a few guys. As I've said all along, and some of you actually agree, the personnel do not fit a traditional 3-4 - hence, it only makes sense to use them according to their strengths. It is true that Capers doesn't use the 3-4 much - but what he does is actually worse; much, much worse than using the 3-4, i.e. the 2-4.

And therein lies our problems on defense, at least in large part. We have consistently put up very dismal numbers and results on defense over the past 3 years - and we have predominantly been running the 2-4 as our base. The 2-4 is at the core of our defensive problems - hence, it should be the focus of discussion.

I am with you wist. I wanted a 3-3 long ago. We aren't strong at LB and the 2-4 was getting our asses run over on 3rd and 6. Now we lost CJ Wilson and with him, all hope that we stop the run next year :)

[pbmax]

You better pray that the pass rush gets home because either your short zone is manned by a DL (or an OLB-one of your best pass rushers) or you are playing man across the board. Both these concepts are nice tendency breakers or allow for blitzing. It cannot be the base pass defense on 3rd and medium to long.

While I agree some use of the 2-4 seems ludicrous given down, distance and field position, there is a reason the 2-4 its the preferred nickel package for a 3-4.

By the way, a 4-2 for the Packers would still leave Jones and Hawk on the field. The most likely guy off the field is Perry as he is subbed by Neal or Peppers.

[red]

you better pray that that pass rush gets home in 1.5 seconds, because thats all the longer it takes for WR's to get behind out shitty safeties

[wist43]

You better pray that the pass rush gets home because either your short zone is manned by a DL (or an OLB-one of your best pass rushers) or you are playing man across the board. Both these concepts are nice tendency breakers or allow for blitzing. It cannot be the base pass defense on 3rd and medium to long.

While I agree some use of the 2-4 seems ludicrous given down, distance and field position, there is a reason the 2-4 its the preferred nickel package for a 3-4.

By the way, a 4-2 for the Packers would still leave Jones and Hawk on the field. The most likely guy off the field is Perry as he is subbed by Neal or Peppers.

You do realize it is permissible to have a safety within 10 yds of the LOS?? How in the bloody hell do any other teams manage to cover the flat and underneath stuff?? You make it sound like it is next to impossible to defend any passing formation out of anything other than the 2-4, lol... How many hard hits did we see Chancellor, Sherman, and Seattle's other DB's making on underneath routes against Denver?? The same thing goes for how Baltimore always plays New England.

My preference is usually to play man, but given how teams have figured us out, and take advantage of us when we play man, and we're so weak with our base ILB's, it only makes sense to play more zone, and bring pressure with the defensive line talent we have.

As for the 4-2, how are Hawk and Brad Jones still on the field at all in a 4-2?? Maybe one of them, but for my money both of their asses would be on the bench, and the "2" LB's I would have on the field would be Matthews and any 1 of Neal, Mulumba, Hawk, or Jones.

My 4 down linemen would be Peppers, Daniels, D. Jones, and Perry.

I could throw together other alignments from that 4-2, but that would be my first personnel grouping in a 4-2. Perry is a fish out of water at OLB, Neal looked good there - accomodate them both. Neal should be our full time starter at ROLB, and Perry should be a situational pass rusher from the DE position.

Am I the only one who sees this... seriously, I think it's pretty obvious.

[pbmax]

Peppers could be a different maker here. But with Matthews, the Packers did not generate enough pressure with a 4 man front to consistently stop a pass attacks. So they had to send numbers, overload or send the cross blitz. You do that with three lineman and someone who should not be in coverage will be in coverage waiting to be exposed.

You are simply trading one problem for another. You stick a 4 DL formation out there and they will pass as often as you see them run at a 2-4. In fact, unlike the 2-4 where at some down and distance they would be giving up on a first down by running, passing attacks could be used to convert ANY down and distance for a first.

And unless Peppers transforms the pass rush, the counter will work often enough to do damage. Prior to Peppers, it would have been even worse.

As for your two LBs, having Matthews out there means one of those DL will be in coverage because the best use of Matthews is in pressure. You can counter your tendency by putting him in coverage, but that weakens your pass rush. I would be OK with Jones in coverage, but you don't have a seventh guy to spare.

[packer4life]

Taking Matthews away from your pass rush in the 4-2 is absurd. It really is that simple.

[bobblehead]

Peppers could be a different maker here. But with Matthews, the Packers did not generate enough pressure with a 4 man front to consistently stop a pass attacks. So they had to send numbers, overload or send the cross blitz. You do that with three lineman and someone who should not be in coverage will be in coverage waiting to be exposed.

You are simply trading one problem for another. You stick a 4 DL formation out there and they will pass as often as you see them run at a 2-4. In fact, unlike the 2-4 where at some down and distance they would be giving up on a first down by running, passing attacks could be used to convert ANY down and distance for a first.

And unless Peppers transforms the pass rush, the counter will work often enough to do damage. Prior to Peppers, it would have been even worse.

As for your two LBs, having Matthews out there means one of those DL will be in coverage because the best use of Matthews is in pressure. You can counter your tendency by putting him in coverage, but that weakens your pass rush. I would be OK with Jones in coverage, but you don't have a seventh guy to spare.

This explanation would be more effective if we actually got to the QB with the 2-4 alignment (in the cases where an offense actually passed).

[pbmax]

This explanation would be more effective if we actually got to the QB with the 2-4 alignment (in the cases where an offense actually passed).

I think it still stands. The Packers had a more than acceptable number of sacks. But the total pressures, and snaps with virtually unlimited time were preposterously bad.

But if that is the case, then the worst thing to do is to beg them to pass more.

[wist43]

Taking Matthews away from your pass rush in the 4-2 is absurd. It really is that simple.

Why would you be taking Matthews out of the pass rush?? Is there a rule that says you can only rush 4??

You've been listening to max for too long.

[wist43]

I think it still stands. The Packers had a more than acceptable number of sacks. But the total pressures, and snaps with virtually unlimited time were preposterously bad.

But if that is the case, then the worst thing to do is to beg them to pass more.

The lack of pressure usually came out of the 2-4 when they went static, i.e. looped the OLB's upfield and rushed the 2 DL in a straight 4 man rush, with no stunts, blitz, presnap disguise, etc. It's easy to block if you know what is coming, and who is coming. Pay extra attn to Matthews and the rest can be dealt with easy enough.

When Capers did bring pressure out of the 2-4, he would force the offenses hand, and we would usually get a good result - but he played a static front far more often than he did anything in terms of blitz or disguise.

You're a hand wringer when it comes to coverage max... a chicken little who can't see the wisdom of creating pressure. For sure and for certain, Dom Capers is your DC wet dream. I think if you had your way, we'd rush 3 every snap, and sending 4 would be your version of blitz - risky, risky stuff sending 4!!! Who will be left in coverage???!!!

[mraynrand]

The lack of pressure usually came out of the 2-4 when they went static, i.e. looped the OLB's upfield and rushed the 2 DL in a straight 4 man rush, with no stunts, blitz, presnap disguise, etc. It's easy to block if you know what is coming, and who is coming. Pay extra attn to Matthews and the rest can be dealt with easy enough.

When Capers did bring pressure out of the 2-4, he would force the offenses hand, and we would usually get a good result - but he played a static front far more often than he did anything in terms of blitz or disguise.

You're a hand wringer when it comes to coverage max... a chicken little who can't see the wisdom of creating pressure. For sure and for certain, Dom Capers is your DC wet dream. I think if you had your way, we'd rush 3 every snap, and sending 4 would be your version of blitz - risky, risky stuff sending 4!!! Who will be left in coverage???!!!

SF is sort of the upper standard for OL play. So when you are sending 4, you're gonna get blocked more often than not. If you have McMillian and Jennings as your safeties, sending extra pressure is going to make you nervous. But basically, last year, you had kind of the worst of all worlds, right up the middle - Hawk and Jones are both mediocre in pass coverage and in pass rush, and the safeties were blah all around. Send Hawk and/or Jones and that middle is wide, wide open. A reasonable upgrade throughout the ILB and safety group could do wonders - give Capers more confidence in coverage due to improved safety coverage and improved pass rush from ILB spot. That's got to come from whomever challenges Richardson and Jones for playing time, as I'm guessing the coaches want Hawk and Burnett out there as much as possible. (Still, if I have to see Hawk do his pre-pass rush hop again, I'll puke).

Wouldn't hurt to have DL healthy, D. Jones improve, and Peppers rejuvenate.

[pbmax]

The lack of pressure usually came out of the 2-4 when they went static, i.e. looped the OLB's upfield and rushed the 2 DL in a straight 4 man rush, with no stunts, blitz, presnap disguise, etc. It's easy to block if you know what is coming, and who is coming. Pay extra attn to Matthews and the rest can be dealt with easy enough.

When Capers did bring pressure out of the 2-4, he would force the offenses hand, and we would usually get a good result - but he played a static front far more often than he did anything in terms of blitz or disguise.

You're a hand wringer when it comes to coverage max... a chicken little who can't see the wisdom of creating pressure. For sure and for certain, Dom Capers is your DC wet dream. I think if you had your way, we'd rush 3 every snap, and sending 4 would be your version of blitz - risky, risky stuff sending 4!!! Who will be left in coverage???!!!

Not at all. I would be happy to see a more aggressive approach and less predictability from a pass rush standpoint. I think predictable blitzing is the same as shooting yourself in the foot UNLESS you are trying to force a short throw in long yardage. However, there are many ways to skin an offense and Capers has skinned plenty. But there are two main problems for the Packers now with a pressure approach:

1. Current personnel aren't fabulous pass rush artists outside of Matthews. Even Matthews is not a game changer in pass rush like some other OLBs. Both Neal and Perry have their moments. The second best pass rush in 2012 was from Daniels and it was his breakthrough season. The personnel don't have the native capacity (not to mention the health) to generate pressure uniformly throughout a game even with blitzing. Capers blitzed a LOT the last two years.

2. Capers most creative blitzes are old hat now. Slot/corner blitz (occasional safety), overload and fire zone. They are all on film multiple times with the Packers. He isn't Gregg Williams. He is a details guy. Multiple QBs, despite repeated references here and in the media to Capers as a mad scientist, have said what the Packers do is not hard to diagnose. He needs the right personnel APRH.

So we are back to what I think started to get mentioned here near the end of the season. Thompson and Capers are not an ideal match, personnel or roster wise.

I think Thompson has moved in his direction. McCarthy is asking Capers to move toward the GM and use ALL the personnel and packages at hand. We'll see if it works. If he has something in the tank, I think the Peppers/Neal combo could be a good solution.

[smuggler]

Matthews can be a game changer, but in order to do so, he'd have to actually play. Which, sometimes he doesn't.

[3irty1]

If we don't belong in the same tier with the 49ers then the 49ers don't belong in the same tier with the Seahawks. You could make the argument that both teams are clearly better in which case I'd say we're in a 4 or 5 way tie in tier 3.

[pbmax]

If we don't belong in the same tier with the 49ers then the 49ers don't belong in the same tier with the Seahawks. You could make the argument that both teams are clearly better in which case I'd say we're in a 4 or 5 way tie in tier 3.

But are we elite?...

[run pMc]

I'm not seeing the AZ love. They have a good defense, but they also have Carson Plamer and won 5 games the year before last. I think they're decent, but I think they were a bit of a fluke.
I think CAR is the same -- good defense with a fluky season. Rivera was on the hotseat mid-season before they went on the mother of all hot streaks. They lost 2 starters in the secondary, both starting WRs, and a couple of starting OL. Duplicating their success will not be easy.

GB has won 3 straight NFCN belts. Are we talking about which tier this next year, or just in general over the last 2-3 seasons heading into this year?

If you played 10 games on a neutral field with both teams healthy, I think GB goes

7-3 against CAR, ARI, CHI, and DET
6-4 against PHI and NO
4-6 against SEA and SF

So I think they are 3rd with Rodgers, Matthews, Cobb, Hayward, et al., healthy. I know it's talked ad nauseum about safety; I think TT will get that addressed. Even the village idiot of Packer Nation know they need competent safeties and a pass rush; they'll get it and APRH be a contender.

FWIW I think MIN will be improved and competitive enough to steal some NFCN wins, preferably not at GB's expense.

[Brandon494]

But are we elite?...

When healthy I believe so, we can compete with any team. Elite imo is top 5 and I think we are clearly a top 5 team at the moment.

[Smidgeon]

If you played 10 games on a neutral field with both teams healthy, I think GB goes

7-3 against CAR, ARI, CHI, and DET
6-4 against PHI and NO
4-6 against SEA and SF

With both teams healthy, I'd increase those records to 8-2, 7-3, 5-5. The Packers have led the league in injuries three of the last four years and I'm also not drinking the 9ers or Seahawk koolaid. Seattle had the mother of all Super Bowls, but I see them more like GB post 2010: everybody's hyping, then suddenly there's a bunch of holes.

[Pugger]

Last year the seachickens were the healthiest team going into the playoffs. Most of the time - our SB year in 2010 notwithstanding - the healthiest team in the end wins it all. If Seattle gets hit by the injury bug in 2014 they will falter too. And when they have to actually play their stars the going rate instead of those rookie contracts they won't be able to keep all these good players either.

[texaspackerbacker]

We damn near beat San Fran in greatly weakened condition. Seattle's rise to the top began with that illegitimate win over the Packers. With nothing at all except good health for about half of our injured players from last season, we would have an elite team. Now, with some tuning up of the D - getting Peppers, drafting a Safety or two and maybe an ILB, etc., the Packers should be at the very top of everything.

[KYPack]

Damn, is this THE TPB?

Welcome back, man.

[mraynrand]

We damn near beat San Fran in greatly weakened condition. Seattle's rise to the top began with that illegitimate win over the Packers. With nothing at all except good health for about half of our injured players from last season, we would have an elite team. Now, with some tuning up of the D - getting Peppers, drafting a Safety or two and maybe an ILB, etc., the Packers should be at the very top of everything.

World Class! The anti-Wist!

[pbmax]

Suddenly I am back in the middle. Hello tex.

[Fritz]

We damn near beat San Fran in greatly weakened condition. Seattle's rise to the top began with that illegitimate win over the Packers. With nothing at all except good health for about half of our injured players from last season, we would have an elite team. Now, with some tuning up of the D - getting Peppers, drafting a Safety or two and maybe an ILB, etc., the Packers should be at the very top of everything.


Welcome back, TPB. It's been a long while. I miss your optimism.

Wist, Red - meet your AntiChrist.

[KYPack]

Tex is here.

The old sheriff is back in town.

Those that post in FYI, brace yourself.

[texaspackerbacker]

looks like I gotta get re-acquainted with who's who around here. I really am confused about the timeline of things. I posted long ago in JSOnline, then stopped. Then I started up there again for a short time about a year ago. It seems my history and profile from JSOnline is here. When and under what circumstance did JSOnline morph into Packerrats? Or is my memory really way off?

As for the content of the thread, I can't imagine what would even be controversial in a Packer forum about seeing this Packer team as at or very near the top. The D has been shaky, but should be improved; The Offense arguably has been so good in spite of rather than because of the O-Line, but having Aaron Rodgers makes up for a multitude of shortcomings.

Oh yeah, thanks for the kind words.

[Fritz]

looks like I gotta get re-acquainted with who's who around here. I really am confused about the timeline of things. I posted long ago in JSOnline, then stopped. Then I started up there again for a short time about a year ago. It seems my history and profile from JSOnline is here. When and under what circumstance did JSOnline morph into Packerrats? Or is my memory really way off?

As for the content of the thread, I can't imagine what would even be controversial in a Packer forum about seeing this Packer team as at or very near the top. The D has been shaky, but should be improved; The Offense arguably has been so good in spite of rather than because of the O-Line, but having Aaron Rodgers makes up for a multitude of shortcomings.

Oh yeah, thanks for the kind words.

This is the proverbial waving of the red cape in front of Wist and Red.

Okay, you two - can you 'splain your side to TPB?

[pbmax]

looks like I gotta get re-acquainted with who's who around here. I really am confused about the timeline of things. I posted long ago in JSOnline, then stopped. Then I started up there again for a short time about a year ago. It seems my history and profile from JSOnline is here. When and under what circumstance did JSOnline morph into Packerrats? Or is my memory really way off?

As for the content of the thread, I can't imagine what would even be controversial in a Packer forum about seeing this Packer team as at or very near the top. The D has been shaky, but should be improved; The Offense arguably has been so good in spite of rather than because of the O-Line, but having Aaron Rodgers makes up for a multitude of shortcomings.

Oh yeah, thanks for the kind words.

tex, you met most of these nut cases back at JSO, but after, oh, how to describe..., disagreements with management and emergence of stalkers, large numbers of the posters wandered the internet desert for a while before landing here at Madtown Packer's International House of Messages and Taco Shack several months/possibly a year+ later.

So you posted here for a while too, before ending up on a milk carton.

[MadtownPacker]

Awwwww hell yeah!!! TPB is back !!

[mraynrand]

Awwwww hell yeah!!! TPB is back !!

Will Tyrone Bigguns be right around the corner?

http://www.thewowie.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Chappelle.jpg

[MadtownPacker]

His account has been active and waiting for some time now.

[bobblehead]

We damn near beat San Fran in greatly weakened condition. Seattle's rise to the top began with that illegitimate win over the Packers. With nothing at all except good health for about half of our injured players from last season, we would have an elite team. Now, with some tuning up of the D - getting Peppers, drafting a Safety or two and maybe an ILB, etc., the Packers should be at the very top of everything.

Great googly moogly.....I don't believe my eyes!!

[pbmax]

His account has been active and waiting for some time now.

I thought I saw him at Deadspin at one point, but I don't have an account there and after they were hacked, don't want one.

[bobblehead]

His account has been active and waiting for some time now.

Now, this may be construed as a political statement and you might delete it, but no fucking way in hell Ty returns with the current state of the country and the guys he supports in charge for the last 5 years. Even he knows he can't flame his way outta looking stupid defending his views at the moment. Likely we see him back in...oh, about 11 months. Hope I toed the line.

[pbmax]

Now, this may be construed as a political statement and you might delete it, but no fucking way in hell Ty returns with the current state of the country and the guys he supports in charge for the last 5 years. Even he knows he can't flame his way outta looking stupid defending his views at the moment. Likely we see him back in...oh, about 11 months. Hope I toed the line.

You are like a lab mouse with a cocaine lever sometimes. :D

[bobblehead]

You are like a lab mouse with a cocaine lever sometimes. :D

My comment was strictly based on the likelihood of bigguns' return.....though i do like me some pony.

[mraynrand]

My comment was strictly based on the likelihood of bigguns' return....

Riiiiiight.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=37OWL7AzvHo

[mraynrand]

Now, this may be construed as a political statement and you might delete it, but no fucking way in hell Ty returns with the current state of the country blah blah blah.

maybe he'd just like to talk packer football

[Fritz]

Only Tyrone could make a comment about Dom Capers' 2-4 alignment into a political commentary.

[Zool]

Only Tyrone could make a comment about Dom Capers' 2-4 alignment into a political commentary.

Not only him.

[mraynrand]

Not only him.

Indeed. FYI got it's start by drawing comparisons between football and politics. You should have been around during the Lombardi era. There were a lot of Pols, including JFK who did the same.

^^^^ Ha, ha - see how easy it is!

[MadtownPacker]

You asseaters best STFU. Think I'm messed up well don't fuck with Zool. He is heartless and cold. I'm talking on a Dexter level here bitches. So don't fuck around unless you want to end up wrapped in virtual shrink wrap mfers.

[King Friday]

If Tex is back, then it means Packers are clearly top of tier 2.

[texaspackerbacker]

tex, you met most of these nut cases back at JSO, but after, oh, how to describe..., disagreements with management and emergence of stalkers, large numbers of the posters wandered the internet desert for a while before landing here at Madtown Packer's International House of Messages and Taco Shack several months/possibly a year+ later.

So you posted here for a while too, before ending up on a milk carton.

Thanks. This is pretty much what I wanted to see - how it all happened. I remember a lot of hacking and screweduppedness at JSOnline, and now that you jogged my memory, I vaguely remember posting here too, but I guess I just put everything out of my mind when I stopped. I had no idea I was such a cult figure or whatever. I don't really remember how it ended, but I got out of posting for several years, got divorced and remarried, and then got the urge to start posting again - I think it was early 2013. I tried the '13 version of JSOnline, but I kinda got recruited into PackersHome.com, which I liked better. I like this place better yet, but I've got plenty of time to do justice to both. Most likely, if I stop again, it really does mean I'm dead, but I'm not planning on dying for quite a few decades. You can thank Joemailman for bringing me back here.

[RashanGary]

Welcome back, Tex. Glad to see you posting again :)

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

Hello guy I don't remember!

I think we can beat anyone and since we have to be due for some good health we can win it all.