COMPARING DEFENSES....AND IN DEFENSE OF DOM.........

[Bretsky]

LAST NIGHT WE SAW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AN ELITE DEFENSE AND AVERAGE TALENT

Stack up every defensive starter on Seattle versus every defensive starter for GB
and make your starting roster

Of Our 11 man starting roster....how many of John Schneiders guys make it vs. TT's


Certainly not a single player would warrant consideration on the DL from GB
I don't think a single safety on GB or ILB from GB gets pondered
Clay Mathews cracks the starting lineup...he's probably our only LB to do so
Sherman trumps everybody as the top CB; I am unsure of the 2nd cb

So of the eleven starters, at worst GB has one...my guess is most would have 2, and maybe the most extreme of homers would take 3 of tt's guys vs. 8 of Schneider's guys


HUGE DIFFERENCE on how those defenses are built

[red]

or, you could ask, how many of those players on seatles teamwhould look that good with capers and fat mike coaching them up?

and how many current packers players would look better in seattles system?

[Bretsky]

or, you could ask, how many of those players on seatles teamwhould look that good with capers and fat mike coaching them up?

and how many current packers players would look better in seattles system?



my point is they wouldn't look much better cause they'd be on the bench. our defensive personnel is light years away from the seahawks

[wist43]

my point is they wouldn't look much better cause they'd be on the bench. our defensive personnel is light years away from the seahawks

Some would be on the bench, but some of Seattle's players are cast offs from other teams... and I'm sure Seattle would love to have Daniels; they'd make use of Matthews and Peppers; our corners are damn good, they're not Richard Sherman good, but as a tandem, our corners are top-flight.

To be sure our ILB's are junk - just complete junk. I have to say I was shocked at how pathetic Hawk was. I'm not a Hawk fan to begin with, but good God was he horrible... looked like he can't run anymore - at all; and Jones?? Hopefully we've seen the last of him as a starter.

I think a competent DC could whip our guys into a top 10 defense though... I like a lot of the players, just don't think they are being used to the best of their ability. Your argument has some merit, but not enough - we have talent on defense, dunderdummy and the defensive coaching staff are just completely fucking it up.

[Bretsky]

Some would be on the bench, but some of Seattle's players are cast offs from other teams... and I'm sure Seattle would love to have Daniels; they'd make use of Matthews and Peppers; our corners are damn good, they're not Richard Sherman good, but as a tandem, our corners are top-flight.

To be sure our ILB's are junk - just complete junk. I have to say I was shocked at how pathetic Hawk was. I'm not a Hawk fan to begin with, but good God was he horrible... looked like he can't run anymore - at all; and Jones?? Hopefully we've seen the last of him as a starter.

I think a competent DC could whip our guys into a top 10 defense though... I like a lot of the players, just don't think they are being used to the best of their ability. Your argument has some merit, but not enough - we have talent on defense, dunderdummy and the defensive coaching staff are just completely fucking it up.


You and many others have noted the game is won in the trenches
Our current DL as a whole is nearly as bad as our ILB core
We'd need to replace about half of our starters...bare minimum of 4... on defense to be top 10 IMO

[wist43]

You and many others have noted the game is won in the trenches
Our current DL as a whole is nearly as bad as our ILB core
We'd need to replace about half of our starters...bare minimum of 4... on defense to be top 10 IMO

Our "starters"... what does that mean?? Our base is a niche subpackage that most teams in the league run sparingly - about 1/2 of the teams not at all.

We don't run a legit 3-4, so dunderdummy and TT didn't keep or acquire true 3-4, run stopping DL. They ran Pickett and Jolly out of town, and didn't bring in any other big men - just Pennel. So to run a 3-4, the players we have left are in no way suited to it. Some of them could be used as 3-4 DE's, but they are certainly not prototypical.

Our starting "nosetackle" now is Guion, and he was nothing more than a rotation DT in Minnesota's 4-3 last year. There's no excuse for that, and that is entirely on TT and dunderdummy. They obviously put their heads together and concluded, '... we're not going to run much 3-4, so we don't need 3-4 personnel'.

It comes down to what dunderdummy is asking the players to do. He runs that idiotic 2-4 most of the time - that alone is putting them in a position to fail; and when he does run base 3-4, the players do not fit it. Again - it is not the players, it is the coaching staff and what they are asking the players to do.

All of our defensive line players are best suited to playing a 4-3. To say that the players are to blame for poor results is to give dunderdummy and the coaching staff a complete pass, and falsely lay the blame on the players who are simply being put in impossible situations for their skill set - that is coaching, or rather very poor coaching.

[Maxie the Taxi]

or, you could ask, how many of those players on seatles teamwhould look that good with capers and fat mike coaching them up?

and how many current packers players would look better in seattles system?

I agree. The biggest fail Thursday night was Stubby and Capers. Carroll, Bevell and company put their players in position to succeed. They were innovative and stuck to their game plan. There were a couple of times Carroll punted on 4th and 1. The odds are Beast Mode could have gotten one yard, but Carroll stuck to his plan.

The bottom line is we got more of the same from Stubby and Capers. It was painful watching Cobb going downfield as the deep threat trying to out leap the taller and stronger Seattle secondary. If you're going to hang half your passing game out to dry on Sherman's island, why not suit up Janis and give him the job. At least he'd have the advantage over Sherman in speed and Boykin's strength, size and big-play potential wouldn't have been squandered. Plus, Cobb could do what he does best...operate in space over the middle.

Plus, Stubby talks field position every week, but then he doesn't practice what he preaches. His decision to go for it on 4th and 5 on the Seattle 41 with seven minutes to play in the 3rd quarter and just a 10 point deficit is inexplicable. He rails on about "momentum change." If that wasn't handing Seattle a "momentum change" on a silver platter, what is?

What has the best chance of success and makes the most sense...converting a fourth and five when failure means handing Seattle the ball at mid-field? Or punting and pinning the Seahawks inside the 20 when failure still gets you field position and where a stop is meaningful and where the pressure to prevent a turnover falls on Seattle deep in their own territory.

Plus, when the stated, prime goal of the defense is to stop or at least harness Lynch, you don't suit up your widest body and run stopper at NT? The Packers need a run stuffer like Gilbert Brown or Howard Green if they want to get to the Super Bowl. Pennel had a promising preseason but if he's not the guy TT has to go out and get one or we'll be replaying Thursday night all season.

[sharpe1027]

Give them an off season of PEDs and several will have a chance.