WHAT IS YOUR VIEW OF DOM CAPERS

[Bretsky]

Time for a dam poll

[pbmax]

Positive, experienced. But not the best fit for a Thompson GM'd team. Need someone who has, and will run, almost any defense because you don't know what body type Thompson is going to hit upon. He has adjusted to having man corners and his secondary has pulled itself together with a functional 2nd safety.

If they gave him another ILB besides Matthews, it would be nice to see. McCarthy has obviously tried to push him in that direction and the players claim there is stuff they haven't trotted out yet. NE game would be an obvious one for something new.

I'd rate the coach a B, his fit with personnel a D and his overall effort a C.

[Bretsky]

I was trying to do one of these dam polly things...so now...go cast your vote !!

[red]

Over rated IMO

I roll my eyes and chuckle everytime the camera switches to him and the knobs on tv talk about what a "guru" he is

He may have been a defensive guru at one time, but the rest of the league has figured him out

Average at best DC at this point, and not a fit for the system that TT drafts and builds for

I am somewhere between the first and second answer. I selected the first because i do not think he does a good job with the talent given

[George Cumby]

I voted that he's a moron but would have preferred middle ground options on either side of the middle ground.

[woodbuck27]

I trust wist43's observations. :-)

[RashanGary]

I think he's a really good dc. Glad we have him.

[Pugger]

I think he's pretty average. We don't have a lot of blue chip players on this defense, frankly. And too many of our first round picks can't stay on the field so it is hard to judge completely.

[Maxie the Taxi]

From my armchair point of view, Capers is great at what he does, but what he does is too often average or below average.

His emphasis on linebackers over defensive linemen changed the defensive culture in Green Bay and I'm not too comfortable with that. Capers system relies on scheme to put his LB's in a position to make big plays and, to his credit, the Packers are getting turnovers again.

However, Capers' intensive scheming requires complication and communication, the breakdown of which often leads to big plays by the opposition. Capers system also requires LB's with athleticism and speed. But these types of players are often injured (Mathews, Perry, Neal, Mulumba, Palmer, etc.) leaving more rugged but less gifted athletes (Hawk, Brad Jones) to pick up the slack. Moreover, Capers' schemes may confuse and disrupt mediocre QB's, but elite QB's can figure them out (if given time in the pocket).

In the past the Packers have relied on big, rugged defensive lineman (White, Dotson, Brown, and in 2010 Howard Green, Cullen Jenkins and Ryan Pickett) to create penetration and inside pressure. I'm more comfortable with that, the style of defense in Detroit and St. Louis, the type the NY Giants had a few years ago. All elite QB's have to do to neutralize Capers' scheming is to use their smarts. It's hard for an elite QB to do that if he's getting forced out of the pocket by heavy pressure up the middle from big, defensive linemen.

In Capers defense, Raji is injured and several promising defensive linemen are/were injured or are hampered by inexperience (Jones, Thornton, Pennel). But so long as Capers is here, the emphasis will remain on LB's not the DL. That might be reason enough for me to change coordinators.

Imagine if the Packers had Detroit's DL and our secondary. The effectiveness of the defense wouldn't hinge on a Peppers or a Mathews being a superstar at LB. You'd be OK with more average guys like Mulumba and Elliot, maybe even Hawk and Brad Jones.

[Bretsky]

I think he's pretty average. We don't have a lot of blue chip players on this defense, frankly. And too many of our first round picks can't stay on the field so it is hard to judge completely.


In the offseason when Wist was not around I was often the most critical poster in here of much of our squad....so besides Wist being an awesome poster that was the other reason I'm always glad when he comes back.

But I've never bought into Wistology; he pounds that point home over and over and over and I think some in here have embraced it....perhaps a Packerrats Cult :)

I think Dom is very average. I think he has obvious weaknesses on that defense and gets as much out of them as most other DC's would.

With my view, I think there should be just as many people voting for the Dominator as there are for Domdummy but most should just fall into the middle.

When we lose it seems like Dom gets no credit at all when the defense excels
When we win it seems like the Dom gets all the blame when it does not

[pbmax]

When the Packers finally found a defense in the late 80s with Infante (his second year only) and then Ray Rhodes arrived with Holmgren, the Packers were running a 3-4.

Prior to the Super Bowl year with Shurmur's 4-3 Under, Rhodes had some of the best Packer defenses since Lombardi I believe. This happened before the Browns vacated their ancestral home, so I could easily be dead wrong but I think that is the gist of it. Of course all this followed some of the worst defensive play man has ever seen in the 1980s.

Its not scheme as much as personnel with the Packers. Ted has not hit as many triples on D as he has on O.

[Maxie the Taxi]

When the Packers finally found a defense in the late 80s with Infante (his second year only) and then Ray Rhodes arrived with Holmgren, the Packers were running a 3-4.

Prior to the Super Bowl year with Shurmur's 4-3 Under, Rhodes had some of the best Packer defenses since Lombardi I believe. This happened before the Browns vacated their ancestral home, so I could easily be dead wrong but I think that is the gist of it. Of course all this followed some of the worst defensive play man has ever seen in the 1980s.

Its not scheme as much as personnel with the Packers. Ted has not hit as many triples on D as he has on O.

I'll be the first to agree it's players that make the difference and not the smarts of the Defensive Coach.

However, defensive philosophy sure makes a difference as to what kind/type of players TT drafts. We've been drafting highly rated OLB's and lower rated defensive linemen IMO.

I'd kill for a Ngata or a Suh in the middle of our DL.

[George Cumby]

I think there is talent there, but it isn't being maximized and that's on the coaching staff and the coordinator.

[Tyrion Lannister]

I think he's a really good dc. Glad we have him.

I'm not THAT glad we have him, but I agree that Capers' a good DC.

The Packers have worthless fat turds on the DL and worthless fucks at ILB. Last season, Capers coached a bunch of worthless she-male safeties. Last time I checked, and I checked a second ago, Capers' job title was Defensive Coordinator - not Executive V.P., General Manager & Director of Football Operations.

[smuggler]

I would have voted for 'marginal, but not a dumpster fire' but settled for the middle option.

[Cheesehead Craig]

I voted for firing. I just don't trust him. My biggest complaint has always been that if plan A isn't working, there doesn't seem to be a plan B. So it's his lack of in-game adjustments when things are going badly is what I am most frustrated with.

[gbgary]

he's good. i think the scouting dept needs upgrading though.

[Patler]

If you can have an effective unit only when you have the best players, you aren't a very good coordinator. By effective, I mean middle of the league.
A good coordinator is one who adapts to the players he has and and finds ways to make them effective even if they aren't a "best in the league" type of unit.

Packer defenses have not been merely ineffective, often they have been awful. A good coordinator avoids being awful even with a lot of mediocre players. Face it, due to roster turnover, injuries and what have you, the Packers have had poor O-lines at times, poor running backs and inexperienced WRs at times. Yet, their offense has found ways to remain effective.

I was among those who were concerned with Capers' history. He seemed to field top 10 type defenses for 2-3 years wherever he went, then faded badly. With all the film available to NFL teams, I'm not sure why that would be, but it is.

[Bretsky]

Not sure I buy into all of that completely Patler.

What our defense does not have is Aaron Rodgers; he really masks weaknesses everywhere..being the best qb in the nfl at the most important position.

But I really think the offense parts around Rodgers are also stronger, personnel wise, than the defensive parts around Clay. I think Ted has done a better job filling out the offensive talent than on defense.

[pbmax]

Thompson did find two guys who sort of fit the Rodgers bill: Collins and Woodson.

Matthews, for all the love and hype, just is not a dominant enough pass rusher to single-handedly change an offense. Maybe you need 2-3 of them on D rather than just the one at QB for Offense.

[Patler]

Not sure I buy into all of that completely Patler.

What our defense does not have is Aaron Rodgers; he really masks weaknesses everywhere..being the best qb in the nfl at the most important position.

But I really think the offense parts around Rodgers are also stronger, personnel wise, than the defensive parts around Clay. I think Ted has done a better job filling out the offensive talent than on defense.

I won't dispute that Rodgers makes a lot of difference, BUT a QB alone is limited. I'm not convinced that the offense has had all that much more talent top to bottom than the defense has had. They've just performed better as a unit. MM has maximized the effectiveness of Rodgers and Favre before him even when they had no running game, even when the depth at WR was/is limited due to injuries and roster turnover, even when they have had little at TE because Finley was out, and even when the O-line struggled.

Has Capers maximized the effectiveness of Matthews? Raji? Anyone other than Woodson in 2010? Have the defensive players been that much worse and/or more limited than Newhouse, Saturday, EDS (who I think was a lot worse than his reputation), Kuhn, Quarless, Alex Green, Crabtree, DJ Williams, Boykin, Benson, Barclay and a host of others that the offense has had to rely on at times?

The offense probably has been a somewhat more talented than the defense, but so much so to justify the difference of the offense being one of the best in the league, and the defense one of the worst? I don't think so.

[Joemailman]

.

[mraynrand]

I won't dispute that Rodgers makes a lot of difference, BUT a QB alone is limited. I'm not convinced that the offense has had all that much more talent top to bottom than the defense has had. They've just performed better as a unit. MM has maximized the effectiveness of Rodgers and Favre before him even when they had no running game, even when the depth at WR was/is limited due to injuries and roster turnover, even when they have had little at TE because Finley was out, and even when the O-line struggled.

Has Capers maximized the effectiveness of Matthews? Raji? Anyone other than Woodson in 2010? Have the defensive players been that much worse and/or more limited than Newhouse, Saturday, EDS (who I think was a lot worse than his reputation), Kuhn, Quarless, Alex Green, Crabtree, DJ Williams, Boykin, Benson, Barclay and a host of others that the offense has had to rely on at times?

The offense probably has been a somewhat more talented than the defense, but so much so to justify the difference of the offense being one of the best in the league, and the defense one of the worst? I don't think so.

Good post. But the difference is the QB. Not many defensive players can have the kind of impact of a QB who is one of the top three QBs in the league.

Capers is decent, not great, and like so many coaches, looks so much better with great experienced talent. Can't deny that Packer struck gold in 2010 with Collins, Woodson, Matthews, Williams, and Raji all playing at a high level, plus guys like Pickett, Jenkins, Shields, and Bishop all playing well down the stretch. 2014 could see the same thing if Daniels, Peppers, Matthews, Burnett, and Shields could play like pro bowlers and others could play well consistently down the stretch. It has to start gelling pretty damn soon though...

[woodbuck27]

Good post. But the difference is the QB. Not many defensive players can have the kind of impact of a QB who is one of the top three QBs in the league.

Capers is decent, not great, and like so many coaches, looks so much better with great experienced talent. Can't deny that Packer struck gold in 2010 with Collins, Woodson, Matthews, Williams, and Raji all playing at a high level, plus guys like Pickett, Jenkins, Shields, and Bishop all playing well down the stretch. 2014 could see the same thing if Daniels, Peppers, Matthews, Burnett, and Shields could play like pro bowlers and others could play well consistently down the stretch. It has to start gelling pretty damn soon though...

" It has to start gelling pretty damn soon though..." m

Sometime like ...TODAY Vs the New England Patriots ! It doesn't get much better (more HUGE) than what we hope to see today.

GO PACKERS !

[pbmax]

The offense probably has been a somewhat more talented than the defense, but so much so to justify the difference of the offense being one of the best in the league, and the defense one of the worst? I don't think so.

This is the question I keep coming back to but I get to the opposite conclusion (which is why I don't favor summarily firing him).

Since 2010, rank of Defense on Points Allowed
2011 - 19th
2012 - 11th
2013 - 24th
2014 - 15th

OK, ranks and yearly totals leave a lot of things out, so how about more advanced metrics?

Football Outsiders
2011 - 25th
2012 - 8th
2013 - 31st
2014 - 12th

Just for comparison's sake, Bob Sanders was fired after finishing 22nd in PA and 12th at Football Outsiders. There is a lot of bend but don't break in Capers D, especially the two worst years. Yardage ranks are lower than points allowed.

[Bossman641]

I voted average and my reasoning is as follows. When is the last time we had a truly dominant DL? Raji or Jenkins during the SB run? Even the years that we've had a decent DL it's always been a mix of run pluggers (Jolly/Jenkins) and pass rushers (Daniels). Not enough balanced/2 way players. I don't even need to discuss the LB situation. It's been a revolving door opposite CM3 and the ILB's need a serious upgrade.

[Smidgeon]

Maybe it was injuries forcing Dom's hand, but he hasn't been this creative (2014) since 2010 when he ran the Woodson 2-4 all year. And it's been effective.

We've basically been harping on him for the 2011, 2012, and 2013 defensive failings. But don't those coincide with waaay too many injuries? HHCD may have finally filled Collins' spot (not the same skill, but far from an embarrassment), and that needed filling. Plus Hyde, Hayward, Daniels, etc.

[pbmax]

Health is a big factor here and it was last year in reverse fashion. Only Perry and maybe Hawk were limited yesterday.

[wist43]

So dunderdummy has put together 2 decent games in the last 4... makes me wonder what his motivation is - such as, are TT and MM holding his family hostage and actually forcing him to do his job??

Doing his job for the sake of doing his job doesn't make sense, b/c afterall - he is dunderdummy. Have to assume he's got a gun to his head in some way ;)

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

Haven't looked at the game yet though... saw some of the 4th quarter - I turned it on, and the first 5 plays I saw were NE ramming it down our throats for 50+ yds and a TD, lol...

My brother sent me a text about 1/2 way thru the 2nd quarter and said, "... here comes the 2-4, gonna get ugly now"; and then 3 minutes later, he texted, "... NE TD".

Still, the stats look good, and they kept the score down... Neal's sack near the end saved the day - great play by Neal. I'll look at the game tomorrow.

[gbgary]

liked the barrington move.

[Zool]

So dunderdummy has put together 2 decent games in the last 4... makes me wonder what his motivation is - such as, are TT and MM holding his family hostage and actually forcing him to do his job??

Doing his job for the sake of doing his job doesn't make sense, b/c afterall - he is dunderdummy. Have to assume he's got a gun to his head in some way ;)

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

Haven't looked at the game yet though... saw some of the 4th quarter - I turned it on, and the first 5 plays I saw were NE ramming it down our throats for 50+ yds and a TD, lol...

My brother sent me a text about 1/2 way thru the 2nd quarter and said, "... here comes the 2-4, gonna get ugly now"; and then 3 minutes later, he texted, "... NE TD".

Still, the stats look good, and they kept the score down... Neal's sack near the end saved the day - great play by Neal. I'll look at the game tomorrow.

Packers getting 3 instead of 7, and Brady fitting the ball into some tight places kept the game close. He made some fantastic throws. When the Packers were across the 50, Pats D got the Packers in 3rd and long often. Fun game to watch.

[3irty1]

Over rated IMO

I roll my eyes and chuckle everytime the camera switches to him and the knobs on tv talk about what a "guru" he is

He may have been a defensive guru at one time, but the rest of the league has figured him out

Average at best DC at this point, and not a fit for the system that TT drafts and builds for

I am somewhere between the first and second answer. I selected the first because i do not think he does a good job with the talent given

Overrated is the best description for Capers IMO. And definitely some truth to his fit with TT as well.

Usually he looks worse than he is due to abnormally unhealthy talent, this year looks better than he is due to abnormally healthy talent.

[3irty1]

I won't dispute that Rodgers makes a lot of difference, BUT a QB alone is limited. I'm not convinced that the offense has had all that much more talent top to bottom than the defense has had. They've just performed better as a unit. MM has maximized the effectiveness of Rodgers and Favre before him even when they had no running game, even when the depth at WR was/is limited due to injuries and roster turnover, even when they have had little at TE because Finley was out, and even when the O-line struggled.

Has Capers maximized the effectiveness of Matthews? Raji? Anyone other than Woodson in 2010? Have the defensive players been that much worse and/or more limited than Newhouse, Saturday, EDS (who I think was a lot worse than his reputation), Kuhn, Quarless, Alex Green, Crabtree, DJ Williams, Boykin, Benson, Barclay and a host of others that the offense has had to rely on at times?

The offense probably has been a somewhat more talented than the defense, but so much so to justify the difference of the offense being one of the best in the league, and the defense one of the worst? I don't think so.

I don't agree with this. If anything Dom relies too much on getting the most out of one or two superstars. He's produced 3 DPOY which is way more than his fair share plus had Clay as a finalist in 2010. The issues seem come when the guy you built your system around goes down.

Also its not fair to compare the offense and defense that way. By nature of offense you're imposing your will and know what's coming which makes it way easier to hide a weak player. Defense is always reacting so a weak link on defense is a much bigger liability.

I think Dom is better than his defense's rankings the last few years and worse than his league reputation as a genius innovator.

[MadScientist]

I'd say Dom's biggest flaw is how he hides (or rather fails to hide) deficiencies. He can do good things with a couple of stars and the rest solid if unspectacular, but when there is a hole, it doesn't get covered well. It seems other defenses get by with a limited player on defense better than the Packers.

Last year they had a hole at safety and the defense was a mess. This year started with holes at NT and ILB. Guion improved to shore up the line, but Jones and Hawk were weak links and the defense was bleeding yards. Now that they are on the bench most of the time, the defense looks much better. Yes they failed at some tackles yesterday, but I won't put Bell or Gronk running over people on Dom. I'll take 320 yards and 21 points against NE any time (even in February).

Bottom line is that I would put Dom as an above average DC for his scheming abilities. He is not outstanding because he can't cover up weaker players.

[Bretsky]

So dunderdummy has put together 2 decent games in the last 4... makes me wonder what his motivation is - such as, are TT and MM holding his family hostage and actually forcing him to do his job??

Doing his job for the sake of doing his job doesn't make sense, b/c afterall - he is dunderdummy. Have to assume he's got a gun to his head in some way ;)

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

Haven't looked at the game yet though... saw some of the 4th quarter - I turned it on, and the first 5 plays I saw were NE ramming it down our throats for 50+ yds and a TD, lol...

My brother sent me a text about 1/2 way thru the 2nd quarter and said, "... here comes the 2-4, gonna get ugly now"; and then 3 minutes later, he texted, "... NE TD".

Still, the stats look good, and they kept the score down... Neal's sack near the end saved the day - great play by Neal. I'll look at the game tomorrow.


I came in here thinking even flippin wist has to give him credit for this game. Dom was Domgenius against NE and from what I can see he didn't bracket coverage Gronk at all...and no Gronk didn't get an infinite number of TD's. You can't lose...when the D sux it's all on Dom and when they are great it's the players.

GB has been a better defense since Clay moved to ILB and Dom no longer looks crippled by the pathetic safety play he's had the past few years. This is the first year in a while he has a chance.

[wist43]

I came in here thinking even flippin wist has to give him credit for this game. Dom was Domgenius against NE and from what I can see he didn't bracket coverage Gronk at all...and no Gronk didn't get an infinite number of TD's. You can't lose...when the D sux it's all on Dom and when they are great it's the players.

GB has been a better defense since Clay moved to ILB and Dom no longer looks crippled by the pathetic safety play he's had the past few years. This is the first year in a while he has a chance.

I give credit to dunderdummy for doing what he should have been doing for at least the 3+ years - that doesn't buy him a pass for all of the misery he is responsible for visiting upon us in that time.

As I've said for a few years now - I like the players, and think we can have at least an effective defense if they are used properly. Obviously we have not had an effective defense for the last 3+ years - and since it seems obvious to me we have a decent amount of talent, doesn't it stand to reason that our failings then would have to be dunderdummy's doing??

He is using the players the way I've stated they needed to be used, and we are realizing some success. He may not have bracketed Gronk (I don't know, I'll have to look at the game - plan to watch it with my brother tomorrow), but he's played the front 6/7 the way I've been calling for, and the results have been much, much better.

To me it's common sense - if you're more talented at DL than you are LB; and if your greatest weakness on defense is at ILB - why in heavens name would anyone design a defense to ensure that those weaknesses are on the field full-time, while the more talented players languish on the sideline?? To me, it was obvious that they needed to go to the 3-3 a long time ago.

[Bretsky]

I give credit to dunderdummy for doing what he should have been doing for at least the 3+ years - that doesn't buy him a pass for all of the misery he is responsible for visiting upon us in that time.

As I've said for a few years now - I like the players, and think we can have at least an effective defense if they are used properly. Obviously we have not had an effective defense for the last 3+ years - and since it seems obvious to me we have a decent amount of talent, doesn't it stand to reason that our failings then would have to be dunderdummy's doing??

He is using the players the way I've stated they needed to be used, and we are realizing some success. .


WHO have our safeties been and our ILB's been the three years prior to this one
To blankly say we have the talent while ignoring the improvements TT has given us this year does not seem at all fair
We still have zero's at ILB....but no Dom has more pass rushers, a real safety, and the flexibility to move Clay inside

[wist43]

WHO have our safeties been and our ILB's been the three years prior to this one
To blankly say we have the talent while ignoring the improvements TT has given us this year does not seem at all fair
We still have zero's at ILB....but no Dom has more pass rushers, a real safety, and the flexibility to move Clay inside

HaHa cleaned up Safety - that still would have been an issue to some extent the past few years... that is largely on TT; but dunderdummy surely could have made less of a mess of it.

Our front seven has been good talent wise for a few years now - the problem has been in how dunderdummy used them. The Jumbo 2-4 was a disaster, and the fact that he ran the 2-4 75% of the time has been the largest issue our defense has faced in the previous 3 years.

It has only been this year when MM supposedly got involved in the offseason that dunderdummy has been running 3-4 and 3-3, and predictably the results have been much better.

That said, given the talent he had available to him the last few years he could have used them to much better effect, but he insisted on run the 2-4 and misusing players. He had Perry at LB, when Perry was clearly a fish out of water out there; he ran the 2-4 in base situations all the time; he gameplanned to have Brad Jones and Hawk on the field 24/7, when he could have been mixing his fronts with players like Raji, Neal, Perry, Jolly, Pickett, Daniels, et al... instead of establishing a solid rotation based on situation, he played the 2-4 and teams not only ran over us, they passed thru us like swiss cheese.

And those facts are before anyone begins to look at the embarrassing playoff losses in which our defense was embarrassed multiple times. All of that is on Capers.

[Maxie the Taxi]

HaHa cleaned up Safety - that still would have been an issue to some extent the past few years... that is largely on TT; but dunderdummy surely could have made less of a mess of it.

Our front seven has been good talent wise for a few years now - the problem has been in how dunderdummy used them. The Jumbo 2-4 was a disaster, and the fact that he ran the 2-4 75% of the time has been the largest issue our defense has faced in the previous 3 years.

It has only been this year when MM supposedly got involved in the offseason that dunderdummy has been running 3-4 and 3-3, and predictably the results have been much better.

That said, given the talent he had available to him the last few years he could have used them to much better effect, but he insisted on run the 2-4 and misusing players. He had Perry at LB, when Perry was clearly a fish out of water out there; he ran the 2-4 in base situations all the time; he gameplanned to have Brad Jones and Hawk on the field 24/7, when he could have been mixing his fronts with players like Raji, Neal, Perry, Jolly, Pickett, Daniels, et al... instead of establishing a solid rotation based on situation, he played the 2-4 and teams not only ran over us, they passed thru us like swiss cheese.

And those facts are before anyone begins to look at the embarrassing playoff losses in which our defense was embarrassed multiple times. All of that is on Capers.

Swiss cheese didn't used to pass thru me like it does nowadays. Maybe Dom's just getting old.

[mraynrand]

Health is a big factor here

ding! winner.

[mraynrand]

My view of Capers is terrible - probably because he's hidden up in the coach's box.

[pbmax]

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/rating-the-packers-vs-patriots-b99400423z1-284424981.html


The Packers played 24 snaps in the 3-4.

I believe that is very close to the number of snaps AJ Hawk played.

So against a team with a stout running game that they are willing to use liberally, Capers adjusts by putting out a stouter front more often (though not exclusively). Same as he has done against the Jets, Atlanta, the Vikings, the 49ers and Seahawks. Its almost as if he watches film, maps tendencies and adjusts accordingly. Like any sane person would.

There is nothing unsound in the design of the approach. Yes, he leverages against the pass earlier than some other DCs, but we are talking 5-7 snaps a game of difference. There is a critique of Capers and why he hasn't been more consistent and successful with the Packers.

Unsoundness and lunacy aren't it.

[Maxie the Taxi]

Hawk played 26 snaps.

[Maxie the Taxi]

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/rating-the-packers-vs-patriots-b99400423z1-284424981.html



I believe that is very close to the number of snaps AJ Hawk played.

So against a team with a stout running game that they are willing to use liberally, Capers adjusts by putting out a stouter front more often (though not exclusively). Same as he has done against the Jets, Atlanta, the Vikings, the 49ers and Seahawks. Its almost as if he watches film, maps tendencies and adjusts accordingly. Like any sane person would.

There is nothing unsound in the design of the approach. Yes, he leverages against the pass earlier than some other DCs, but we are talking 5-7 snaps a game of difference. There is a critique of Capers and why he hasn't been more consistent and successful with the Packers.

Unsoundness and lunacy aren't it.

Neither is intentional wrongdoing. There is no reason to think Capers is not trying his best to do what's necessary for the Packers to win.

[Fritz]

I give credit to dunderdummy for doing what he should have been doing for at least the 3+ years - that doesn't buy him a pass for all of the misery he is responsible for visiting upon us in that time.

As I've said for a few years now - I like the players, and think we can have at least an effective defense if they are used properly. Obviously we have not had an effective defense for the last 3+ years - and since it seems obvious to me we have a decent amount of talent, doesn't it stand to reason that our failings then would have to be dunderdummy's doing??

He is using the players the way I've stated they needed to be used, and we are realizing some success. He may not have bracketed Gronk (I don't know, I'll have to look at the game - plan to watch it with my brother tomorrow), but he's played the front 6/7 the way I've been calling for, and the results have been much, much better.

To me it's common sense - if you're more talented at DL than you are LB; and if your greatest weakness on defense is at ILB - why in heavens name would anyone design a defense to ensure that those weaknesses are on the field full-time, while the more talented players languish on the sideline?? To me, it was obvious that they needed to go to the 3-3 a long time ago.

I think your original argument was that having linebackers lining up on the line and counting them as defensive lineman was wrong because they were too light and small to do the job, and thus that alignment was not really a 3-3 or 3-4.

You've clearly backtracked from that line, so that now, when the Packer defense, piloted by Capers, gives up only 21 to the Patriots (contrary to your predictions), you claim that Capers is doing what you said he should, and that's why they played well.

You are a piece of work, dude.

[wist43]

I think your original argument was that having linebackers lining up on the line and counting them as defensive lineman was wrong because they were too light and small to do the job, and thus that alignment was not really a 3-3 or 3-4.

You've clearly backtracked from that line, so that now, when the Packer defense, piloted by Capers, gives up only 21 to the Patriots (contrary to your predictions), you claim that Capers is doing what you said he should, and that's why they played well.

You are a piece of work, dude.

Oy vey, lol...

I think you guys read every 3rd word I write, and fill the inbetweens with your own prerecordings...

I've never deviated in my contention of how these personnel should be used. Yes, the way Dom ran his 2-4, both the jumbo and the pass rush version was severely flawed, and I've pointed out why on both counts.

I've also laid out the case for why the 3-3 is vastly superior, given our personnel, and that does involve having more size and pass rush on the field simultaneously. For the longest time I've wanted to have Perry inserted as a down linemen b/c 1) he is bigger than Brad Jones, 2) I wanted him as a down linemen, not a LB b/c he wasn't natural at LB, and he's stated all along he wanted to play DL, 3) played inside the T's he gives us better gap control, and thus we are better equipped to handle the run, should the opponent decide to run it, and 4) he provided much more pass rush potential than anything that could be generated out of dunderdummy's Jumbo.

The next thing I wanted done was to have Neal at either OLB or ILB. Since I think Neal is a very good outside rusher, my preference was to have him on the outside, and use Matthews as a rover. Before we signed Peppers we would have necessarily had to play either Brad Jones, Hawk, or Lattimore somewhere, but now with Peppers - and given our personnel, it is entirely doable to craft nickel alignments that don't have either Brad Jones or Hawk on the field at all - and of course we are much the better for it.

What you are referrencing with the LB's rushing from the 2-4 is that I don't accept the argument that that alignment is in effect a 4-2 simply b/c the 2 OLB's always rush. I don't like that alignment b/c 1) it is very static and predictable, thus easy to block, 2) it ensures that Brad Jones and Hawk remain on the field, 3) it ensures that more talented players like Perry, Neal, and D. Jones are left standing on the sidelines, 4) there are fewer downlinemen firing off and taking on offensive linemen with leverage, and 5) it limits pass rush/blitz options.

The 3-3 is the cure all for all those things - and now that dunderdummy is actually running much more 3-3 and 3-4, our defense is starting to look like a legitimate NFL defense. It only took dunderdummy how many years to come around to this realization??

[ThunderDan]

I think your original argument was that having linebackers lining up on the line and counting them as defensive lineman was wrong because they were too light and small to do the job, and thus that alignment was not really a 3-3 or 3-4.

You've clearly backtracked from that line, so that now, when the Packer defense, piloted by Capers, gives up only 21 to the Patriots (contrary to your predictions), you claim that Capers is doing what you said he should, and that's why they played well.

You are a piece of work, dude.

He wouldn't even give me Peppers as OLB in the 2-4 playing on the line as a DE. Now he must have counted him as a down lineman I think for this week's game.

[wist43]

I think your original argument was that having linebackers lining up on the line and counting them as defensive lineman was wrong because they were too light and small to do the job, and thus that alignment was not really a 3-3 or 3-4.

You've clearly backtracked from that line, so that now, when the Packer defense, piloted by Capers, gives up only 21 to the Patriots (contrary to your predictions), you claim that Capers is doing what you said he should, and that's why they played well.

You are a piece of work, dude.

I would add to my above post - that my prediction of the game was predicated upon my believe that dunderdummy would be dunderdummy, i.e. that he would revert back to his 2-4, and run his keystone cops anti-coverage scheme.

He obviously ran a lot of what I've been calling for for a long time, and we held them in check and won the game. It sounds like we didn't double Gronk a lot, so if that is the case, I am quite surprised that we held him in check without doubling him. I'm going to watch the game tonight, so I'll pay close attention to how they dealt with Gronk.

The fact is - the fact that you guys can't bring yourselves to admit - is that dunderdummy is finally running the scheme I've been calling for all this time, and it's working. As much as you may hate it - the success of running the 3-3 and more 3-4 is vindicating my arguments in spades.

By the same token, the fact that you guys have argued with me every step of the way, i.e. defending dunderdummy and the 2-4 - proves that you've been wrong all along, and that your attempts to sling shit at my arguments were exactly that - shit!!

[wist43]

He wouldn't even give me Peppers as OLB in the 2-4 playing on the line as a DE. Now he must have counted him as a down lineman I think for this week's game.

Tell ya what... I'm gonna watch the game tonight - I'll note every defensive down, and give you a run down of personnel, alignment, down and distance, and result.

How's that??

[mraynrand]

Tell ya what... I'm gonna watch the game tonight - I'll note every defensive down, and give you a run down of personnel, alignment, down and distance, and result.

How's that??

http://www.quickmeme.com/img/ed/ed835527bfeacd63ea6338ab33c474b69744c6b8218d8f6d52 437fc92139772b.jpg

[wist43]

http://www.quickmeme.com/img/ed/ed835527bfeacd63ea6338ab33c474b69744c6b8218d8f6d52 437fc92139772b.jpg

You guys just hate that I'm right, lol...

I would expect that out of the rabble - but I expect a little more intellectual honesty out of you ayn ;)

[mraynrand]

You guys just hate that I'm right, lol...

I would expect that out of the rabble - but I expect a little more intellectual honesty out of you ayn ;)

You cannot be serious!
http://www.webtennis.com/players/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/john_mcenroe.jpg

[mraynrand]

Wist, Capers adjusts. He really does. People have viewpoints that differ from you, and that's fine, but in some ways you are not arguing honestly. When presented with facts that don't fit your view, you've been changing conditions, etc., just as you did when I presented you with the exact numbers, down and distance for the 2-4 versus the 3-3. Dave, this conversation can serve no purpose anymore. Goodbye.

http://i.ytimg.com/vi/x56O4G8VsiA/hqdefault.jpg

[3irty1]

For years I've been saying this defense would be better if they'd just stay healthy. Dom finally took my advice and look at the result. You're welcome guys.

[Cheesehead Craig]

For years I've been saying this defense would be better if they'd just stay healthy. Dom finally took my advice and look at the result. You're welcome guys.

http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/alial1222/guinness-brilliant.jpg#guinness%20brilliant

[RashanGary]

If we win our second Super Bowl in the last 4 years with Capers lead defenses, wist will disappear for a few months, like last time, then come back calling him dunderdummy when he can't hold teams to 3 pints per game every game, every year, no matter how many injuries or circumstNces.

[Zool]

If we win our second Super Bowl in the last 4 years with Capers lead defenses, wist will disappear for a few months, like last time, then come back calling him dunderdummy when he can't hold teams to 3 pints per game every game, every year, no matter how many injuries or circumstNces.

3 pints per game would really hurt the Packers bottom line. I'd say each fan goes at least 4.5 pints per game.

[Maxie the Taxi]

3 pints per game would really hurt the Packers bottom line. I'd say each fan goes at least 4.5 pints per game.

Do you have stats to back that up? Link please! :???:

[pbmax]

For years I've been saying this defense would be better if they'd just stay healthy. Dom finally took my advice and look at the result. You're welcome guys.

I think KFC thursday was the entire problem.

[wist43]

If we win our second Super Bowl in the last 4 years with Capers lead defenses, wist will disappear for a few months, like last time, then come back calling him dunderdummy when he can't hold teams to 3 pints per game every game, every year, no matter how many injuries or circumstNces.

Are you even 30 years old yet??

Get back to me after you have a couple of heart attacks ;)

[wist43]

Okay, here's the FF version of going thru the game...

Didn't really break anything down - tried to make an observation here and there, but for the most part I just denoted alignment, down/distance, personnel, and result.

One thing that stood out to me was Barrington - he was down right studly at times... loved his play at ILB, and hope he is now a fixture.

The other thing that stood out to me was the amount of 2-4 dunderdummy played in the 1st half. We were starting to bleed in the 2nd Quarter running the 2-4, but dunderdummy did the right thing and abandoned it in the 2nd half.

We were starting to bleed running the 2-4, but NE didn't take full advantage by the fact that they ran the ball very little. By the end of game NE had 18 rushing attempts (17 really - Brady kneel down) and 35 passing attempts - penalties notwithstanding.

So out of 55 snaps (some penalties that wiped plays out included), dunderdummy ran the following alignments:

3-4, 23 times
2-4, 14 times
3-3, 5 times
3-2 dime, 3 times
2-3 dime, 7 times
4-3, 1 time
4-2, 1 time
Goal line defense (5 down linemen), 1 time

Gronk was kept in check with man coverage and a lot of zone help. It was exactly the type of coverage that I called for. He did manage to shake loose a couple of times, and on a couple of those he was lined up outside the numbers. Outstanding job on Gronk throughout the game.

When dunderdummy was in the 2-4, NE should have run the ball, but they didn't - and in all honesty, dunderdummy did not run his usual 2-4, he crowded the LOS, filled gaps, and Barrington played lightyears better than anyone we've had at ILB in a long, long time. That said, NE did realize most of their success against the 2-4 when dunderdummy did run it... most notably in the 2nd Quarter.

Dunderdummy did then adjust and he only ran the 2-4 1 time in the 2nd half. He did run some 2 man lines in the Dime, but he brought pressure on those snaps, and on several occassions had both Matthews and Peppers coming on the blitz from ILB positions. Excellent mixing of the blitz.

In the 2nd half, dunderdummy ran the 3-4 predominately - even running against 4 WR's and Gronk, i.e. no RB's on the field.

I give dunderdummy a lot of credit for a good game plan - abandoning the 2-4 when it was beginning to hemorrhage in the 2nd Quarter, and mixing fronts and blitzes very effectively. At the same time, he did not vary his coverage much - and given that the coverage was very effective, i.e. man up on Gronk with zone help, and excellent zone play underneath, dunderdummy made the right calls throughout the game.

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

All of that said - I do not trust dunderdummy, and will never trust dunderdummy :)

[woodbuck27]

Tell ya what... I'm gonna watch the game tonight - I'll note every defensive down, and give you a run down of personnel, alignment, down and distance, and result.

How's that??

http://www.foxsports.com/wisconsin/story/packers-report-card-offense-outperforms-patriots-in-statement-win-120114


Packers report card: Offense outperforms Patriots in statement win

Paul Imig ... FOX Sports Wisconsin

DEC 01, 2014 1:00p ET

I watched the game again today. One player really stood out to me on our 'D'

That was Clay Matthews. He was flying all over. I felt he had the best game for us on the 'D'.

AJ Hawk was out and Sam Barrington in and that move helped the 'D'.

Our secondary is small. I'll be happy when TT gets CB's on board that are taller, fast and more physical. I realize that's a difficult task.

The Packers still have lots to be desired tackling (tackling high doesn't cut it) and often the secondary play receivers too soft or too up and personal near the LOS and get beat early. Tramon Williams didn't have the game I originally thought he had. In fairness to him and our secondary. NE has very quick WR's in LaFell and Edelman.

The front of the 'D' just did enough to keep Tom Brady off balance.

Tom Brady overall still had a solid effort with a QBR > 100. He remains a solid MVP candidate.

MM has lots of work to do with his team to get it to the Super Bowl. This win all the same has to be a real confidence booster and that's good as long as the packers don't rest on it for any length of time.

GO PACK GO !

[pbmax]

Gronk was kept in check with man coverage and a lot of zone help. It was exactly the type of coverage that I called for. He did manage to shake loose a couple of times, and on a couple of those he was lined up outside the numbers. Outstanding job on Gronk throughout the game.


McGinn: Unofficially, here were the top five primary defenders on TE Rob Gronkowski's 31 routes: Morgan Burnett (nine), Clinton-Dix (seven), Micah Hyde (four), Matthews (four) and Davon House (three).

Packers played single high safety for almost the entire game. What zone support was over the top if it was single-safety?

From Tramon Williams: http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/packers-safeties-earn-draw-vs-gronk-b99399847z1-284287911.html

Surprisingly, the Packers did not direct extra attention Gronkowski's way. Williams said the plan was to stick to their defense, their principles — defensive coordinator Dom Capers didn't want to bracket "Gronk" with extra defenders. With Brady so skilled at creating advantageous matchups, at making pedestrian receivers seem like All-Pros, the Packers played a lot of man-to-man coverage and simplified the thinking on the back end.

[woodbuck27]

McGinn: Unofficially, here were the top five primary defenders on TE Rob Gronkowski's 31 routes: Morgan Burnett (nine), Clinton-Dix (seven), Micah Hyde (four), Matthews (four) and Davon House (three).

Packers played single high safety for almost the entire game. What zone support was over the top if it was single-safety?

From Tramon Williams: http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/packers-safeties-earn-draw-vs-gronk-b99399847z1-284287911.html

That makes sense to me.

The MVP of that team isn't Rob Grokowski rather it's Tom Brady.

Play it 11 on 11 and don't double up on Gronk and leave 9 on 10.

[wist43]

McGinn: Unofficially, here were the top five primary defenders on TE Rob Gronkowski's 31 routes: Morgan Burnett (nine), Clinton-Dix (seven), Micah Hyde (four), Matthews (four) and Davon House (three).

Packers played single high safety for almost the entire game. What zone support was over the top if it was single-safety?

From Tramon Williams: http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/packers-safeties-earn-draw-vs-gronk-b99399847z1-284287911.html

Zone support was underneath... many times Gronk was manned up with zone support underneath. Yes we were in single high safety most of the game, and Gronk was passed along to the safety very effectively when we were not in man against him.

Overall they did an outstanding job of containing Gronk... I haven't watched a lot of NE this year, not sure how often they line him up outside the numbers, but they did that several times against us, and he had some catches out there. I can only suspect that they were trying to free him up from all the traffic and interference he was encountering inside the numbers. Very effective job on Gronk.

Oddly, I saw Matthews outside covering a WR... WTF?? lol... It looked as if dunderdummy simply did not want to change out of base personnel - I suspect due to any confusion that might result from having so much changeover in personnel from snap to snap - we did not substitute very liberally in this game, and think that helped a lot. Snap in, snap out, we had our best players on the field - no Brad Jones, less Hawk; more Neal, more Perry, more D. Jones...

Capers played base 3-4 most of the 2nd half, regardless of offensive personnel. As I mentioned, he was even in base 3-4 against 4 wides and Gronk.

[Bretsky]

Zone support was underneath... many times Gronk was manned up with zone support underneath. Yes we were in single high safety most of the game, and Gronk was passed along to the safety very effectively when we were not in man against him.

Overall they did an outstanding job of containing Gronk... I haven't watched a lot of NE this year, not sure how often they line him up outside the numbers, but they did that several times against us, and he had some catches out there. I can only suspect that they were trying to free him up from all the traffic and interference he was encountering inside the numbers. Very effective job on Gronk.

Oddly, I saw Matthews outside covering a WR... WTF?? lol... It looked as if dunderdummy simply did not want to change out of base personnel - I suspect due to any confusion that might result from having so much changeover in personnel from snap to snap - we did not substitute very liberally in this game, and think that helped a lot. Snap in, snap out, we had our best players on the field - no Brad Jones, less Hawk; more Neal, more Perry, more D. Jones...

Capers played base 3-4 most of the 2nd half, regardless of offensive personnel. As I mentioned, he was even in base 3-4 against 4 wides and Gronk.


Come on man; just set yourself free and admit you were completely wrong and off base in the way you noted Dom would call this game and melt down. Dom called a fabulous game and outsmarted Josh McDaniels.

Gronk didn't score 6 plus TD's as you noted, and IMO Capers didn't just do what you told him to by bracketing Gronk the entire game.

We might need to have a packerrats session with you to rid yourself of the Dom Demons :))

[Bretsky]

For years I've been saying this defense would be better if they'd just stay healthy. Dom finally took my advice and look at the result. You're welcome guys.


This, along with the addition of HaHa and Julius, is about the best logic on why the defense is getting better the thread has offered.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I'd think a lot more of Dom Capers if he was the defensive coordinator for two Super Bowl champions at the end of the year.
:-)

[wist43]

Come on man; just set yourself free and admit you were completely wrong and off base in the way you noted Dom would call this game and melt down. Dom called a fabulous game and outsmarted Josh McDaniels.

Gronk didn't score 6 plus TD's as you noted, and IMO Capers didn't just do what you told him to by bracketing Gronk the entire game.

We might need to have a packerrats session with you to rid yourself of the Dom Demons :))

What is with you guys... good grief. He did call the game largely the way I've been calling for, and he did bracket Gronk - not every play, but it's impossible to do the same thing play after play. You guys are so determined to poke me in the eye, that if 1 single play doesn't fit my narrative you're calling shenanigans on me... get over it.

I said Dom called a good game. I went thru the game, quickly I admit, but from what I saw I liked just about everything he did... I still don't trust the guy, and never will - I know his history, and I know he can't be trusted; but for a 1 game deal, for a few game stretch?? He's shown marked improvement.

I've been saying all along that I like the players - if Dom can get out of his own way long enough, I think we have the talent to make a run at a title. Heretofore I haven't been in the least optimistic that could happen b/c of Dom's track record and recent history, but if he can keep his shit together for another 7 games, we have a decent shot - but that's a big IF.

[Maxie the Taxi]

Wist:

It looked as if dunderdummy simply did not want to change out of base personnel - I suspect due to any confusion that might result from having so much changeover in personnel from snap to snap - we did not substitute very liberally in this game, and think that helped a lot. Snap in, snap out, we had our best players on the field - no Brad Jones, less Hawk; more Neal, more Perry, more D. Jones...

Capers:

“I would say it would vary from week to week,” Capers said. “Again, based off what our opponent is doing, you’ll see different personnel groups and different people involved in those. It could change from one week to the next based on your injury situation, who’s available. The purpose is to try to get your best 11 people against who they put out there and the match-ups.”

It seems the common goal is to get the best 11 players on the field at any one time. I really don't understand what the fuss is all about.;-)

[wist43]

Wist:


Capers:


It seems the common goal is to get the best 11 players on the field at any one time. I really don't understand what the fuss is all about.;-)

Well, 4 wides and Matthews lined up as a cornerback?? Even I wouldn't have done that, lol...

There were also many occasions in which Barrington was on the field - which I counted as a 3-4, but he was actually lined up 10 yds off the slot receiver. He wasn't in man coverage, but that is where he lined up. He played the underneath zone between the hash and the numbers, ala Cam Chancellor.

Against NE, we were very effective against their 3 and 4 WR packages out of the base - I have argued we should have been playing more base against 3 WR sets, but I would have dumped Hawk for a DB against the 4 WR sets NE showed. Regardless, anything is better than that static, or jumbo 2-4 Capers used to run.

NE was able to get the ball moving against the 2-4, but dunderdummy 1) played tight coverage behind it, 2) wasn't entirely static in his presnap movement, and 3) didn't stay with it when they began to get the better of it. All 3 of those conditions have been sorely lacking for over 3 years now.

I hate to think there is hope - b/c dunderdummy has such an abysmal track record. For all we know, he'll behave himself all the way to the Superbowl, and then on Super Sunday he'll revert back to his static 2-4 and stab us in the heart. No matter that he did a good job in this game - and he did - he simply cannot be trusted, ever.

[Fritz]

Okay, here's the FF version of going thru the game...

Didn't really break anything down - tried to make an observation here and there, but for the most part I just denoted alignment, down/distance, personnel, and result.

One thing that stood out to me was Barrington - he was down right studly at times... loved his play at ILB, and hope he is now a fixture.

The other thing that stood out to me was the amount of 2-4 dunderdummy played in the 1st half. We were starting to bleed in the 2nd Quarter running the 2-4, but dunderdummy did the right thing and abandoned it in the 2nd half.

We were starting to bleed running the 2-4, but NE didn't take full advantage by the fact that they ran the ball very little. By the end of game NE had 18 rushing attempts (17 really - Brady kneel down) and 35 passing attempts - penalties notwithstanding.

So out of 55 snaps (some penalties that wiped plays out included), dunderdummy ran the following alignments:

3-4, 23 times
2-4, 14 times
3-3, 5 times
3-2 dime, 3 times
2-3 dime, 7 times
4-3, 1 time
4-2, 1 time
Goal line defense (5 down linemen), 1 time

Gronk was kept in check with man coverage and a lot of zone help. It was exactly the type of coverage that I called for. He did manage to shake loose a couple of times, and on a couple of those he was lined up outside the numbers. Outstanding job on Gronk throughout the game.

When dunderdummy was in the 2-4, NE should have run the ball, but they didn't - and in all honesty, dunderdummy did not run his usual 2-4, he crowded the LOS, filled gaps, and Barrington played lightyears better than anyone we've had at ILB in a long, long time. That said, NE did realize most of their success against the 2-4 when dunderdummy did run it... most notably in the 2nd Quarter.

Dunderdummy did then adjust and he only ran the 2-4 1 time in the 2nd half. He did run some 2 man lines in the Dime, but he brought pressure on those snaps, and on several occassions had both Matthews and Peppers coming on the blitz from ILB positions. Excellent mixing of the blitz.

In the 2nd half, dunderdummy ran the 3-4 predominately - even running against 4 WR's and Gronk, i.e. no RB's on the field.

I give dunderdummy a lot of credit for a good game plan - abandoning the 2-4 when it was beginning to hemorrhage in the 2nd Quarter, and mixing fronts and blitzes very effectively. At the same time, he did not vary his coverage much - and given that the coverage was very effective, i.e. man up on Gronk with zone help, and excellent zone play underneath, dunderdummy made the right calls throughout the game.

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

All of that said - I do not trust dunderdummy, and will never trust dunderdummy :)

When you look at the above underlined sections, it's just as we knew, and as I posted earlier in another thread -

On playing Gronkowski - you claim above that the Packers played him just as you called for - I wrote:

"As far as I could tell, Capers refused to double or bracket Gronk, yet somehow, miraculously, the Patriots only scored 21, and I don't think Gronk scored those three touchdowns you were so sure he'd get."

So even though no one - not here, not at the JSO, not even the players who played the game (see Tramon Williams's quote from PB's post) - except you is maintaining that the Packers doubled Gronk, by your line of "reasoning," by golly, they actually did.

On how you'd manage to not give credit - I wrote:

"But don't forget to trot out your old schtick about how, really, the other team screwed it up. In this case, I imagine you'll say that if Belichek had run the ball lots more, the Patriots would've surely won."

Sure enough, there you go again - see the above underlined section.


Ding ding ding ding ding! Winner winner chicken dinner!

You live in one strange universe.

[wist43]

When you look at the above underlined sections, it's just as we knew, and as I posted earlier in another thread -

On playing Gronkowski - you claim above that the Packers played him just as you called for - I wrote:

"As far as I could tell, Capers refused to double or bracket Gronk, yet somehow, miraculously, the Patriots only scored 21, and I don't think Gronk scored those three touchdowns you were so sure he'd get."

So even though no one - not here, not at the JSO, not even the players who played the game (see Tramon Williams's quote from PB's post) - except you is maintaining that the Packers doubled Gronk, by your line of "reasoning," by golly, they actually did.

On how you'd manage to not give credit - I wrote:

"But don't forget to trot out your old schtick about how, really, the other team screwed it up. In this case, I imagine you'll say that if Belichek had run the ball lots more, the Patriots would've surely won."

Sure enough, there you go again - see the above underlined section.


Ding ding ding ding ding! Winner winner chicken dinner!

You live in one strange universe.

"As far as I can tell..." you don't understand the first thing about football or strategy - so you really don't have much standing to critique anything I've said.

We did double Gronk a lot; with man coverage and zone help. Doubling a receiver doesn't mean that 2 guys line up head on the guy and both run with him at the snap, ala a gunner on punt coverage.

As for running the ball - it is our achilles heel. I think most people expected NE to run the ball more - Dom played the 3-4 most of the time, regardless of offensive personnel, but NE didn't test it enough for anyone to know if they could have effectively controlled the ball on the ground. It is what it is... if I were them, I would have run the ball more, and would have come in with a run-heavy gameplan.

So since you are taking umbrage with my arguments - I assume you would have preferred that dunderdummy run the 2-4 the whole game?? Or that they should have played Brad Jones and Hawk the whole game?? Or that they shouldn't have accounted for Gronk with bracketed and over the top coverage??

I find it amazing that you guys are so offended by good results. If you had your way, we'd still be running the 2-4 24/7, and you'd be attacking me b/c I deign to attack the approach that is leading to poor performance - how dare anyone question the Gods that reside at 1265??

[RashanGary]

Wist,

Capers does different things because he has different players. The addition of Peppers and the growth of Neal/Perry into their new roles means Capers can do different things. I'm pretty sure he wanted to do better than last year too. It's the NFL. If you get a championship every few years, you're doing ducking great.

[channtheman]

Wist,

Capers does different things because he has different players. The addition of Peppers and the growth of Neal/Perry into their new roles means Capers can do different things. I'm pretty sure he wanted to do better than last year too. It's the NFL. If you get a championship every few years, you're doing ducking great.

Ducking great indeed.

[George Cumby]

Is it just me or does reading this thread make anyone else feel like they are wandering the desert with Moses?

[Bossman641]

He wouldn't even give me Peppers as OLB in the 2-4 playing on the line as a DE. Now he must have counted him as a down lineman I think for this week's game.

I remember that conversation. As far a I can tell, if Peppers and Perry line up as the OLB in a 2-4 and it works, Wist counts that as crowding the line and attacking the LOS (regardless of whether Perry and Peppers are in a 2 or 3 point stance). If it doesn't work, it's an example of dunderdummy conceding the run and running his tired old 2-4.

[Zool]

Is it just me or does reading this thread make anyone else feel like they are wandering the desert with Moses?

More like standing on a street corner with someone screaming at the top of their lungs about the end of days.

[Fritz]

McGinn: Unofficially, here were the top five primary defenders on TE Rob Gronkowski's 31 routes: Morgan Burnett (nine), Clinton-Dix (seven), Micah Hyde (four), Matthews (four) and Davon House (three).

Packers played single high safety for almost the entire game. What zone support was over the top if it was single-safety?

From Tramon Williams: http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/packers-safeties-earn-draw-vs-gronk-b99399847z1-284287911.html



Wist, I've never claimed to be an expert football analyst. But when Tramon Williams says there was not extra help, and the JSO supports that, and my own (limited) knowledge supports that, then it's hard for me to just go along with your claim.

What I'm contending is that you have created a narrative that suits you, and you either ignore or bend any evidence that contradicts your set-in-concrete views. This is something most of us do, to some extent, but you take it to extremes that are hard to stomach.

I think I'll just refrain from commenting any further on your posts. Life's too short.

[vince]

This from the Official Packers-Pats Discussion Thread


Gronk could have 23 catches for 289 yds, and 6 TD's.
...
Brady will throw for at least 5 TD's against Capers.
...
I looked at an early line that had us favored by 3, but I don't buy that at all - NE is very well coached, and we have the eternal liability that is dunderdummy... I'll be shocked if we win this game.
...
I expect this game will look very much like the New Orleans game. Brees threw for 311 yds and 3 TDs, and they ran for 194 yds.
...
You guys need to take the rose colored glasses off and look at the MO of dunderdummy... you guys are such homers, lol
...
Like dunderdummy has any intention whatsoever of covering anybody??
...
Whether we are in base, nickel, or dime... dunderdummy will let receivers run wide open all over the field - it's what he does.
...
The Pats won't afford us the same courtesy - they'll cover everyone short tight and make Rodgers hold the ball.
...
Talentwise - I think we can win this game; coaching on the other hand... we're way outclassed.
...
They'll have their way with dunderdummy - complete mismatch in terms of coaching.
...
I wish I owned every Patriot in fanstasy this week.
...
dunderdummy does so many things that are unsound, that it compounds the mess we have at ILB.
...
The Vikings just held us to 24 pts... if we score 24 against the Pats, we'll get blown out.
...
We have no identity on defense, and we never will as long as dunderdummy is our DC.
...
And yes, I"m assuming a late Packer TD to make it semi-respectable... I simply don't think Capers is any match for a good offense.
...
Dunderdummy has stated openly how much of a pussy he is, i.e. that elite QB's must not be challenged in any way. He will be content to sit back and let Brady pick us apart all day long...
...
You guys don't want to look at reality - you'd rather shoot the messenger.

In the same thread, you also went on to rip the OL on the heels of a strong performance both run and pass blocking against Minnesota - on top of a strong run of dominating performances which demonstrates they're shaping into one of the top lines in the league.

Then Fritz prophesizes about your likely retorts before they're even made and you comically fall right into form, ignoring facts, twisting some, and making up others .. and then this gem.

You guys just hate that I'm right, lol...

I would expect that out of the rabble - but I expect a little more intellectual honesty out of you ayn ;)
And you wonder why the homers and rabble take you on with these proclamations. You can only ignore for so many months/years before it's time for a calling-out, so I'm gonna follow Fritz' lead.

Wist you really are a broken record of doom and gloom followed by selective reasoning to support your perspectives, no matter how wrong or misguided.

The one that sticks out to me was when you proclaimed with authority that the Packers were minimum of two years away from being "remotely competitive" - the offseason before they won the Super Bowl.

The (un)funny thing is you actually believe yourself wist. Denial is a powerful force I see.

It's really tough to win it all, but I'd bet my left nut that if the Packers come up short somehow, you'll once again step up on your perch and proclaim how you've been right all along - and the NFL defensive coordinator who has dedicated pretty much every waking minute of his adult life to scheming and coaching some of the best players in the world to stop some other of the best players in the world can't hold your jock or that of the neighborhood Pop Warner coach when it comes to understanding football.

Based on some of the responses you get to your posts, I don't think I'm alone when I say ... It really does get old man. Maybe you exaggerate to make your point (the same one over and over and over and over. I hope you have a shortcut set up for dunderdummy because you've had to have worn out a few D's on the ol keyboard by now), but reread those quotes of yours. You'd have been hard-pressed to have been more wrong about the game - and then to make it worse you try to twist things around and proclaim that you were right. Dunder finally listened. Whoda thunkit. Everyone's wrong a lot, but you're just so far out of touch not seeing it that I don't even know what else to say.

[denverYooper]

As KY would say, "that's one king hell post Vince".

[George Cumby]

More like standing on a street corner with someone screaming at the top of their lungs about the end of days.

Much more apropos. Well done, sir.

[wist43]

Even though there are others that agree with me that Capers has been an ongoing disaster for several years now - I'm about the only that that takes up the fight; therefore, I am a single voice of logic and honesty in opposition to the intellectual dishonesty of the homers.

Capers has, in fact, made many of the adjustments I've been calling for - especially after this years bye week. Last year, and the previous years of wandering in the desert, dunderdummy ran the 2-4 some 75% of the time - he never adjusted, he just ran the same crap game after game, down after down. The only variation we saw was Jumbo vs. pass rush 2-4, and nickel vs. dime.

Now that he is running a 3-4 predominately, and is running much more 3-3, and is putting our more talented players on the field in lieu of Brad Jones and Hawk, we are getting much better results. All of these are changes that I have been calling for forever.

On the other hand - for my contentions, all of you have done nothing but sling spitballs at the idea that the 2-4 was the problem, or that we actually had better personnel standing on the sidelines; and now that we have made some of the changes I've been talking about all this time - all of your defenses of Capers, and protestations of my arguments are long forgotten.

Now you seamlessly launch into attack mode with a different narrative, neverminding that you have been wrong all this time?? Is it any wonder an honest person would not conclude anything other than the fact that most of you prozac posters are nothing if not intellectually dishonest??

[wist43]

This from the Official Packers-Pats Discussion Thread

In the same thread, you also went on to rip the OL on the heels of a strong performance both run and pass blocking against Minnesota - on top of a strong run of dominating performances which demonstrates they're shaping into one of the top lines in the league.

Then Fritz prophesizes about your likely retorts before they're even made and you comically fall right into form, ignoring facts, twisting some, and making up others .. and then this gem.

And you wonder why the homers and rabble take you on with these proclamations. You can only ignore for so many months/years before it's time for a calling-out, so I'm gonna follow Fritz' lead.

Wist you really are a broken record of doom and gloom followed by selective reasoning to support your perspectives, no matter how wrong or misguided.

The one that sticks out to me was when you proclaimed with authority that the Packers were minimum of two years away from being "remotely competitive" - the offseason before they won the Super Bowl.

The (un)funny thing is you actually believe yourself wist. Denial is a powerful force I see.

It's really tough to win it all, but I'd bet my left nut that if the Packers come up short somehow, you'll once again step up on your perch and proclaim how you've been right all along - and the NFL defensive coordinator who has dedicated pretty much every waking minute of his adult life to scheming and coaching some of the best players in the world to stop some other of the best players in the world can't hold your jock or that of the neighborhood Pop Warner coach when it comes to understanding football.

Based on some of the responses you get to your posts, I don't think I'm alone when I say ... It really does get old man. Maybe you exaggerate to make your point (the same one over and over and over and over. I hope you have a shortcut set up for dunderdummy because you've had to have worn out a few D's on the ol keyboard by now), but reread those quotes of yours. You'd have been hard-pressed to have been more wrong about the game - and then to make it worse you try to twist things around and proclaim that you were right. Dunder finally listened. Whoda thunkit. Everyone's wrong a lot, but you're just so far out of touch not seeing it that I don't even know what else to say.

I was wrong about the game - but only d/c dunderdummy ran the schemes and alignments I've been wanting him to run forever.

If you flip a coin 99 times and it comes up heads 99 times - call me crazy, but I'm going to expect that the next flip will be heads. The fact that the 100th flip came out tails, and that is all the ammunition you guys need to try and attack me - neverminding that I've been right about what changes needed to be made - is pretty weak shit.

Since I have no faith in dunderdummy, and he rarely if ever has a gameplan I agree with - the odds were that he would come out with another crap gameplan. The fact is, he came out with a gameplan that I've been wanting to see for the past few years.

As I said in the above post - when I"ve laid out the specifics of the changes that dunderdummy needed to make, you guys spit on me - now, amazingly, he runs the schemes I've been wanting, and we're getting good results - yet I'm still the bad guy b/c I don't believe he'll do the right thing beforehand??

If you don't want read an honest critique of what dunderdummy is doing - don't read my posts. Max will be more than happy to give you prozac version.

[Zool]

Even though there are others that agree with me that Capers has been an ongoing disaster for several years now - I'm about the only that that takes up the fight; therefore, I am a single voice of logic and honesty in opposition to the intellectual dishonesty of the homers.

All hail!

The secret here is, you're fighting with yourself for nothing other than some sort of self imposed superiority. Not one person who reads your rants is sitting at home going "you know what? that Wist is one smart mother fucker. I'm impressed by his knowledge." Not the "homers" and not the "others" who might happen to agree with you. You might consider getting a new outlet for this aggression. It's not good for you.

[wist43]

All hail!

The secret here is, you're fighting with yourself for nothing other than some sort of self imposed superiority. Not one person who reads your rants is sitting at home going "you know what? that Wist is one smart mother fucker. I'm impressed by his knowledge." Not the "homers" and not the "others" who might happen to agree with you. You might consider getting a new outlet for this aggression. It's not good for you.

I call it as I see it... I put my observations out there, and they shouldn't be controversial - yet they are b/c you guys are accepting of mediocrity, and worse, and I am not.

I care about my team and want to win championships - defense is what has been preventing us from getting there.

[mraynrand]

I embrace mediocrity


http://neobohemia816.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/salieri-abraham.jpg

[denverYooper]

Mozart never had to worry about the salary cap.

[Maxie the Taxi]

You know what? Wist is one smart mother fucker. ;-)

[Cheesehead Craig]

Mozart never had to worry about the salary cap.

He did however, have to worry about his tights riding up his keester while conducting. That's not very civilized.

[Zool]

I call it as I see it... I put my observations out there, and they shouldn't be controversial - yet they are b/c you guys are accepting of mediocrity, and worse, and I am not.

I care about my team and want to win championships - defense is what has been preventing us from getting there.

I accept there is nothing I can change about the situation. I don't go to games so my dollars are not being spent. I don't subscribe to the Sunday ticket. We quite literally can do nothing affecting any change in the organization. So unless the Packers front office frequents this website and holds you in high esteem, you're screaming at the wind. If that screaming is therapeutic for you, by all means keep at it. Just don't expect everyone to join in chorus with you. They aren't being homers, they're being realistic.

[Maxie the Taxi]

I read somewhere that Fat Stubby is addicted to this forum. Not Capers, though.

[woodbuck27]

My view of Packers DC Dom Capers:

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRH8HkiOwhBzFzzYjXof6QEzGMjsI_mr hVL7ina_cuvanieV-UU

It flips and flops.

https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSJ8Rr0S-C80bvhcXk6hHZRbkllbL8lJ4NKlRbWSjbD1pJk01a4DQ

It's Warm and cozy.

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTid2zMn6HRz2Ekn15OYjvGRCABixoT-TOWKkkW8aDPwFuBB-hY

Suddenly when performance is essential it often gets to ..... NOT so good.

[Tyrion Lannister]

Reading this thread, I am suddenly reminded that Wist, Texaspackerbacker and Anti-Polar Bear, in no particular order, are the top 3 notorious posters posting here.

Remember when Anti-Polar Bear used to write rhetoric about Ted Thompson?

[Bossman641]

Now that he is running a 3-4 predominately, and is running much more 3-3, and is putting our more talented players on the field in lieu of Brad Jones and Hawk, we are getting much better results. All of these are changes that I have been calling for forever.

You keep saying this but it isn't true. It's not even close to being true. This week was probably the most 3-4 the Packers have run all year.

Patriots - 24 of 56 in the 3-4
Vikings - 11 of 68
Eagles - 4 of 78
Bears - 1 of 71
Saints - can't find
Panthers - 10 of 69

[Joemailman]

Reading this thread, I am suddenly reminded that Wist, Texaspackerbacker and Anti-Polar Bear, in no particular order, are the top 3 notorious posters posting here.

Remember when Anti-Polar Bear used to write rhetoric about Ted Thompson?

Is Ted still trapped in the closet?

[Tyrion Lannister]

Is Ted still trapped in the closet?

Yes. :D

[pbmax]

I call it as I see it... I put my observations out there, and they shouldn't be controversial - yet they are b/c you guys are accepting of mediocrity, and worse, and I am not.

I care about my team and want to win championships - defense is what has been preventing us from getting there.

The Defense wasn't responsible for last year's playoff loss. It outplayed the fantabulous offense while missing 4 key guys. So as per usual, you take a few specific points in time and generalize to the whole. Its one of the reasons your observations and not persuasive nor predictive.

That and the fact that you think ranting on the internet is demanding excellence.

[pbmax]

Capers has, in fact, made many of the adjustments I've been calling for - especially after this years bye week. Last year, and the previous years of wandering in the desert, dunderdummy ran the 2-4 some 75% of the time - he never adjusted, he just ran the same crap game after game, down after down. The only variation we saw was Jumbo vs. pass rush 2-4, and nickel vs. dime.

Now that he is running a 3-4 predominately, and is running much more 3-3, and is putting our more talented players on the field in lieu of Brad Jones and Hawk, we are getting much better results. All of these are changes that I have been calling for forever.

He doesn't run 2-4 75% of the time in any particular gameplan. That's over the course of the season. And over the course of the season, he is often playing in a game where his team has a 10 point lead. Against a Patriots team completely capable of staying even, running the ball and lacking deep threats, he was not going to run dime defense on 1st and 2nd down. He has adjusted to opponents every year he has been here. You simply refuse to acknowledge this and gloss it over by using the yearly percentage.

He ran 3-4 24 times in the Patriots game out of 56 Patriot Offense snaps. That's 42%, higher than the yearly figures but not close to his high water mark for his Packer tenure. When his sub package numbers of high and they lose, you cry unsound. When his sub package numbers are low and they win, you say he is listening to you.

He ran 3-3 in one game for 15 snaps.

Any prediction based on a previously used Packer D alignment will eventually yield a positive result because the Packers, even with Capers, win 65% of the time. I could say the Packers need to use more onside kicks and look prescient twice a year. Your argument is not persuasive precisely for this reason; because it explains and/or predicts too little.

[wist43]

You keep saying this but it isn't true. It's not even close to being true. This week was probably the most 3-4 the Packers have run all year.

Patriots - 24 of 56 in the 3-4
Vikings - 11 of 68
Eagles - 4 of 78
Bears - 1 of 71
Saints - can't find
Panthers - 10 of 69

Good grief, you guys surely must be given all the answers years in advance of a standardized test just to squeak by with a D+...

He's been run running 3-whatever predominately - I said 3-4 for brevities sake.

Prior to the bye he was using a combination of 3-4, Elephant (which is in effect a 3-4); and when he was in the nickel he was using a lot more 3-3, as opposed to 2-4. Prior to this year's bye however, he was reverting back to his default dunderdummy settings, i.e. too much 2-4, and too much nickel in either/or situations, and we were getting destroyed in the running game.

How quickly any of you forget that we were dead last - and by quite a margin - in run defense just a few short weeks ago... given dunderdummy's track record, of course one who is paying attention would expect that to continue. Thankfully he seems to have gotten his head out of his ass to some extent, culminating in the NE game in which he called one hell of a game.

Last year, and in previous years he had been running 2-4 almost 75% of the time, be it jumbo or what I would call a pass rush 2-4. Why don't you guys trying offering up an analysis and break down once in a while, instead of riding Max's coattails??

I may disagree with Max from time to time, but at least he understands football, breaks down games and plays, and offers an analysis - I have a lot of respect for Max even if we don't agree some of the time. Most of the rest of you guys are frauds who just want to harangue those not in the kool-kid clique.

[wist43]

He doesn't run 2-4 75% of the time in any particular gameplan. That's over the course of the season. And over the course of the season, he is often playing in a game where his team has a 10 point lead. Against a Patriots team completely capable of staying even, running the ball and lacking deep threats, he was not going to run dime defense on 1st and 2nd down. He has adjusted to opponents every year he has been here. You simply refuse to acknowledge this and gloss it over by using the yearly percentage.

He ran 3-4 24 times in the Patriots game out of 56 Patriot Offense snaps. That's 42%, higher than the yearly figures but not close to his high water mark for his Packer tenure. When his sub package numbers of high and they lose, you cry unsound. When his sub package numbers are low and they win, you say he is listening to you.

He ran 3-3 in one game for 15 snaps.

Any prediction based on a previously used Packer D alignment will eventually yield a positive result because the Packers, even with Capers, win 65% of the time. I could say the Packers need to use more onside kicks and look prescient twice a year. Your argument is not persuasive precisely for this reason; because it explains and/or predicts too little.

Read more carefully max... I said last year.

Actually I believe that number came from the amount of nickel and dime combined; and if memory serves me, I think it was the Saints that were 1st on that list with close to 80%.

I don't mind running nickel, just not against running teams, in running situations; or either or situations. That said, you can run nickel in either or, but not a static 2-4, and not that Jumbo 2-4, which were all Capers ran; so, of course the results were disasterous.

This year, of course MM made some headlines by saying that he was going to get involved with the defense during the offseason - and they came out of the gate running a lot of Elephant. They ran more Elephant than they did base 3-4, but at least they still had 3 down linemen on the field, and seemed to be taking the LOS more seriously. As the games wore on this year, however, dunderdummy started to revert a bit, and we began to be gashed to quite bloody effect in the running game.

Now after the bye, he's played much more 3-4 base, and in the Chicago game he played a lot more 3-3 nickel.

Those are very encouraging signs.

[wist43]

The Defense wasn't responsible for last year's playoff loss. It outplayed the fantabulous offense while missing 4 key guys. So as per usual, you take a few specific points in time and generalize to the whole. Its one of the reasons your observations and not persuasive nor predictive.

That and the fact that you think ranting on the internet is demanding excellence.

max, he ran 3-4 most of that game against the Niners - which was a major departure from what he had been doing all of last year.

We had success stopping their running game in that game b/c dunderdummy played 3-4 most of the game. Kapnerfucker still lit us up for 400+ I think, but at least we contained their running game, and were in the game, as opposed to getting run over on the ground and having pretty much no chance.

[pbmax]

Prior to the bye he was using a combination of 3-4, Elephant (which is in effect a 3-4); and when he was in the nickel he was using a lot more 3-3, as opposed to 2-4. Prior to this year's bye however, he was reverting back to his default dunderdummy settings, i.e. too much 2-4, and too much nickel in either/or situations, and we were getting destroyed in the running game.
.

The first instance of the 3-3 Bear front that got you excited was the Eagles game which was after the bye.

I have seen no notice that it reappeared in the Patriots game. And it goes without saying that the 3-3 you advocated is not the 3-3 he ran during the Eagles game. He still removed a DL, got smaller in nickel, and used an OLB at DT.

[pbmax]

max, he ran 3-4 most of that game against the Niners - which was a major departure from what he had been doing all of last year.

We had success stopping their running game in that game b/c dunderdummy played 3-4 most of the game. Kapnerfucker still lit us up for 400+ I think, but at least we contained their running game, and were in the game, as opposed to getting run over on the ground and having pretty much no chance.

And that is an example that he arranges his game plan according to the opponent, not the personality faults you detect in him. Nor is it decided because he does not believe in protecting the middle of the field or covering anybody. Which is what we have been arguing with you all along.

CK running was more of a problem that the passing, but much of the Packer pass rush was on the bench plus the injured Shields.

But as for your argument that no one hopes for excellence, regardless of the reason Capers did it, the Defense didn't let the team down, even when grievously injured.

[Bossman641]

Capers matches offensive personnel more than down and distance. Against teams that run a lot of 2 TE sets, like the Patriots and SF, Capers will match 3-4. As 90% of the league has moved towards a 1 RB, 3 WR, 1 TE "base" personnel, Capers has countered with the 2-4 with Peppers/Perry on the edge.

Ya I know it bugs the shit out of you when he plays those defenses in 3rd and short situations, but he is doing it to match personnel. Teams run 1-3-1 or 1-4 sets on third and short all the time. I'm of the opinion that if he were to trot out a 3-4 in those situations we would get burned deep often.

[George Cumby]

5-7-9!!!!!!!!!

[wist43]

And that is an example that he arranges his game plan according to the opponent, not the personality faults you detect in him. Nor is it decided because he does not believe in protecting the middle of the field or covering anybody. Which is what we have been arguing with you all along.

CK running was more of a problem that the passing, but much of the Packer pass rush was on the bench plus the injured Shields.

But as for your argument that no one hopes for excellence, regardless of the reason Capers did it, the Defense didn't let the team down, even when grievously injured.

He didn't run hardly any 3-4 in 2013 - the whole year!! And made some ludicrous comment about preferring to bleed to death instead of giving up big plays.

He did run the 3-4 against the niners in the playoff game last year, and as I said, that is what kept us in the game. Kapernik did hit us for 7 rushes, 98 yds - I was thinking of the game in which he threw for 400+... the 3-4 held Gore in check for 20 rushes, 66 yds. Kapernik threw for 227, 1 TD, 1 INT.

Except for Kapernick breaking loose for 98 yds, the 3-4 held SF down and kept us in the game.

The list of sins is well documented - need I trot them out as evidence, or a reminder to those of you with such short memories yet again??

If dunderdummy was tailoring his defense for each opponent, then he was doing a piss-poor job of it, was he not?? One of the worst run defenses was an ongoing problem, even running into this year when he finally did make some actual changes; embarrassing playoff defeats - almost entirely the fault of Capers and the defense; etc, etc...

The results he's been giving us have been worse than abysmal, why you guys try to continue to defend that is beyond me.

Now, after years of wife-beating, he brings home some flowers and you guys say, '... see, he really is a good guy'.

[wist43]

The first instance of the 3-3 Bear front that got you excited was the Eagles game which was after the bye.

I have seen no notice that it reappeared in the Patriots game. And it goes without saying that the 3-3 you advocated is not the 3-3 he ran during the Eagles game. He still removed a DL, got smaller in nickel, and used an OLB at DT.

We're looking at the same picture and seeing completely different things... you talk about "bigger" and think that necessitates the jumbo nickel with Pickett and Raji.

Whereas I want to get "bigger" by having 3 down linemen on the LOS and take out one of the ILB's. You have 4 guys in the box between the tackles, whereas in an either or, I'd likely have 5, i.e. 3 down linemen, whoever was playing ILB (Matthews or Neal would be my preference), and whoever was roaming - again again Matthews/Neal.

If it is an either/or, in a 3-3, you can move one of those LB's outside... which is the alignment you posted of the Eagles game - which of course you are going to stubbornly go to your grave saying is a 2-4, lol...

[wist43]

Capers matches offensive personnel more than down and distance. Against teams that run a lot of 2 TE sets, like the Patriots and SF, Capers will match 3-4. As 90% of the league has moved towards a 1 RB, 3 WR, 1 TE "base" personnel, Capers has countered with the 2-4 with Peppers/Perry on the edge.

Ya I know it bugs the shit out of you when he plays those defenses in 3rd and short situations, but he is doing it to match personnel. Teams run 1-3-1 or 1-4 sets on third and short all the time. I'm of the opinion that if he were to trot out a 3-4 in those situations we would get burned deep often.

Nobody abandons the LOS like Capers... I've never seen a single other team abandon the LOS like he does, never once. 3rd and 1, and he's got 2 guys on the LOS?? 1st and goal from the 1, same thing?? What's wrong with that picture??

As I've said, if I were an offensive coordinator I'd do exactly what you just said, and I've said this many times - I'd just trot 3 wides out there all the time, and run it down Dom's throat - which is what happened pretty much from 2011-2013.

The biggest change that we've seen this year is that he is not completely abandoning the LOS, and he is matching up against 3 wides with base personnel; either in the 3-4 or in the Elephant - which as I've said I consider to be a 3-4, whereas Max calls it sushi.

The other thing he's been doing is getting Hawk and Brad Jones off the field - which I have been the lead cheerleader here forever. I suggested that Matthews should be moved inside and you guys reacted like Linda Blair being hit with Holy Water!!!

Now we're seeing those things on the field, and you guys are saying I never said any such things... but trying to find minutia to attack general statements I may have made; and general statements to attack specifics I may have cited. Those tactics are not made of argument, but rather they are intellectually dishonest personal attacks - I think you guys might be puppets for James Carville, lol...

[Bretsky]

Nice entertainment after the dominator frustrated him

http://uproxx.com/sports/2014/12/video-the-tom-brady-taylor-swift-remix/

[mraynrand]

I suggested that Matthews should be moved inside and you guys reacted like Linda Blair being hit with Holy Water!!!

Several of us suggested this, as early as last season, but due to injuries, they haven't had the LB horses to do it

[George Cumby]

Several of us suggested this, as early as last season, but due to injuries, they haven't had the LB horses to do it

I'm just glad they FINALLY took our advice!

[woodbuck27]

I'm just glad they FINALLY took our advice!

Ohh Yea !

[mraynrand]

I'm just glad they FINALLY took our advice!

I kept calling and calling and following Stubby around Green Bay to tell them our ideas - until the restraining order, that is.

[George Cumby]

I kept calling and calling and following Stubby around Green Bay to tell them our ideas - until the restraining order, that is.

Judges and cops are SO up tight. They just don't understand a fan's PASSION!

[texaspackerbacker]

This shouldn't even be controversial. Capers is making a defense with sub-par talent into a marginally decent, sometimes good defense with his scheming. As was said, having the world's greatest QB masks a lot of the problems on D, but the fault - to the extent there is a fault on the NFL's best team - is with Ted Thompson not providing more good players on the D. For years - make that decades, the Packers had D Coordinators who played plain vanilla, totally uncreative defense. In the Lombardi era, we didn't need to do any more than just line up and outplay opponents (even then, though, there was a lot of bend,don't break). In the decades since then, we have NOT had that dominant personnel - and consequently, we've had consistently bad defense - until Capers came along and used schemes and creativity to at least make the D decent. He is EXACTLY what a Ted Thompson GMed team needs as a D Coordinator.

Note: voting for Dom as a Dominator does NOT equate to voting that the defense is dominant.

[Fritz]

This shouldn't even be controversial. Capers is making a defense with sub-par talent into a marginally decent, sometimes good defense with his scheming. As was said, having the world's greatest QB masks a lot of the problems on D, but the fault - to the extent there is a fault on the NFL's best team - is with Ted Thompson not providing more good players on the D. For years - make that decades, the Packers had D Coordinators who played plain vanilla, totally uncreative defense. In the Lombardi era, we didn't need to do any more than just line up and outplay opponents (even then, though, there was a lot of bend,don't break). In the decades since then, we have NOT had that dominant personnel - and consequently, we've had consistently bad defense - until Capers came along and used schemes and creativity to at least make the D decent. He is EXACTLY what a Ted Thompson GMed team needs as a D Coordinator.

Note: voting for Dom as a Dominator does NOT equate to voting that the defense is dominant.


Tex, While I often do not agree with your views, and in this case don't agree that Capers and Thompson are a good fit, I also appreciate your breath-of-fresh-air optimism and appreciation for this team. I myself try to appreciate what has been accomplished, but I also don't think this team has a Super Bowl defense. So even though I don't often agree with you, I do enjoy your posts.

[3irty1]

Yeah I don't agree that Dom and Ted are a perfect fit. Ted operates with the only decent philosophy for today's NFL. You live and die by the draft and fish for bargains in FA. All that youth and inexperience is an issue for any coach but it seems especially tough for Dom's schemes.

Anyways I agree that Dom has always been more competent than the roster he coaches. Even all this fancy new shit isn't new, he did it all in Miami when he had the pieces to pull it off and we'd have seen it sooner if we had the pieces here. Its also impossible to give an honest evaluation of Dom or Ted without acknowledging their shitty luck with injuries. Dom's had way more than his fair share since being here so you'd have to be truly delusional to be surprised at the improvements when the law of averages kicks in and gives us one of the healthiest teams in the NFL. And really they still aren't all that great. Clay at ILB isn't a genius move by Dom, its a failure by TT. For the price of Clay you could easily buy two stud ILB's who are better and more experienced at the position. Its probably what's best for the team in the short term but its far from ideal.

Beneath all the hyperbole, personal incredulity, confirmation bias, childlike misunderstandings of correlation, and anecdotal evidence about Dom around here there is some truth. A handful of times a season we've seen our opponent come out with running personnel in a running situation and the Packers respond with a nickel or dime defense, gifting the offense the play it appeared to want to run in the first place. On the spectrum of fans from normal to wist the reaction to this can range from frustrating to literally maddening. At the end of the day I know that if I were to punch Dom in the face, take his headset, and call the game myself we'd lose by 70. I know that firing Dom is only a good move if you can hire somebody better. I also know that Bretsky deserves credit for this piece of threadbait. Why stir the pot when you can throw chum in the water and have the sharks do it for you?

[Joemailman]

Tex, While I often do not agree with your views, and in this case don't agree that Capers and Thompson are a good fit, I also appreciate your breath-of-fresh-air optimism and appreciation for this team. I myself try to appreciate what has been accomplished, but I also don't think this team has a Super Bowl defense. So even though I don't often agree with you, I do enjoy your posts.

Maybe the Packers do have a Super Bowl defense. Through the New Orleans game they certainly did not. However, over the last 4 weeks the Packers have held some very good offenses below their season averages:

Held Chicago to 14. They average 22.
Held Philadelphia to 20. They average 31.
Held Minnesota to 21. They average 19.
Held New England to 21 They average 32.

Only against Minnesota did they underperform, and that was because they went prevent after taking an 11 point lead. I think any defense that can hold New England and Philadelphia to those kind of numbers gives its team a chance to win any game.

[texaspackerbacker]

Tex, While I often do not agree with your views, and in this case don't agree that Capers and Thompson are a good fit, I also appreciate your breath-of-fresh-air optimism and appreciation for this team. I myself try to appreciate what has been accomplished, but I also don't think this team has a Super Bowl defense. So even though I don't often agree with you, I do enjoy your posts.

Arguably we didn't have a Super Bowl defense the last time we went to the Super Bowl, or the 15-1 season that followed either. In case I didn't make myself clear, saying Capers is EXACTLY what we need with Thompson as GM was a slap at Thompson. Capers is all about compensation for lack of talent using schemes, and few if any do a better job of that.

[Fritz]

Maybe the Packers do have a Super Bowl defense. Through the New Orleans game they certainly did not. However, over the last 4 weeks the Packers have held some very good offenses below their season averages:

Held Chicago to 14. They average 22.
Held Philadelphia to 20. They average 31.
Held Minnesota to 21. They average 19.
Held New England to 21 They average 32.

Only against Minnesota did they underperform, and that was because they went prevent after taking an 11 point lead. I think any defense that can hold New England and Philadelphia to those kind of numbers gives its team a chance to win any game.


It's the run defense. I do think the NE running backs sliced through or ran over the defense. I grudgingly agree with Wist on the point that NE could've run for lots and lots of yards had they run it more.

[pbmax]

Several of us suggested this, as early as last season, but due to injuries, they haven't had the LB horses to do it

It was a move a lot of people discussed trying to upgrade the talent on the field. My concern was coverage and it has been borne out, however the pluses have outweighed the negatives so far.

I think it will be wise for Dom to keep changing personnel not only to get the best matchup, but I suspect teams could take greater advantage of Clay if they knew each game he will be the dime ILB. The Patriots got one by him in the second half by flooding his zone. Matthews reacted to the first guy, even though he had help there, and the next guy was wide open.

[pbmax]

I kept calling and calling and following Stubby around Green Bay to tell them our ideas - until the restraining order, that is.

Did you use Cellcom?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgfzX-TV-40

[pbmax]

Yeah I don't agree that Dom and Ted are a perfect fit. Ted operates with the only decent philosophy for today's NFL. You live and die by the draft and fish for bargains in FA. All that youth and inexperience is an issue for any coach but it seems especially tough for Dom's schemes.


I have mentioned this before but I am nearly convinced that the Steelers unconventional player personnel structure (esp. college side) was not just a reaction to Dan Rooney booting his brother Art Rooney Jr. out of the department (he had been the GM) in the mid-80s, but also a reaction to the needs of the 3-4 defense Cowher/Capers/LeBeau wanted to run. Cowher wanted a hand in personnel and the roster and I think finding the correct D personnel was always an issue.

When Capers and LeBeau left and Haslett was the DC, they changed the LBs. When LeBeau came back, they changed them again.

[mraynrand]

It was a move a lot of people discussed trying to upgrade the talent on the field. My concern was coverage and it has been borne out, however the pluses have outweighed the negatives so far.

I think it will be wise for Dom to keep changing personnel not only to get the best matchup, but I suspect teams could take greater advantage of Clay if they knew each game he will be the dime ILB. The Patriots got one by him in the second half by flooding his zone. Matthews reacted to the first guy, even though he had help there, and the next guy was wide open.


I suggested moving Clay there as the new "W" position - like Woodson, except that in Clay's case, he would shuttle three positions: DL, OLB, Safety, where Woodson shuffled LB, Safety, Corner. But the freelancing aspect is what I liked, because Clay was getting eaten up by LTs.

And you're right about the coverage. Cheat game-planned to get Vereen (I think) across from Clay as much as possible to exploit his limitations in coverage.

mix it up, keep 'em guessing. Even if you're out of position from time to time (as the Packer D was against NE), the switching schemes and formations can befuddle an offense, even one led by Brady.

[mraynrand]

Did you use Cellcom?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgfzX-TV-40

man, that's embarrassing. Was it really worth the coin, Stubby? I expected Cobb to say "Yeah, what is ya, ignorant?"

[Fritz]

It was a move a lot of people discussed trying to upgrade the talent on the field. My concern was coverage and it has been borne out, however the pluses have outweighed the negatives so far.

I think it will be wise for Dom to keep changing personnel not only to get the best matchup, but I suspect teams could take greater advantage of Clay if they knew each game he will be the dime ILB. The Patriots got one by him in the second half by flooding his zone. Matthews reacted to the first guy, even though he had help there, and the next guy was wide open.


I wonder if some of this recent success is a result of having fewer injured players and thus being able to field a defense that is not only more talented but better understands the schemes and calls as well. There seems to be less confusion and Capers seems to be able to dial up more shit than he has in the past. Maybe Clinton-Dix deserves a lot of credit; he seems to understand a lot for a rookie. Dom finally isn't being forced to play raw rookies everywhere.

[pbmax]

I wonder if some of this recent success is a result of having fewer injured players and thus being able to field a defense that is not only more talented but better understands the schemes and calls as well. There seems to be less confusion and Capers seems to be able to dial up more shit than he has in the past. Maybe Clinton-Dix deserves a lot of credit; he seems to understand a lot for a rookie. Dom finally isn't being forced to play raw rookies everywhere.

Health definitely helps. Not sure about number of calls. It was the offseason goal to make fewer adjustments and play more personnel, but I am not sure that has led to fewer alignments or coverages. It might mean he is tweaking game plans less to cover shortcomings.

[George Cumby]

Agreed, Fritz. HHCD has solidified the back end and the new practice schedule seems to have solved (fingers crossed) the injury problem. Dunderd-dominator is now weapons free and can dial up all sorts of stuff that he can't with an injury depleted squad.

That's what I think this week but the winds of a fan's heart blow fickle.

[pbmax]

On Matthews evolving role:


“Believe me, there’s an awareness on my part in terms of the number of times he’s rushing and dropping. The bottom line is, what gives us the best chance of getting them stopped? He’s done a nice job with the run. You just obviously have to be conscious of how much you’re asking him to go backwards and how much you’re asking him to go forwards.”

http://www.espnwisconsin.com/page.php?page_id=278

[Cheesehead Craig]

Agreed, Fritz. HHCD has solidified the back end and the new practice schedule seems to have solved (fingers crossed) the injury problem. Dunderd-dominator is now weapons free and can dial up all sorts of stuff that he can't with an injury depleted squad.

That's what I think this week but the winds of a fan's heart blow fickle.

I think that the drafting of HHCD did almost as much as getting the man himself. The Safeties were put on notice that they were going to be replaced and I think it stepped up their game.

[deake]

It's the run defense. I do think the NE running backs sliced through or ran over the defense. I grudgingly agree with Wist on the point that NE could've run for lots and lots of yards had they run it more.

I think one of the problems in the NE game was the absence of Perry, Neal doesn't set the edge as well as Perry and when Elliott came in he didn't set the edge at all.

[mraynrand]

Health definitely helps. Not sure about number of calls. It was the offseason goal to make fewer adjustments and play more personnel, but I am not sure that has led to fewer alignments or coverages. It might mean he is tweaking game plans less to cover shortcomings.

At first it makes you wonder why other teams don't do no huddle more on the Packers, except that they have versatility within their groupings. Probably another Capers flaw!

[Carolina_Packer]

So, how do you reconcile the defensive performance we saw against New England and the one we saw last night in the second half vs. Atlanta? What gives?

For the X's and O's people on the board, what did you see the Packers trying to do to defend and what adjustments needed to be made? Coverage lapses, no consistent pressure against a patch-work Atlanta line. It should have been easier for Capers to come up with something to take away Julio and Ryan torching them like they did.

Were the schemes sound but the execution just not there? That Shields free release give up on the Jones TD was amazing. It looked like he had no recognition. If he re-directs him at all in his 5 yard window of opportunity, then the safety help may have gotten there in time, it may have thrown off the timing enough or Ryan may have had to go to a different read.

[mraynrand]

Shields obviously wasn't himself. But even after they replaced him with House, they left House on an island against Jones. Obviously the game plan was to allow Jones to catch 200-300 yards and run himself out of the game from pure exhaustion. Another Capers stratagem that worked to perfection. I think a raise is in order.

[woodbuck27]

I'm sure that like most of us wist43 is shell shocked after that 2nd half last night.

It will take time to absorb and analyze it all ... or simply toss it into the dumpster and forget it?

No...that last thingy won't work.

Right now to me it's still 'a HOT MESS'.

[pbmax]

No pass rush, one other worldly WR. Jones is more Calvin Johnson than Brandon Marshall. Much more speed.

One other note, Packers started with a lot of nickel early and no base. Falcons were running on it pretty well. As the game went on, there was more 3-4 looks. And that introduced a whole new problem in the second half. Completions across the middle to backs, TE and WR. Brad Jones got picked off by the umpire on a 3rd or 4th down.

There just isn't enough coverage ability out there at linebacker. And Peppers mainly helps in zone drops. In man, its a nightmare.

Now wist has suggested this means you put more pass rushers in and take ineffective LBs out and that is understandable, certainly at certain down and distance (3-3!). But only Matthews can move well enough to cover at ILB, Jones is hit or miss and Barrington doesn't have enough speed. Bob might be disappointed but he isn't wrong, ILB needs to be rebuilt completely.

And that pass rush is not reliable enough to get home. Ryan had plenty of time on most drop backs. I also think its possible the D line was doing a controlled pass rush ala facing Wilson or Kapernick. Because Ryan ran very effectively and the did tend to close the pocket rather than break free for a one on one shot.

[mraynrand]

No pass rush, one other worldly WR. Jones is more Calvin Johnson than Brandon Marshall. Much more speed.

if he's really that good, then doubling him might make some sense, no?

[pbmax]

if he's really that good, then doubling him might make some sense, no?

They had a safety over the top most of the time, but Dix, in one case, still couldn't get there in time after the CB trailed Jones.

I did eventually expect Capers to pull the old Belichick move with Tony Gonzalez, double him at the LOS and beat him to submission.

[mraynrand]

They had a safety over the top most of the time, but Dix, in one case, still couldn't get there in time after the CB trailed Jones.

I did eventually expect Capers to pull the old Belichick move with Tony Gonzalez, double him at the LOS and beat him to submission.

I was calling for the latter, but they kept throwing individual coverage at the guy. Fortunately, Capers' mad plan to run him to exhaustion with 300 yards receiving pretty much worked - eventually.

[Fritz]

This game reminded me - painfully and vividly - of just about every game from 2011.

Man, if last week's defense was the "real" Packer defense, this team could go far. If last night's defense is the "real" Packer defense, this is a one-and-done team.

If it's in between, it's not a Super Bowl defense.

[hoosier]

This game reminded me - painfully and vividly - of just about every game from 2011.

Man, if last week's defense was the "real" Packer defense, this team could go far. If last night's defense is the "real" Packer defense, this is a one-and-done team.

If it's in between, it's not a Super Bowl defense.

That's interesting, because I've always felt that the 2011 Packers were a team of destiny, and that their loss in the divisional round was one of those rare moments when the grand design of the universe develops a bug and crashes. Even with all the bumps in the road (the drop by a rusty Jennings, the bye-week tragedy with Philbin's son), the Packers probably win that game nine times out of ten. We just happened to roll a 10. If the 2014 team turns out to be the reincarnation of the 2011 team, the odds of them capitalizing on their destiny have to be really, really good.

[denverYooper]

Though it didn't show up last night, the Packers pass rush this year is better than 2011.

[denverYooper]

No pass rush, one other worldly WR. Jones is more Calvin Johnson than Brandon Marshall. Much more speed.

One other note, Packers started with a lot of nickel early and no base. Falcons were running on it pretty well. As the game went on, there was more 3-4 looks. And that introduced a whole new problem in the second half. Completions across the middle to backs, TE and WR. Brad Jones got picked off by the umpire on a 3rd or 4th down.

There just isn't enough coverage ability out there at linebacker. And Peppers mainly helps in zone drops. In man, its a nightmare.

Now wist has suggested this means you put more pass rushers in and take ineffective LBs out and that is understandable, certainly at certain down and distance (3-3!). But only Matthews can move well enough to cover at ILB, Jones is hit or miss and Barrington doesn't have enough speed. Bob might be disappointed but he isn't wrong, ILB needs to be rebuilt completely.

And that pass rush is not reliable enough to get home. Ryan had plenty of time on most drop backs. I also think its possible the D line was doing a controlled pass rush ala facing Wilson or Kapernick. Because Ryan ran very effectively and the did tend to close the pocket rather than break free for a one on one shot.

I had to listen to most of the game because, children. Did the Falcons keep extra blockers at all?

[pbmax]

I had to listen to most of the game because, children. Did the Falcons keep extra blockers at all?

I don't think so. They mostly ran 3 wide 1 back and when they wanted to change it up they went two TE or extra lineman. They had an extra OL twice I saw (Gabe Carimi), but those were runs and play action to change tendency.

Ryan was just throwing the ball early and when he had heat he is nimble enough to run. That interior pressure that moved Brady wasn't as obvious last night.

Though to be fair, it might be the same pressure but Ryan could just loft a deep floater to Jones and make a play where the Patriots couldn't.

Beyonf Jones, the killer in the second half was all the short five yard throws that went for 9 yards, many of them in the middle of the field. I am not sure Atlanta is the team to play man against.

[Fritz]

I thought Gruden was saying they were playing lots and lots of zone.

I know Ryan was quick, but still, there was no pressure.

[deake]

I don't think so. They mostly ran 3 wide 1 back and when they wanted to change it up they went two TE or extra lineman. They had an extra OL twice I saw (Gabe Carimi), but those were runs and play action to change tendency.

Ryan was just throwing the ball early and when he had heat he is nimble enough to run. That interior pressure that moved Brady wasn't as obvious last night.

Though to be fair, it might be the same pressure but Ryan could just loft a deep floater to Jones and make a play where the Patriots couldn't.

Beyonf Jones, the killer in the second half was all the short five yard throws that went for 9 yards, many of them in the middle of the field. I am not sure Atlanta is the team to play man against.

Haven't rewatched the game yet but it seemed like a lot of zone, in fact in Wilde's report he quoted Willams, who was wondering why they didn't change coverage and bracket Jones. Williams said Jones was just finding the soft spots in the zone.

[pbmax]

If it was mainly zone then it took a step backward from the rest of the season. Lots of false steps and people out of position or late. I saw a lot of trail coverage on Jones, so I thought at least on him they were manned up with a safety over the top.

[wist43]

I was reserving comment until I had a chance to watch the game - listened to it on the radio - but went to play it back today, and the recording fritzed for some reason, so I can't watch it.

Listening to it on the radio, and reading some of the JS comments - it sounds like the bottom line was that dunderdummy simply wouldn't make the necessary adjustment; worse, he wouldn't make any adjustment.

It's not that difficult to adjust from the original gameplan, but dunderdummy has a terrible habit of riding the horse that brung him all the way over the cliff.

Prep for a team like Atlanta should begin with the Ryan-Jones connection. Okay, so dunderdummy thinks he can just run vanilla zones and some man, and that should be good enough; but alas and behold, suppose it's not?? Plan B should be to take that #1 option/threat away, and force Atlanta to beat you in other ways.

Far too often dunderdummy will scratch out a gameplan, and then simply live or die by it - my theory is that the spraypaint he uses on his hair has seeped into his brain, and while he may have a few lucid moments here and there, ala the NE game, most of the time the guy is in a fog.

The NE game, followed by this stinker, is exactly my point about the guy - and has been a point I've been making since the day we hired him, i.e. he has the potential to gameplan and execute an outstanding gameplan which gives his team more than ample opportunity to win; but the Jekyl/Hyde in him, can turn around the next week and vomit a complete mess that will lose you the game.

The guy simply cannot be trusted - week in/week out... regardless of talent available to him, you simply don't know what you're going to get. We have enough talent on this team to win a title - the biggest question mark surrounding this team and our chances?? Is Dunderdummy.

[3irty1]

I was reserving comment until I had a chance to watch the game - listened to it on the radio - but went to play it back today, and the recording fritzed for some reason, so I can't watch it.

Listening to it on the radio, and reading some of the JS comments - it sounds like the bottom line was that dunderdummy simply wouldn't make the necessary adjustment; worse, he wouldn't make any adjustment.

It's not that difficult to adjust from the original gameplan, but dunderdummy has a terrible habit of riding the horse that brung him all the way over the cliff.

Prep for a team like Atlanta should begin with the Ryan-Jones connection. Okay, so dunderdummy thinks he can just run vanilla zones and some man, and that should be good enough; but alas and behold, suppose it's not?? Plan B should be to take that #1 option/threat away, and force Atlanta to beat you in other ways.

Far too often dunderdummy will scratch out a gameplan, and then simply live or die by it - my theory is that the spraypaint he uses on his hair has seeped into his brain, and while he may have a few lucid moments here and there, ala the NE game, most of the time the guy is in a fog.

The NE game, followed by this stinker, is exactly my point about the guy - and has been a point I've been making since the day we hired him, i.e. he has the potential to gameplan and execute an outstanding gameplan which gives his team more than ample opportunity to win; but the Jekyl/Hyde in him, can turn around the next week and vomit a complete mess that will lose you the game.

The guy simply cannot be trusted - week in/week out... regardless of talent available to him, you simply don't know what you're going to get. We have enough talent on this team to win a title - the biggest question mark surrounding this team and our chances?? Is Dunderdummy.

The interesting thing about this stinker is rather than sitting in a pass defense and hemorrhaging rushing yards it was the other way around. We sat mostly in run defense formations with zone behind it against a team with an old RB and no tight ends. What I think is revealing was that our idea of an adjustment wasn't to the game plan, at least from what I saw, it was to replace Sam Shields with House. That did help a little but I think that says something about Capers that the game plan depends on our secondary hanging with Julio Jones one on one all night. After what he did last week it I'd think there'd be a plan B.

The passrush wasn't great and the announcers mentioned that but I honestly don't think they were the problem. Some of it was perfect execution that was contested, a lot of had to do with them taking desperation mode risks, but a lot of it was quick passes to wide open Julio.

[wist43]

Can someone go thru the defensive snaps and give the alignments, i.e. 3-4, 2-4, 1-whatever??

Listening to it on the radio, every once in a while they'd say we were in a nickel, but for the most part they rarely give alignments, and they never speak negatively, i.e. a big gainer against us is never the fault of the defense, but rather it is the result of a great play by the offense... and so it goes with all media - positivity on steroids, no one is ever to blame for anything, it's always about being being positive; reality be damned.

Talked to my brother fairly early in the game, and he said they were in a 1-?? nickel right then...

Don't trust Max to give the breakdown though - Max thinks 3 down linemen is a 2-4, lol... so can't take his word for it ;)

[vince]

The D did fine in the first half and then got complacent in the 2nd half with the big lead. The game was never really in doubt and Capers continued to play bend D to force time off the clock only to watch Shields and Dix peeking into the backfield in zones repeatedly and getting burned as a result. When the under zone was in place the over safety was late. When the safety was in place over, the corners were out of place due to peaking. Jones found open spots repeatedly.

You might have thought Capers would cheat to Jones but this was a case of players not doing their job and getting beat. He beat Williams like a red-headed stepchild to start the half in man coverage, then zones with over coverage were undisciplined. In the end, the game dictated the defense and short of over-compensating for Jones, the game came down to a hot receiver having his way with DB's - just about all of them - not scheme.

I did notice that the Packers played just about all 2-4 the first half when they dominated on both sides of the ball - jumping out to a 31-7 lead and winning ToP by 21-9.

[Bossman641]

Echoing others, but my take on the game was that the Packers played mostly zone.

Also, I don't have the exact formation breakdown other than they played 8 downs of 3-4.

[Zool]

I didn't write it down or anything, but there was quite a bit of Neal, Daniels, Guion, Peppers all with a hand in the dirt alignment. None were getting pressure though. When Clay would move to the edge, the would run away from him time and again. They moved Julio Jones to the slot and Ryan would just stare at him waiting for him to get open. This was a full team effort to suck that bad in the second half.

[Freak Out]

I didn't write it down or anything, but there was quite a bit of Neal, Daniels, Guion, Peppers all with a hand in the dirt alignment. None were getting pressure though. When Clay would move to the edge, the would run away from him time and again. They moved Julio Jones to the slot and Ryan would just stare at him waiting for him to get open. This was a full team effort to suck that bad in the second half.

This is about right. A Good QB/WR Combo can make a defensive backfield look bad when there is no pressure but man...that was ridiculous. I remember one Julio Jones play where Shields looked concussed....just lost out there.

[pbmax]

The first Falcons drive yielded some good runs, but that was against nickel. Hawk did go in, but played the lowest number of snaps for him since 2008 (8 total).

First half D yielded 160 yards and 7 points and collected zero sacks and 1 INT. Perry played ROLB but had only one effective rush I saw and was not in time.

What I don't have is the numbers of snaps for Matthews at ILB with Barrington. So there could have been some run D 3-4 with Hawk on sideline, but that wasn't the predominant defense in the first half. Jones was the dime linebacker. I do think Hawk played more in the second half, but I don't have the snap numbers yet.

EDIT: Said 1 first half sack, but that was incorrect.

[ThunderDan]

My hope, which is completely unsupported and just a guess out of left field, is that Dom didn't want to show anything in the 2nd half with the game well in hand. So we played vanilla D and let the WRs run all day.

No need to give away new wrinkles in your D when you are up 20+ points at half. When the Falcons got it close enough that we need to come out of our "prevent" D our pass rush was gassed.

Good thing the O scored 43.

[mraynrand]

It looked like there was man coverage on Jones on almost every play, and there was supposed to be safety help but it was dramatically late far too often. Allowing Jones to get 250 yards receiving left him totally spent, and the Packers won. Capers' plan worked to perfection.

[vince]

I was at the game so the "All-22" showed a number of times when corners (Shields in particular) come off Jones, flatten out and look back to the QB only to see Jones stay in their area and find gaps after the corner lost him... It was zone technique on a bunch of 2nd half plays in my estimation, though they did mix it up. House played man more and shadowed Jones on a few ocassions where he had a couple break-ups.

[3irty1]

The main story in the 2nd half was tons of cover 1/cover 3 with a safety in the box. It doesn't make sense.

When we gave up 200 yards rushing to the Bears I wasn't unhappy with the defensive effort because it was a good plan to sell out against their top 10 WR's and make Forte beat us. I would have expected last night's defense to look similar in game plan although better in results because Atlanta is more 1 dimensional than Chicago and our tackling efforts in general have somewhat improved. These are the games I just can't make sense of where our opponent appears to have a clear strength, they're having a lot of success with that strength, there's no reason to suspect they'll stop leveraging that strength, yet we're defending against something else entirely. The Bears game was a much better game plan with much better results. Running backs and tight ends can hurt you but WR's and QB's will kill you. You'd think Green Bay would know that as well as any team in the league.

[wist43]

I remember from the radio broadcast that we were already into the 2nd quarter, and there had only been 3 possessions. We had the ball twice, and ATL had it once... so long drives/possessions ate up much of the 1st half - so our defense "holding them down" is a bit of a mirage. We ate up 10:47 of the 1st quarter on 2 possessions.

Atlanta's first drive, they drove it 72 yds, in 9 plays, 4:13 TOP, and scored the TD.

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

In the 2nd quarter, we forced a 3 and out, punt; gave up a 25 yd pass play before Burnett's INT; gave up a 1st down, and then forced a punt after 3 incompletes.

So those 3 possessions were okay... anyone have alignments, coverage, and rush packages for those series??

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

Then on the last possession of the half, Atlanta moved the ball 45 yds, in 2 plays, in 22 seconds, to set up a makable FG - which was blocked.

That knife thru butter impersonation at the end of the half was a precursor of things to come in the 2nd.

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

Not much need to go over what happened in the 2nd half - we got absolutely gashed over, and over again. TOP can't be used as an excuse, b/c overall for the game, we out possessed them 33 to 27.

I'll call around to some buddies and see if anyone recorded it and hasn't deleted it yet... asked a couple of guys already, but no one recorded it.

You guys were all giddy over the NE game, and I gave dunderdummy his props; but I'm here to tell ya - he is a huge ?

[woodbuck27]

I remember from the radio broadcast that we were already into the 2nd quarter, and there had only been 3 possessions. We had the ball twice, and ATL had it once... so long drives/possessions ate up much of the 1st half - so our defense "holding them down" is a bit of a mirage. We ate up 10:47 of the 1st quarter on 2 possessions.

Atlanta's first drive, they drove it 72 yds, in 9 plays, 4:13 TOP, and scored the TD.

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

In the 2nd quarter, we forced a 3 and out, punt; gave up a 25 yd pass play before Burnett's INT; gave up a 1st down, and then forced a punt after 3 incompletes.

So those 3 possessions were okay... anyone have alignments, coverage, and rush packages for those series??

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

Then on the last possession of the half, Atlanta moved the ball 45 yds, in 2 plays, in 22 seconds, to set up a makable FG - which was blocked.

That knife thru butter impersonation at the end of the half was a precursor of things to come in the 2nd.

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

Not much need to go over what happened in the 2nd half - we got absolutely gashed over, and over again. TOP can't be used as an excuse, b/c overall for the game, we out possessed them 33 to 27.

I'll call around to some buddies and see if anyone recorded it and hasn't deleted it yet... asked a couple of guys already, but no one recorded it.

You guys were all giddy over the NE game, and I gave dunderdummy his props; but I'm here to tell ya - he is a huge ?

Yup.

I recorded this game and watched the glorious first half this morning. Yes the Packers 'O' dominated and the defense was well rested. They went to the locker room for half time and went for a nap. Woke up stiff...dazed and confused. It was a dramatic shift in style and execution.

I'll watch the second half tomorrow morning. I can stand the pain.

[Tyrion Lannister]

Yup.

I recorded this game and watched the glorious first half this morning. Yes the Packers 'O' dominated and the defense was well rested. They went to the locker room for half time and went for a nap. Woke up stiff...dazed and confused. It was a dramatic shift in style and execution.

I'll watch the second half tomorrow morning. I can stand the pain.

Just watched the first half tonight. Probably won't watch the 2nd half til sometimes in the off-season.

I know I should be watching the 2nd half b/c Matt Ryan is my favorite non-Packer QB, but I can't stand the pain. :whaa:

[vince]

With the exception of a handful of 3-4 downs, the Packers played pretty much exclusively 2-4 nickel personnel against almost all 1-back, 3 wide offensive groups. Peppers, while always wide in an OLB position outside the tackle on the left, tended to stand up when covered by a TE/H-back and put his hand down when uncovered. The ROLB always stood up in either a one-foot forward rush mode when uncovered or a parallel stance ready to go any direction and press the TE/tight slot when covered up.

Matthews shifted from ILB to ROLB as has been his norm recently and the combination of Neal/Jones patrolled the DL increasingly as the game went on obviously to generate more pass rush, but that didn't materialize.

Coverages tended to match up to personnel, situation (and tendencies I'm sure), but as far as I could tell tended to shift from cover 3 zone - which was too often played too softly - to cover 1 man - which turned out to be too aggressive (against Jones) who had success going over the top of Shields and making double moves on Williams. He was just too big for Hyde early and Heyward later on some slants and crosses from the slot. House played him much too softly in zone a few times but did have a couple break-ups in man on the perimeter.

There was a down early on the first series when the Falcons scored where they went 1-4 dime and all 5 rushed backed up by man press coverage. Jones was too much for Hyde on a quick slant and the pass was completed. I don't recall seeing that again in the game.

It all pretty much worked well in the first half and then leaked a shit ton against the pass with a big lead but got them the win in the second half - particularly the 4th quarter.

[George Cumby]

GBPG says it was the plan to go vanilla after building the big lead:

http://www.packersnews.com/story/sports/nfl/packers/baranczyk/2014/12/09/julio-jones-feasts-packers-vanilla-defense/20173407/

[Carolina_Packer]

GBPG says it was the plan to go vanilla after building the big lead:

http://www.packersnews.com/story/sports/nfl/packers/baranczyk/2014/12/09/julio-jones-feasts-packers-vanilla-defense/20173407/

What I heard was the defensive backs were getting really cocky in the locker room at half time, so MM instructed Capers to run a vanilla defense to humble the defensive backs by having to face Jones on an island. Also duplicitous was the Packers pass rush who helped hang the defensive backs out to dry with little to know pressure on Matt Ryan. I guess they now have their comeuppance. Message received.

[Bossman641]

Just watched the first half tonight. Probably won't watch the 2nd half til sometimes in the off-season.

I know I should be watching the 2nd half b/c Matt Ryan is my favorite non-Packer QB, but I can't stand the pain. :whaa:

You have just crushed Joey Harrington

https://mit.zenfs.com/209/2011/08/joey-harrington-lions.jpg

[woodbuck27]

With the exception of a handful of 3-4 downs, the Packers played pretty much exclusively 2-4 nickel personnel against almost all 1-back, 3 wide offensive groups. Peppers, while always wide in an OLB position outside the tackle on the left, tended to stand up when covered by a TE/H-back and put his hand down when uncovered. The ROLB always stood up in either a one-foot forward rush mode when uncovered or a parallel stance ready to go any direction and press the TE/tight slot when covered up.

Matthews shifted from ILB to ROLB as has been his norm recently and the combination of Neal/Jones patrolled the DL increasingly as the game went on obviously to generate more pass rush, but that didn't materialize.

Coverages tended to match up to personnel, situation (and tendencies I'm sure), but as far as I could tell tended to shift from cover 3 zone - which was too often played too softly - to cover 1 man - which turned out to be too aggressive (against Jones) who had success going over the top of Shields and making double moves on Williams. He was just too big for Hyde early and Heyward later on some slants and crosses from the slot. House played him much too softly in zone a few times but did have a couple break-ups in man on the perimeter.

There was a down early on the first series when the Falcons scored where they went 1-4 dime and all 5 rushed backed up by man press coverage. Jones was too much for Hyde on a quick slant and the pass was completed. I don't recall seeing that again in the game.

It all pretty much worked well in the first half and then leaked a shit ton against the pass with a big lead but got them the win in the second half - particularly the 4th quarter.

I'm just getting set to watch the second half now.

I'll be looking for all you report Vince.

Thanks.

[woodbuck27]

What I heard was the defensive backs were getting really cocky in the locker room at half time, so MM instructed Capers to run a vanilla defense to humble the defensive backs by having to face Jones on an island. Also duplicitous was the Packers pass rush who helped hang the defensive backs out to dry with little to know pressure on Matt Ryan. I guess they now have their comeuppance. Message received.

Are you serious?

[George Cumby]

What I heard was the defensive backs were getting really cocky in the locker room at half time, so MM instructed Capers to run a vanilla defense to humble the defensive backs by having to face Jones on an island. Also duplicitous was the Packers pass rush who helped hang the defensive backs out to dry with little to know pressure on Matt Ryan. I guess they now have their comeuppance. Message received.

If that's true, I don't know if it's inspired or just crazy. Since they won, I guess it was inspired, but it seems dangerous.

What's your source?

[woodbuck27]

Yup.

I recorded this game and watched the glorious first half this morning. Yes the Packers 'O' dominated and the defense was well rested. They went to the locker room for half time and went for a nap. Woke up stiff...dazed and confused. It was a dramatic shift in style and execution.

I'll watch the second half tomorrow morning. I can stand the pain.

http://www.footballdb.com/games/boxscore.html?gid=2014120801

Atlanta Falcons at Green Bay Packers

December 8, 2014 - Lambeau Field, Green Bay, WI ... Attendance: 77,512

I just finished watching the second half and now am less concerned RE: any shock.

It's as I saw it before this game. Atlanta has a formidable offense with Ryan passing to Julio Jones the NO. 1 WR in the NFL right now in terms of receiving yards. Roddy White is getting his health back and is dangerous and Douglas as well. All three of these fellas scored a TD in this game.

I saw Clay Matthews, Sam Barrington and Mike Neal giving it throughout this game. Julius Peppers had a very clean uni when he went to the sidelines late in the 4th Qtr. He didn't look very happy for some reason. He seemed to blend into the background. Is this any real concern?

What I saw was a large lead of 17 points get reduced to 10 Points and smartly back to 17 Points.

Nothing really showed up in a dramatic sense with the Packers defense until late in the last quarter.

With 6:15 left the Packers have a 2 possession lead at 40-30. That's extended to 43-30 with Mason Crosby's long 53 yard FG with about 4:20 left in the 4th quarter.

The Packers 'D' gets gashed by good Falcon runs and the ball reaches the Packers Red Zone in pronto time. The Atlanta falcons are about 60% successful scoring in the Red Zone.

A Matt Ryan pass to Douglas who beats Hayward in a right to left crossing route brings the score to 43-37; but it's now nearing the 2 minute warning and Atlanta needs a good shot at an onside kick and the ball back.

That onside kick effort sucked . It went too far and right to.... of all Packers,.... a sure handed Jordy Nelson. It's game over with 1-2 first down which the Packers offense easily got. Recall James Starks long run down the LHS and inside the Atlanta Red Zone.

This is a game now where both defenses are tired.

It's as expected a Packer win and the score on Atlanta's side is a reflection of maybe a few things:

1. The Packers secondary isn't that good in terms of consistency.

2. I see a lot of cockiness on that secondary and a game is 60 minutes. Don't waste energy celebrating every play that turns out good.

3. That secondary is on the small side and often not up to the task of competing with the likes of ** a Julio Jones.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamdef

The Packers Pass 'D' is Ranked 17th.

What defense can hold that WR down when he's healthy? Julio Jones is a dominating WR. (See Calvin Johnson)

** The Packers have to contain Rookie Sammy Watkins (6-1 and 211 lbs.) of Buffalo this week 15. Buffalo also has a young WR Robert Woods that can be dangerous.

** Then in Week 16 it's outstanding Rookie Mike Evans (6-5; 231 lbs.) of Tampa Bay.

** Next up it's DETROIT in Week 17 ... it's a pair of solid WR's in Megatron and Golden Tate....Look out !

The Packers have to look at this game in terms of the teams defense and of course learn and grow....adjust.

GO PACKERS !

[pbmax]

GBPG says it was the plan to go vanilla after building the big lead:

http://www.packersnews.com/story/sports/nfl/packers/baranczyk/2014/12/09/julio-jones-feasts-packers-vanilla-defense/20173407/

He says it was vanilla early too. Although more than two people are reporting some kind of Cover 3 that could be a zone underneath.

[mraynrand]

He says it was vanilla early too. Although more than two people are reporting some kind of Cover 3 that could be a zone underneath.

well, if it was a zone, it was a matchup zone on Jones, because he was man covered on almost every down that I saw. Unbelievable.

[pbmax]

well, if it was a zone, it was a matchup zone on Jones, because he was man covered on almost every down that I saw. Unbelievable.

Yes on this. Every game article says the Packers did to Jones what they did to Gronk which was play everyone on him, including the slot CBs and safety/CBs.

[Carolina_Packer]

If that's true, I don't know if it's inspired or just crazy. Since they won, I guess it was inspired, but it seems dangerous.

What's your source?

My mind. No, I was totally joking around. Would have been a good story. Kind of seemed like someone getting punished though, huh? :-)

[Joemailman]

Yes on this. Every game article says the Packers did to Jones what they did to Gronk which was play everyone on him, including the slot CBs and safety/CBs.

And yet it seemed that the safeties were in a much better position to affect play against Gronk than they were against Jones. Did the difference in the 2 games have more to do with player execution than with scheme? (Cue Wist)

[3irty1]

And yet it seemed that the safeties were in a much better position to affect play against Gronk than they were against Jones. Did the difference in the 2 games have more to do with player execution than with scheme? (Cue Wist)

The difference has to do with Gronk not being the same caliber of weapon that Jones is. Gronk is a terrific tight end but he's still a tight end. Gronk would need to catch 30 balls to do the kind of damage Julio can do in 10.

[woodbuck27]

Yes on this. Every game article says the Packers did to Jones what they did to Gronk which was play everyone on him, including the slot CBs and safety/CBs.




Tom Silverstein @TomSilverstein

The 259 yards that #Falcons WR Julio Jones had was the most the #Packers have allowed ever, topping Megatron's 244 on Jan. 1, 2012.

[LEWCWA]

Not an X and O guy, but I saw a D that got pretty lucky in the first half and one that went into clock management in the second half way to early. They played soft and got beat up by a very talented player. Thing is they got there break when the Falcons scored on 4th down, Hyde broke up 3rd down pass to the out at the front pylon. Ryan stared down that play and had Hyde not knocked the pass down Shields was going 100 yards the other way for the back breaking score. It didn't work out that way and Atlanta was in desperation mode at that point and scored on 4th down. I don't think MrAyn is too far off on the rope a dope defense, lol. I don't really understand why though. Shields played poor, from what I could tell, but man that dude is fast. He chased down Jones on that long pass. Dude made everyone else look like they were running in quick sand!

[vince]

well, if it was a zone, it was a matchup zone on Jones, because he was man covered on almost every down that I saw. Unbelievable.
http://media.jrn.com/images/Column+Header+-+Mcginn.gifRating the Packers vs. Falcons (http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/rating-the-packers-vs-falcons-b99405554z1-285318851.html)

SECONDARY (one-half)

The best players were Morgan Burnett (66) and Davon House (22). Burnett made Ryan pay for his awful throw by remaining disciplined in coverage, catching the sideline interception in his hands (for the game's only takeaway) and breaking two tackles on a 32-yard return. Burnett spent much of the game in the box as the Packers focused on stopping the run. He's a determined, accurate tackler in-line. House replaced ineffective Sam Shields (45) early in the fourth quarter. He was the only cornerback who got up and challenged Julio Jones on his career day. House broke up two long fades to the dominating big man with tight coverage. He also made a strong face-up tackle to halt the conversion run. Coming off a concussion, Shields had a forgettable showing. On Jones' 22-yard TD, he didn't get a jam and was weak at the ball. He did show great speed chasing down Jones on his 79-yard slant-and-go behind Tramon Williams (67) and hustling to throw a block for Burnett. Williams looked equally as bad in trail technique on a 29-yard dig by aging Roddy White, who's playing on a bum ankle, and dropped a sideline interception after nice coverage. Micah Hyde (42) and Casey Hayward (39) played poorly, too. Hyde let little Eric Weems, a special-teamer, beat him inside on a fourth-and-5 TD pass. Hayward was too deep in the end zone and gave up a too-easy 2-yard TD pass to Harry Douglas. The Packers played some man and they played some zone. The cohesion between the three levels of defense was as bad as it has been all season. Ha Ha Clinton-Dix (67) needs to stop making rookie mistakes.
It was vanilla coverage for sure, but with big receivers coming up pretty much the rest of the season, it's easy to see how they'd prefer to show as little as possible for as long as possible. It'd be nice if the DB's step up to that challenge and play better to help make that happen a little bit more.

[pbmax]

The difference has to do with Gronk not being the same caliber of weapon that Jones is. Gronk is a terrific tight end but he's still a tight end. Gronk would need to catch 30 balls to do the kind of damage Julio can do in 10.

Exactly. They are so different, I actually think Capers whiffed on that idea. Unless Baranczyk is right and he was non-game planning them. Which is not standard M3 operating procedure.

[woodbuck27]

http://www.packers.com/news-and-events/article-locker-room-report/article-1/Packers-defense-has-no-answer-for-Julio-Jones/7c20417e-26e1-486c-81fe-f690f30a793b

Packers defense has no answer for Julio Jones

Posted Dec 8, 2014

[woodbuck27]

Not an X and O guy, but I saw a D that got pretty lucky in the first half and one that went into clock management in the second half way to early. They played soft and got beat up by a very talented player. Thing is they got there break when the Falcons scored on 4th down, Hyde broke up 3rd down pass to the out at the front pylon. Ryan stared down that play and had Hyde not knocked the pass down Shields was going 100 yards the other way for the back breaking score. It didn't work out that way and Atlanta was in desperation mode at that point and scored on 4th down. I don't think MrAyn is too far off on the rope a dope defense, lol. I don't really understand why though. Shields played poor, from what I could tell, but man that dude is fast. He chased down Jones on that long pass. Dude made everyone else look like they were running in quick sand!


" Shields played poor, from what I could tell, but man that dude is fast. He chased down Jones on that long pass. Dude made everyone else look like they were running in quick sand! " LEWCWA

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2295058-sam-shields-exposed-in-matchup-vs-julio-jones

Sam Shields Exposed in Matchup vs. Julio Jones

By: Justis Mosqueda , Featured Columnist

Dec 10, 2014

Comment woodbuck27:

Sam Shields is fast. It also looked to me like Sam Shields chased down Julio Jones but I learned I was wrong when I reviewed my recording of the game this morning..

With the score Packers 31 over Atlanta 7 and now in the 3rd Qtr.:

It was NO. 38 Tramon Williams who beaten up field, turned and ran Julio Jones down with Sam Shields (who did close very fast) next in with an assist on the tackle inside the Packer 5 yard line with approx. 14:41 remaining in the 3rd Qtr.

You'll see this by looking at the video at the bottom of the article above.

GO PACK GO !

[Joemailman]

Shields was running Jones down and forced him to cut to the middle of the field where others were able to make the tackle. That would have been a TD without Shields doing what he did.

[wist43]

GBPG says it was the plan to go vanilla after building the big lead:

http://www.packersnews.com/story/sports/nfl/packers/baranczyk/2014/12/09/julio-jones-feasts-packers-vanilla-defense/20173407/

The logic of saying - let's keep possible double coverage and bracketing a secret, b/c we might face them in the playoffs - is so flawed I don't even know where to begin!!

Does anyone really think that any defense doubling or bracketing Jones would come as a surprise to the Falcons?? That should have been the basis of the gameplan for this game from the start, and it should the founding principle of any gameplan should we face them again!!

Is there some unspoken Packer rule that says we can only employ sound logic against an opponent once, but not twice, b/c, '... boy, won't they be surprised when we don't play as stupidly the second time'??

We are always 1 gameplan away from disasterous results with dunderdummy as our DC. Now, after what should have been a momentum and confidence building win against NE, dunderdummy comes out and allows yet another record setting performance (breaking the previous record also allowed by dunderdummy) against us.

In predictable dunderdummy fashion, he has killed our momentum and confidence, and the talk of the Packers being the clear frontrunner in the NFC has changed to, '... can Rodgers and the offense overcome that pathetic defense'??

[woodbuck27]

Shields was running Jones down and forced him to cut to the middle of the field where others were able to make the tackle. That would have been a TD without Shields doing what he did.

Tramon Williams made the tackle a step in front of Sam Shields.


There's more here:

Observe how Tramon Williams runs around Morgan Burnett. How much slower (or maybe? just lazy) Burnett is on this play.

[mraynrand]

^^^ of course you are right Wist. Capers should have lit Jones up at the LOS, but he's too afraid to take those kind of chances. Prefers this slow to medium bleeding. That man coverage of Jones was the most absurd thing I've seen in a long while. Even my friend watching the game with me, who knows little about football, knew that strategy was flawed. Kudos to House for the way he stood up to the challenge though.

[mraynrand]

BTW, if 33 didn't tip that 3rd and goal pass at the beginning of the second half, Shields probably gets a pick 6 and ends the game. Too bad.

[woodbuck27]

The logic of saying - let's keep possible double coverage and bracketing a secret, b/c we might face them in the playoffs - is so flawed I don't even know where to begin!!

Does anyone really think that any defense doubling or bracketing Jones would come as a surprise to the Falcons?? That should have been the basis of the gameplan for this game from the start, and it should the founding principle of any gameplan should we face them again!!

Is there some unspoken Packer rule that says we can only employ sound logic against an opponent once, but not twice, b/c, '... boy, won't they be surprised when we don't play as stupidly the second time'??

We are always 1 gameplan away from disasterous results with dunderdummy as our DC. Now, after what should have been a momentum and confidence building win against NE, dunderdummy comes out and allows yet another record setting performance (breaking the previous record also allowed by dunderdummy) against us.

In predictable dunderdummy fashion, he has killed our momentum and confidence, and the talk of the Packers being the clear frontrunner in the NFC has changed to, '... can Rodgers and the offense overcome that pathetic defense'??

Did you observe Julius Peppers demeanor at the end of the game? His seemingly to me distance or non-attachment to those he plays with ...and if I saw that accurately?

What or why was that?

He looked sad.

[pbmax]

^^^ of course you are right Wist. Capers should have lit Jones up at the LOS, but he's too afraid to take those kind of chances. Prefers this slow to medium bleeding. That man coverage of Jones was the most absurd thing I've seen in a long while. Even my friend watching the game with me, who knows little about football, knew that strategy was flawed. Kudos to House for the way he stood up to the challenge though.

While wist is arguing with a former High School coach I do agree they should have pressed him harder on the line.

Several pre-game article mentioned that Jones one weakness was getting of the LOS. But I get the idea, and not just on the Packers, that part of CB technique is left to the CB to determine. I wonder if none of the others wanted to bump him. Maybe need to hire Al Harris back.

[wist43]

^^^ of course you are right Wist. Capers should have lit Jones up at the LOS, but he's too afraid to take those kind of chances. Prefers this slow to medium bleeding. That man coverage of Jones was the most absurd thing I've seen in a long while. Even my friend watching the game with me, who knows little about football, knew that strategy was flawed. Kudos to House for the way he stood up to the challenge though.

You can play man on Jones, and jam him off the line, but I'd have safety help over the top... safety help that is dedicated to Jones, and not subject to being run off by another receiver intended to do just that.

I can't stand Belichick, but he always gameplans that way, i.e. take away their #1 option, and deal with whatever is left.

I would have approached Jones the same way I would have approached Gronk - except that the underneath coverage on Jones would have to be a CB, whereas the underneath coverage on Gronk could be anyone you want... the key is, you always, always have safety help.

In that link someone posted, the first thing that stood out to me about the picture of Jones making the catch over Shields was - where is the safety?? Of course there is no safety in the picture, b/c dunderdummy is our DC.

I read some of the comments from fans at the end of that article, and the first communt was from a guy who said it well, "... we're a roll of the dice defense". One week it's yatzee, the next week it's snake eyes.

I say it all the time - our defense, and therefore our teams chances, rest solely one man - dunderdummy. If everything else is fairly constant - he is the constant variable... you just never know what you're going to get week in, and week out.

Dunderdummy can't be trusted - even if he pitched 3 straight shutouts going into the playoffs this year - he'd be just as likely to blow a gasket and give up 50+ pts and embarrass us out of the playoffs with a "one and done".

[mraynrand]

Did you observe Julius Peppers demeanor at the end of the game? His seemingly to me distance or non-attachment to those he plays with ...and if I saw that accurately?

What or why was that?

He looked sad.

I think he realized how many years he wasted before he looked upon Luke with his own eyes.

[gbgary]

they seemed intent on playing it one way with jones in spite of the results. baffling.

[George Cumby]

My mind. No, I was totally joking around. Would have been a good story. Kind of seemed like someone getting punished though, huh? :-)

You got me good! Fucker. :-)

[vince]

wist - CMON MAN!

There are a number of different ways to cheat the defense to a guy and a number of situations where you might want to do so - or not. You can play a soft cover 2 like teams do against the Packers which comes short of doubling a guy like you're talking about and still has more than its share of holes. But you're talking about predictably dedicating two guys to Jones and never taking them off - the whole game on all downs from start to finish as if it's some grade school strategy that would be guaranteed to shut down the Falcons. It's grade school alright.

You spew terms like "unsound" around like there's no tomorrow and now you're talking about sacrificing the integrity of the D - not around the ball with layers of back-up - but leaving gaping holes from the ball all the way to the end zone. And you want to do it in a completely predictable way like it's a no-brainer strategy but Capers isn't smart enough to have thought of it.

You think Mike Smith and Matt Ryan aren't good enough to use White, Douglas and Hester against a boundary corner, slot/backup corner and a safety (or worse) with no one else between them and the end zone - when they know what's coming, how and when (all game long) - no ifs ands or buts with no attempt to hide coverage or change anything up. You talk about stressing a defense that'll do it quickly and all day long... and you think that's what Bellichek would do?

What they did (with a big lead) was too simple, too soft much of the time and guys played like shit but it was at least fundamentally sound. With the exception of the 80 yarder to start the half when Tramon bit on a double move they forced time off the clock in spite of poor individual perimeter play. They gave up yards in 10-yard chunks instead of 50 yard chunks like would likely happen in your approach.

You're right about one thing. There's no logical reason to keep that defense a secret. No surprises indeed.

[mraynrand]

But you're talking about predictably dedicating two guys to Jones and never taking them off - the whole game on all downs from start to finish as if it's some grade school strategy that would be guaranteed to shut down the Falcons. It's grade school alright.....

I don't know about Bretsky, but this is not what I was talking about. I think you could mix a few double teams in - and hit the guy hard at the LOS. And then you also make sure you shade the safety to his side. Or just stay in mostly two-deep zone so it isn't hard to get over the top in a hurry. Perhaps this is just a Clinton-Dix issue - maybe he hasn't yet learned the subtleties of appearing to be covering both sides, but then shading late to one side, etc. etc. He should watch some tape of Brian Dawkins.

[vince]

I was referring to Coordinator wist's prescription above sorry ayn.

[wist43]

There are a number of different ways to cheat the defense to a guy and a number of situations where you might want to do so - or not. You can play a soft cover 2 like teams do against the Packers which comes short of doubling a guy like you're talking about and still has more than its share of holes. But you're talking about predictably dedicating two guys to Jones and never taking them off - the whole game on all downs from start to finish as if it's some grade school strategy that would be guaranteed to shut down the Falcons. It's grade school alright.

You spew terms like "unsound" around like there's no tomorrow and now you're talking about sacrificing the integrity of the D - not around the ball with layers of back-up - but leaving gaping holes from the ball all the way to the end zone. And you want to do it in a completely predictable way like it's a no-brainer strategy but Capers isn't smart enough to have thought of it.

You think Mike Smith and Matt Ryan aren't good enough to use White, Douglas and Hester against a boundary corner, slot/backup corner and a safety (or worse) with no one else between them and the end zone - when they know what's coming, how and when (all game long) - no ifs ands or buts with no attempt to hide coverage or change anything up. You talk about stressing a defense that'll do it quickly and all day long... and you think that's what Bellichek would do?

What they did (with a big lead) was too simple, too soft much of the time and guys played like shit but it was at least fundamentally sound. With the exception of the 80 yarder to start the half when Tramon bit on a double move they forced time off the clock in spite of poor individual perimeter play. They gave up yards in 10-yard chunks instead of 50 yard chunks like would likely happen in your approach.

You're right about one thing. There's no logical reason to keep that defense a secret. No surprises indeed.

Double post

[wist43]

There are a number of different ways to cheat the defense to a guy and a number of situations where you might want to do so - or not. You can play a soft cover 2 like teams do against the Packers which comes short of doubling a guy like you're talking about and still has more than its share of holes. But you're talking about predictably dedicating two guys to Jones and never taking them off - the whole game on all downs from start to finish as if it's some grade school strategy that would be guaranteed to shut down the Falcons. It's grade school alright.

You spew terms like "unsound" around like there's no tomorrow and now you're talking about sacrificing the integrity of the D - not around the ball with layers of back-up - but leaving gaping holes from the ball all the way to the end zone. And you want to do it in a completely predictable way like it's a no-brainer strategy but Capers isn't smart enough to have thought of it.

You think Mike Smith and Matt Ryan aren't good enough to use White, Douglas and Hester against a boundary corner, slot/backup corner and a safety (or worse) with no one else between them and the end zone - when they know what's coming, how and when (all game long) - no ifs ands or buts with no attempt to hide coverage or change anything up. You talk about stressing a defense that'll do it quickly and all day long... and you think that's what Bellichek would do?

What they did (with a big lead) was too simple, too soft much of the time and guys played like shit but it was at least fundamentally sound. With the exception of the 80 yarder to start the half when Tramon bit on a double move they forced time off the clock in spite of poor individual perimeter play. They gave up yards in 10-yard chunks instead of 50 yard chunks like would likely happen in your approach.

You're right about one thing. There's no logical reason to keep that defense a secret. No surprises indeed.

There you guys go again - taking a general statement of mine and extrapolating it to all circumstances, and then declaring it null and void. More intellectually dishonesty.

Of course teams are going send guys in motion, and shift presnap to drop a safety down on one side or the other, etc... all that means is that the coverage would change with who has what responsibility to cover the #1 threat on any given play depending on personnel.

To be sure, there would be instances in which a guy like Jones would be isolated one on one, or could only be covered within a zone - that is the presnap chess game of formation, personnel, motion, and audibles; but for the most part, the gameplan should be such that those instances would be limited.

When the offense would be able to iso a guy like Jones - that would be a "win" them in the game within a game - even if they weren't able to execute and connect.

Is this rocket science to you guys??

[vince]

Just going by what you wrote wist. I need to re-remind myself not to get mired in the circle-jerk of scheme discussion guaranteed to go nowhere. "That's not what I meant. I really meant this you idiot." Carry on with your authoritative solutions Mr. Coordinator.

[pbmax]

From Bob McGinn's rating the Packers vs Falcons: http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/rating-the-packers-vs-falcons-b99405554z1-285318851.html


Sam Barrington (44) joined Matthews in nickel and A.J. Hawk (eight) in base, and Brad Jones (23) was the dime. Barrington's alignments are far from precise. He does play downhill, and is a heavier hitter than Hawk or Jones. His vulnerability in coverage was apparent on a 14-yard pass to Jacquizz Rodgers when he was slow reacting and didn't get through a pick. Jones wasn't a dependable presence in the middle. Hawk didn't see the field until 4 minutes remained in the half.

If you have to play Hawk, why would you pick base when, if he has a strength, its coverage? Whatever is affecting him, the new development has to be his legs or something else affecting his speed.

It would really help if Jones could be passable in coverage, but he seems incapable of improvement.

[wist43]

Just going by what you wrote wist. I need to re-remind myself not to get mired in the circle-jerk of scheme discussion guaranteed to go nowhere. "That's not what I meant. I really meant this you idiot." Carry on with your authoritative solutions Mr. Coordinator.

And I really meant this you idiot - if you don't know anything about football, you should probably keep your commentary restricted to how much like the team colors.

[Fritz]

PB, I do agree that the entire ILB corp is now a tire fire. Jones is less than a JAG, Hawk is slower than my mom, Barrington is a part-time guy who can plug the run but can't cover his ears, Lattimore is ST only, and obviously the team feels that Carl Bradford is still nowhere near being able to play inside. Or probably outside.

I wonder if Dom - or if anyone - will be able to scheme around that weakness in the middle of the field. Thank the gods that Matthews is playing inside at all.

[pbmax]

PB, I do agree that the entire ILB corp is now a tire fire. Jones is less than a JAG, Hawk is slower than my mom, Barrington is a part-time guy who can plug the run but can't cover his ears, Lattimore is ST only, and obviously the team feels that Carl Bradford is still nowhere near being able to play inside. Or probably outside.

I wonder if Dom - or if anyone - will be able to scheme around that weakness in the middle of the field. Thank the gods that Matthews is playing inside at all.

The one theory of wist that I do find interesting is the old chestnut that the Packers don't draft defense well and haven't since Wolf came on board.

While I think that is overstating it, they do go through streaks at positions where nothing they try hits. And then at QB and WR, Ted could wake up from a year long coma 5 days before the draft and get you 3 guys who can play in the NFL.

[wist43]

PB, I do agree that the entire ILB corp is now a tire fire. Jones is less than a JAG, Hawk is slower than my mom, Barrington is a part-time guy who can plug the run but can't cover his ears, Lattimore is ST only, and obviously the team feels that Carl Bradford is still nowhere near being able to play inside. Or probably outside.

I wonder if Dom - or if anyone - will be able to scheme around that weakness in the middle of the field. Thank the gods that Matthews is playing inside at all.

I actually like what I saw from Barrington in the NE game - didn't see the Atlanta game, so I don't know how he did there; but overall, I'd say Barrington should be given an opportunity to stick. The rest of 'em should all be cut in the offseason.

That said, the lack of playmakers in the middle is all the more reason to gameplan more to have guys like Perry, Neal, and D. Jones on the field, and Matthews/Neal roving in the middle. In base 3-4, count Barrington as 1... why not try Neal there?? He's primarily a pass rusher and edge guy, but he's got a lot of bulk and movement skill for the position. I'd rather have Neal on the field at ILB than any of the actual ILB's we have.

In base you could have Daniels, Guion, D. Jones on the line; and Peppers, Neal, Barrington, and Matthews at LB.

Just about anything is better than having Hawk and Brad Jones on the field.

[wist43]

The one theory of wist that I do find interesting is the old chestnut that the Packers don't draft defense well and haven't since Wolf came on board.

While I think that is overstating it, they do go through streaks at positions where nothing they try hits. And then at QB and WR, Ted could wake up from a year long coma 5 days before the draft and get you 3 guys who can play in the NFL.

I like a lot of the players we have now... the question for this current crop of players is, '... where do you play them, and how do you use them'?? There absolutely has been a disconnect between TT and dunderdummy. Less so this year, as I think dunderdummy was brought into the principles office during the offseason.

That said, it is just true that the Packers historically don't draft very well on the defensive side of the ball, but I'm taking that back to the 70's when I really began to pay attention to our drafts - and as you said, they could sling a spitball at the wall and hit on a WR.

[George Cumby]

And I really meant this you idiot - if you don't know anything about football, you should probably keep your commentary restricted to how much like the team colors.

I really like forest green!

[Maxie the Taxi]

I really love gold!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DOFAnpb8I3E

[pbmax]

I like a lot of the players we have now... the question for this current crop of players is, '... where do you play them, and how do you use them'?? There absolutely has been a disconnect between TT and dunderdummy. Less so this year, as I think dunderdummy was brought into the principles office during the offseason.

That said, it is just true that the Packers historically don't draft very well on the defensive side of the ball, but I'm taking that back to the 70's when I really began to pay attention to our drafts - and as you said, they could sling a spitball at the wall and hit on a WR.

Well we diverge here too. Daniels, Guion, Boyd and Jones all had awful, pedestrian games against a bunch of scrubs. Neal was the only front seven guy to show up other than Matthews.

[Fritz]

Against Russell Wilson in a passing situation, how about the NASCAR package, if one of the guys is a spy? That might keep those ILB's on the bench.

[vince]

And I really meant this you idiot - if you don't know anything about football, you should probably keep your commentary restricted to how much like the team colors.
With authority!
Packers Defense: What My Eyes Might Be Missing (http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2295593-packers-defense-and-seahawks-o-line-lies-my-statistics-told-me)


Packers Yards Allowed

The Numbers: The Green Bay Packers defense ranks 26th in the NFL with 374.4 yards allowed per game. The Atlanta Falcons nearly came back on it Monday night. At first glance, the defense looks very vulnerable over the long haul.

The Truth: No one will mistake the Packers defense for the Seattle Seahawks defense. But there is an incredible amount of fluff in its yardage allowed totals, due to the fact that the Packers offense is so good that opponents rack up gobs of garbage yardage against a prevent defense.

Opponents have accumulated 1,126 passing yards and 359 rushing yards when trailing by 17 or more points (all stat splits come from the Football Outsiders internal database unless noted otherwise). Those 1,485 yards work out to an average of 114.2 yards per game, over 30 percent of the Packers total yardage allowed! It's safe to assume that the Packers defense can tighten up and cut down on that 114.2 yard figure if it has to. After all, those 17-point leads never happen if the defense does not make a few early stops.

Coming at it another way, Football Outsiders ranks defenses by quarter in its Premium Database. Here is how the Packers defense shakes out on a quarter-by-quarter basis:

Packers Defensive Rank by Quarter
Quarter....Rank
First.........10th
Second.....14th
Third........14th
Fourth......28th

Football Outsiders' methodology adjusts for late-game blowouts, but it does not completely ignore them; scares like the Packers received on Monday night are a reminder that so-called "meaningless" drives can pile up and cause a problem. But the quarter-by-quarter analysis shows a better-than-average defense through three quarters with a habit of letting up when it enters the fourth leading 48-7. That's as good a defense as the Packers need to remain Super Bowl contenders. When the games are tighter, the Packers are less likely to let up.

And now I see in another thread that PB once again beat me to the punch.

I love green.

[mraynrand]

It's just possible a lot of guys took the night off. Can't get away with that against the Bills. They are gonna bring the hammer.

[woodbuck27]

Well we diverge here too. Daniels, Guion, Boyd and Jones all had awful, pedestrian games against a bunch of scrubs. Neal was the only front seven guy to show up other than Matthews.

I felt that Sam Barrington had a decent game with 5 Tackles and 2 Assisted Tackles:

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2014120800/2014/REG14/falcons@packers#menu=gameinfo%7CcontentId%3A0ap300 0000441493&tab=analyze&analyze=boxscore

[wist43]

Well we diverge here too. Daniels, Guion, Boyd and Jones all had awful, pedestrian games against a bunch of scrubs. Neal was the only front seven guy to show up other than Matthews.

It sounds like dunderdummy ran a pretty vanilla 2-4 most of the game, no?? Regardless of what coverages he ran on the back end... if he ran his patented static 2-4 most of the game - then he set his players up to fail before the first snap.

I can't really comment on the type of game those guys had b/c I haven't seen the game. If we ran a 2-4 most of the game, and remained fairly static in our presnap looks, then that front is very predicatable. The players do not have the assistance of scheme helping them gain an edge - it is straight forward mano-o-mano... no deception, and very little stunting and blitzing.

If that is what dunderdummy ran most of the game, then the lack of pressure is more his fault than the players. If he put them in the best position to make plays - and it certainly sounds like he did not, and the results would say that he did not - then it would be on the players.

Someone posted that we ran the 3-4 front 8 times during the game... what else did he run, how often, how many blitzes, etc??

[Joemailman]

Someone posted that we ran the 3-4 front 8 times during the game... what else did he run, how often, how many blitzes, etc??

Blitzed only 24% of the time, the least since week 3.

[Zool]

Blitzed only 24% of the time, the least since week 3.

And a lot of that was during the 4th quarter attempt to not lose.

[mraynrand]

I had the feeling the Packers were in 'prevent mode' the entire game.

[George Cumby]

I had the feeling the Packers were in 'prevent mode' the entire game.

Which is what one does with a big lead, n'est ce pas?

Je t'aime vert!

[vince]

It's pretty clear that Dom's approach revolves around this, from the Quality Stats link in Woody's thread... He's said as much before.


3. Owning the Quarterback Battle

As you've likely heard from us, efficiency in the passing game on both sides of the football gives you best chance to win in this league. That's why we call Passer Rating Differential the "Mother of All Stats." However, if you want a spin off to this story, look at Real Quarterback Rating Differential. This stat applies better to today's discussion particularly because of how Russell Wilson is running the football under center. RQRD adjusts the PRD to sacks and rushing totals from quarterbacks to give a more complete picture.

Don't be surprised that these four teams lead the league in RQRD. This includes four of the top five offenses in this area (the Dallas Cowboys rank fourth in REALQBR). The Green Bay Packers led the league with a 27.18 RQRD, followed by the Denver Broncos with a 18.77 RQRD.

The New England Patriots and Seattle Seahawks rank third and fourth in RQRD, respectively. However, they are only two teams to rank the in the top 9 on both sides of the football (the Indianapolis Colts are quite close, ranking 9th and 10th on offense and defense, respectively).
Defenses obviously don't operate in a vacuum. Having (by far) the most efficient QB in history tends to make his defensive approach more conservative.

[woodbuck27]

With authority!
Packers Defense: What My Eyes Might Be Missing (http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2295593-packers-defense-and-seahawks-o-line-lies-my-statistics-told-me)



And now I see in another thread that PB once again beat me to the punch.

I love green.

This is a solid find:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2295593-packers-defense-and-seahawks-o-line-lies-my-statistics-told-me

Did B/R come through here? Give us a ditto heads up on a Football Outsiders Report/Analysis Result?

I believe so. I also find it comforting. :-)

[wist43]

It's pretty clear that Dom's approach revolves around this, from the Quality Stats link in Woody's thread... He's said as much before.


Defenses obviously don't operate in a vacuum. Having (by far) the most efficient QB in history tends to make his defensive approach more conservative.

I would say that is a bunch of crap - however, it is obvious the Packers put stock in the fact that their offense is so good, that they sew that fact into how they approach defense. The only time it works is when the team has a lead; the opponent isn't very proficient at running the ball, or isn't running the ball due to the lead; the opponent is offensively challenged and inferior; or we're getting a lot of turnovers.

Too much of that formula is dependent upon things that are outside the control of the defense itself. When we run into teams that can contain our offense - our defense is usually in big, big trouble - b/c we don't have an identity (or at least prior to getting back to some 3 man lines we didn't) to play tough and get stops... at least enough stops to overcome the opponents ability to stifle our offense.

Even given that our defense is now being used in a more traditional way, i.e. more 3 man fronts, and more shrift being given to contesting the LOS, we are still constructed to deal with the pass over the run; hence, a heavy running team like Seattle, SF, or Dallas can usually control the game by controlling the ball on the ground and turning that running game and those yds into points.

Yes, it is true that the league is largely a passing league, but that doesn't mean you can just abandon run defense - like Capers has done for the pass 3 years. We're 0-4 against SF, and 0-2 against Seattle in the past few years - that is not an accident; and almost all of the games went by the same formula. Only the 23-20 loss to SF in the playoffs was a competitive game where Capers played a lot of 3-4 (with the players they cut loose this offseason). The fail mary game Seattle was just coming on the scene, but they held us to 12 pts in that game, and sacked Rodgers 8 times in the first half.

I don't like the approach at all. Defense should be a stand alone proposition apart from whatever the offense is doing. The goal of defense should be to get stops, force punts, and prevent points - it should not be a hope and prayer that we force a turnover, or be minutes off the clock before the offense gets back out there and scores us a TD. I would much rather force 5-7 punts/game, 3 FG attempts, and get 3-4 sacks/game, than to get 1 turnover, and give up 450+ yds and 35+ pts/game.

[vince]

There's not a fan out there who wouldn't want the best defense in the league to go along with the best offense in the league.

- Most experts put the Packers at the very top of the league in terms of Super Bowl odds this year as they fight down the stretch for the #1 seed in the NFC.

- The Packers are alone with the Pats (who they just beat) in terms of enjoying sustained success over the last 8 years or so, including a Super Bowl win.

- You could go on and on with all the great things about this team.

Yet your outlook is just loaded with nothing but doom, gloom and a fixation on the negative.

- You called the 2013 Packer draft class - which looks like one of Ted's best in his tenure, perhaps outdone by the 2014 class - an "unmitigated disaster" when it was happening and shortly after...

- You characterized the team as years away from being competitive when they were on the precipice of huge success.

- You can probably count on one hand the number of posts you've made without the word dunderdummy in the past year... Maybe that's an exaggeration but not by much.

- The defense is average in most respects. Could be a hell of a lot better no doubt. They're 21st in Rushing YpA. 12th in Passing YpA. 25th in Yards Allowed. 18th in Points Allowed. Not good but not as horrible as you regularly characterize it.

The team gets the lead and Dom goes into bend/take time off the clock mode. Statistics show that they are much better when the game is competitive and they let up when they have big leads.

Sure they have struggled with really good defensive teams. Those have been the teams that have either won the Super Bowl or were right there at the end every year. Most teams have struggled with the Packers.

- Above you say, "The only time it works is when the team has a lead." Do you recognize that the team hasn't been behind in any second of any game in about seven weeks?

- Anything remotely positive you grudgingly acknowledge is almost always immediately followed by something negative.

My question is this: Why so fixated on doom and gloom when there's so much to celebrate and enjoy as a Packer fan?

[vince]

Here's the win probability graph for the Falcons game from Pro Football Reference. The game was never in doubt but reading some posts you'd think they got killed.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/201412080gnb.htm

[Bretsky]

WHERE do we rate in turnovers this year is Dom's Defense ????

[Joemailman]

WHERE do we rate in turnovers this year is Dom's Defense ????

5th In INT's with 16. 15th in fumble recoveries with 8. Tied for 1st with 4 defensive TD's scored.

[Joemailman]

My question is this: Why so fixated on doom and gloom when there's so much to celebrate and enjoy as a Packer fan?

That's just Wist being Wist. Whether he's talking Packers or America, he sees little hope.

[mraynrand]

That's just Wist being Wist. Whether he's talking Packers or America, he sees little hope.

http://s.quickmeme.com/img/2a/2afe23ade764af46e1ea542b1738545d1f4d24c894a655418e f2e14e0a7b6ec0.jpg

[wist43]

That's just Wist being Wist. Whether he's talking Packers or America, he sees little hope.

It isn't that I see little hope for the Packers - on the contrary, I think we have enough pieces in place to win a title. We just have one huge, glaring weakness - dunderdummy. As for Amerika - ya got me there, lol... absolutely no hope for Amerika. On that score, we are in fact doomed.

What sets me apart from the rest of you guys is that I only focus on that which is wrong and needs to be fixed - you guys like to drink kool-aid and prattle on about how great our offense is, as if that is all that is required.

If the last few years have taught us anything, it is that, defensively, we are a severely flawed team; and when we run into bullies, i.e. teams that take running the ball and playing lights out defense very seriously - we usually get our asses handed to us. It is our flaw. It is our Achilles Heel. It is what is holding us back from winning titles.

We went 15-1 a few years ago, but had the worst defense in the league - come playoff time we were 1 and done. Then there are the embarrassing playoff losses, getting shoved around by SF and Seattle, etc.

If we had even a marginally better or more consistent defense, I think everyone would be saying we're the favorite and I'd agree; but as it is, after last weeks debacle, all I hear on the radio is '... can the Packers overcome that putrid defense'??... and I agree. That is the #1 question concerning our chances - of course I'm going to focus on that.

[denverYooper]

On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everything drops to zero.

Now excuse me, I've got to go season someone's lobster bisque.

[mraynrand]

What sets me apart from the rest of you guys is that I only focus on that which is wrong and needs to be fixed - you guys like to drink kool-aid and prattle on about how great our offense is, as if that is all that is required.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-1G3fCWYS294/UgRCOZGNpqI/AAAAAAAAAZs/m5xJqTfxX6g/s1600/straw-man.jpg

[George Cumby]

You are not special. You're not a beautiful and unique snowflake. You're the same decaying organic matter as everything else. We're all part of the same compost heap. We're all singing, all dancing crap of the world.

[wist43]

You are not special. You're not a beautiful and unique snowflake. You're the same decaying organic matter as everything else. We're all part of the same compost heap. We're all singing, all dancing crap of the world.

I live in Amerika - I agree, Amerikans are a bunch of "singing, all dancing crap of the world" ;)

[Fritz]

So how 'bout that Dom Capers guy? Wonder if his defense can win a game in Buffalo today?

[Cheesehead Craig]

Buffalo loss isn't on the defense. Gave up 12 pts. Offense just shat the bed

[pbmax]

Genius. No TDs surrendered today even with exciting tackling methods.

[wist43]

Good grief, it was against Buffalo... Kyle Orton, a 41 year old RB, and a bunch of nobodys.

It was exactly the kind of game I thought it would be... although, I did think we would win a close one. Jordy catches that bomb, it's a different game.