The Packers defense is better than you think

[RashanGary]

Jaire, King, and Savage are all three young, athletic players with a lot of upside and have shown aptitude for true high end veteran play one day. Obviously Jaire looks like the Best of them but it took him time to get there. The same way Savage is now turning it on and King is better than given credit.

Pettine was not going to be able to run 4 different styles of defense to perfection with 23 and 24 year old. It was always going to be a process to get them to the level we all want. That is what has been happening. Period.

They took some bumps with the zone learning but have absolutely made improvements. They have always played solid man defense.


They're gonna turn it on and are turning it on in spurts as I see more and more huge plays with sneaky blitzes that no one sees coming. You can't get away with those blitzes if the back end isn't trickint the QB into not finding that hot read.

It's happening. Now. The statistics don't show it, but the packers defense is good! And a big part of the reason is the learning time they put into building some nice reliable zone options from young players who NEEDED to learn.


Relax! This is a great team. There is more to football than 24 year old knowing it all on day 1. Get over the panic and enjoy seeing guys grow. If you can't see the process, no.wonder it's frustrating

[bobblehead]

Its better. But to the point I always argued with Pb when he was man enough to debate, when you dominate ToP and keep the other teams offense sitting on the sideline out of rhythm and stiff all facets of the game improve. If you go 3 and out, or score in 28 seconds your D gets worn down and the opposition gains rhythm and focus. Game flow is completely misunderstood by fans and even most coaches. We are in a great game flow right now. When fat mike got to the 4th quarter and tried to run to kill the clock it was a quick 3 and out. Other teams defenses were usually fresh still and we didn't really focus on the run game in practice or in game. M4 gets to that last 6 minutes and still throws short, runs effective and finishes the job.

[Upnorth]

It may be better than I think but that still puts itbelow average

[HarveyWallbangers]

It's probably better than most think, but it's still firmly average. They are up to 8th in yards allowed (at just over 330 yards/game), 10th in sacks, 12th in passing yards allowed, and 12th in rushing yards allowed. Yet, they are 17th in points allowed. Part of the yardage stats is the offense keeps them off the field--although the special teams haven't been doing them in service. It does seem like--as there stats are improving--they are getting worse in red zone defense.

[gbgary]

i think they're "pretty good" so no they're not better than i think. it'll take everyone on deck and healthy to make it to a SB. oh...and it'll take the O playing small ball, and keeping the D off the field...like yesterday's 2nd half and the first 4 games of the season. first downs over ill-timed attempts at big plays. ball control.

[Joemailman]

It's probably better than most think, but it's still firmly average. They are up to 8th in yards allowed (at just over 330 yards/game), 10th in sacks, 12th in passing yards allowed, and 12th in rushing yards allowed. Yet, they are 17th in points allowed. Part of the yardage stats is the offense keeps them off the field--although the special teams haven't been doing them in service. It does seem like--as there stats are improving--they are getting worse in red zone defense.

They rank high in yards allowed as you say, but are only 16th in average yards allowed per play. As you say, the offense keeping them off the field helps the total yardage. What's bothersome to me is that they're only 24th in INT's and 27th in total turnovers. Those ranks should be higher given that they're often playing with double digit leads. The lack of defensive turnovers hasn't badly hurt this team only because the Packers offense is the best in the NFL at avoiding turnovers.

What does it all mean? Probably that if the defense can get off the field enough that the Packers offense has the upper hand in time of possession, they have a chance against anybody in the NFC.

[texaspackerbacker]

The personnel is probably better than most people think. The performance is also - maybe about a third of the time. But the rest of the time, the D is dragging things down by not being able to get off the field and cutting down the time Aaron Rodgers, Adams, Jones, etc. can work their magic.

I think the reason for the inconsistency is scheme/coaching. Pettine finally figured out how to stop the run versus the Lions. Great, but he apparently did so by letting them pass like crazy - back to that loose zone that wins games but wins ugly, and who knows what happens against a better team. It's annoying that the Packers can't seem to stop both the pass and the run in the same game.

Personnel-wise, we sure could use a decent ILB. I had hope before the season that Kirksey would be that, but he has been pure crap. I was one of those last year that said don't draft an ILB early because the position for the Packers anyway, just isn't that important. I hereby roll that back. That is the missing piece of the puzzle. The only other significant weakness is Kevin King as the second Corner. It seems like he gets beat too often in man coverage and appears also to be the main culprit when zone D breaks down.

[run pMc]

Unless your offense gets decimated by injuries or FA, offense tends to be more consistent year over year. Defense tends to have higher variability because of turnovers (and sacks to a lesser extent) vary from year to year, and have a big impact.
I strongly agree the ToP by the MLF offense makes them look better, as does the fact that they are a front-running team... i.e., they score early and often, and the other team has to keep pace. Yesterday's game vs. the Lions I believe they each had 8 possessions, but GB punted less and held the ball longer -- a LOT longer in the 2nd half (13+ minutes of the 3Q changed the game).

As for the actual performance of the defense, I continue to say that I don't think they often play smart and at less than the sum of their players. Some of that is youth or football IQ, but I also think it's coaching. I don't have much to back this up beyond anecdotes, but it feels like they do ok on early downs and then give up an easy 3rd down completion to reset the chains. Again, just a feeling but it seems like Pettine is so terrified of giving up big plays that he's playing his corners too far off, playing too much zone, or his safeties too deep. I think Kenny Clark needs help on the DL; when Keke or Lowry contribute anything it's a pleasant surprise. I think they still have issues with defending the MoF too, mostly in the short to intermediate and I put that on the LBs more than the safeties. I also think Z.Smith is so focused on getting the QB that he can be fooled into vacating the edge and giving up runs to the outside... Clay did the same thing. Preston and Gary are guilty of this as well, to a lesser extent.

There have been games where the defense has played well... at least for stretches. The Lions aren't bad on offense, and just looking at 1st half vs. 2nd half stats they looked like they locked them down more in 2H. I just wouldn't use 'dominating' or 'stifling' to describe them, and I'm not sure I'd use 'dependable' either.

[HarveyWallbangers]

They rank high in yards allowed as you say, but are only 16th in average yards allowed per play. As you say, the offense keeping them off the field helps the total yardage. What's bothersome to me is that they're only 24th in INT's and 27th in total turnovers. Those ranks should be higher given that they're often playing with double digit leads. The lack of defensive turnovers hasn't badly hurt this team only because the Packers offense is the best in the NFL at avoiding turnovers.

What does it all mean? Probably that if the defense can get off the field enough that the Packers offense has the upper hand in time of possession, they have a chance against anybody in the NFC.

The thing about turnovers though is I think there is a lot of luck involved, so maybe we are due for a barrage.

This year the top 5 teams in forced turnovers:

Miami - 25 (30th last year)
Pittsburgh - 25 (1st last year)
Indianapolis - 22 (14th last year)

With much the same personnel, we ranked 8th in turnovers forced last year with 25. This year we are 27th with 13.
Chicago finished 1st in turnovers forced with 36 in 2018, finished 22nd in 2019 with 19, and are 24th this year with 14.
Seattle finished 11th in turnovers forced with 26 in 2018, finished 3rd in 2019 with 32, and are 16th this year with 18.

And the list goes on.

[Bossman641]

The second half stats only look better because the offense played keep away. The thing that pisses me off the most about the D is they have zero killer instinct. We've been up 14+ points numerous times in the fourth quarter. The pass rushers should be teeing off then. Instead, the whole D plays soft and inevitably lets the other team back in the game. Just once it'd be nice to see the D slam the door shut instead of crack it back open.

[RashanGary]

I truly believe it's about to take off because that savage blitz was something we could not pull off a year ago. We had to line up, let Clark, Z and P rush undisciplined and hope they don't get gashed when the opposition runs right though the hole left by the reckless rush. More turnovers. Better stats. But then good running teams and certain matchups have their way.

Solution? Develop a few other go to defenses. You don't want to walk on the field with a healthy 49ers offense or a guy like filthy Phil rivers and call one bread and butter defense. Shanahan walked into the games with his diverse run options, knew what we were calling and called a hard man beater run game twice. Filthy Phil walked in and torched us, despite whatever turnovers we may have had on the whole season last year. He knew what he was facing had shredded it.

We spent the last 10 weeks developing some other options. Now pettine can choose to, at any time, let Z, Clark and P do some reckless shit. And if offenses can't call pure man beaters every play, it'll probably work out a bunch or the time. But...... With all of the zone defense we've worked on, he can also zone blitz savage in the b gap and have a free hitter. Stafford doesn't know it's coming and a big play happens BECAUSE of having zone defense as an option.

It's coming together!

[RashanGary]

The Titans game will prove if we're better than a year ago on defense. That's the offense most similar to the 9ers last year.

[RashanGary]

If you don't practice safe zone defense first (7 in coverage) it's awful hard to pull out the 5 man rushes with zone defense behind it. Early season was development time. Safe. But at least it didn't end in quick scores.

Now it's time to put it all together. Mix man and zone. Mix 3, 4 and 5 man rushes. Play callers and veteran QB's can't line up in the perfect play now. And we're practiced enough to have ironed out some of those details like playing too far off or not defending the sticks on 3rd down.

That free hitter savage blitz is the end game payoff of developing zone defense. We're more ready for good run teams and veteran QB's than we were a year ago. If Stafford wasn't so damn composed, instead of being curled up like an achordian, we probably would have some turnovers yesterday.

Stafford
Stafford
Matt Ryan
Drew Brees
Phil Rivers
Tom Brady
Watson
Cousins
Cousins


It hasn't exactly been your who's who of easy to confuse quarterbacks. We've played some good quarterbacks with good run games on top.

We complained every time one of the young guys messed up a detail like the yardage marker in zone coverage but those lumps were needed to learn. Ever watch a 15 year old try to use a broom? Things take practice

[HarveyWallbangers]

I wonder where we rank in defense three and out percentage and red zone percentage? It feels like we play well for several drives each game, but our red zone percentage is getting worse as the season goes along. We've also given up points and yards late with big leads.

[Joemailman]

The Titans game will prove if we're better than a year ago on defense. That's the offense most similar to the 9ers last year.

Except that against 49ers the speed of Mostert Packers had a big problem with. The bigger problem with Titans is getting run over by Henry, although Henry certainly can break big runs.

[Joemailman]

I wonder where we rank in defense three and out percentage and red zone percentage? It feels like we play well for several drives each game, but our red zone percentage is getting worse as the season goes along. We've also given up points and yards late with big leads.

Packers defense ranks 28th in red zone pct at 67-5 %. 27 TD's on 40 attempts. Last year they were 10th at 50%. 24-48. No idea on 3 and outs.
.

[RashanGary]

I wonder where we rank in defense three and out percentage and red zone percentage? It feels like we play well for several drives each game, but our red zone percentage is getting worse as the season goes along. We've also given up points and yards late with big leads.

A. Don't lose when you have the lead
B. Develop the ability to play some zone so good offenses can't go right at you, knowing what you're running
C. The redzone defense is a concern. Maybe putting too much energy into developing the zone defense that they haven't put the work in to keep the red zone sharp. If you put energy in one spot, it takes away from another at practice.


All of the problems can be solved right now. Instead of developing new major zone concepts, accept the growth you've gotten, Ride what you got and go back to red zone as the primary growth focus. They're already light year's ahead of last year's zone defense when it was so bad he couldn't even call it and the defense got killed by good man beater teams.

[Bossman641]

Red zone defense by TD allowed - Packers rank 28 giving up TD 67.5% of time.

[RashanGary]

We have not had one single game as bad as Sandiego, SF and SF from a year ago. That took development time in practice and games to round out those other defenses. I say just go with what you got now and dig into redzone for the final growth stretch. Pettine can mix defense now. He can zone blitz and he can play man with 2 deep and have some undociplined rushed that get home like last year. He can also play safe zone with two deep. They've developed a lot and it's about to come together!

[RashanGary]

2019

San Diego
San Francisco
San Francisco


2020.... Nothing even remotely as helpless as those three. Development! Now lean into that development and focus on redzone. Fixed!

[Zool]

2019

San Diego
San Francisco
San Francisco


2020.... Nothing even remotely as helpless as those three. Development! Now lean into that development and focus on redzone. Fixed!

I would counter with Tampa and the second MN game. They are giving up 110 per game on the ground playing with the lead most of the time. Scoring on the first drive 11 times this year has been the recipe for success. The D is just okay. They got burned deep by Chase Daniel in the 4th on a zone. They are inconsistent as all hell. No one is saying they are the Jets or the Jags on D, but they are pretty far from a top 10 squad right now. Individual drive they will look fantastic, then come out the next series and lay an egg.

[run pMc]

Stafford
Stafford
Matt Ryan
Drew Brees
Phil Rivers
Tom Brady
Watson
Cousins
Cousins

Questions: They apparently played more man coverage vs. PHI. Does it make sense to play zone against established vet QBs, or man? Wouldn't a vet QB like Rivers or Stafford know exactly where the holes in the zone would be? Would that be a reason to play MORE man coverage, not less? I expect zone prevents more big plays and busted coverages, but it also seems like it's more leaky, especially if the QB gets the ball out in 2.5 seconds.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Packers defense ranks 28th in red zone pct at 67-5 %. 27 TD's on 40 attempts. Last year they were 10th at 50%. 24-48. No idea on 3 and outs.
.

This is where it seems like drive to drive we made improvements over last year. I wouldn't be surprised if we are doing pretty well in 3 & out percentage. Red zone defense is like turnovers. There's a lot of volatility year-to-year--which is a primary reason why many predicted massive regression for the Packers. Last year, we were a 10 win team that won 13 games because of turnover margin, red zone defense, and an unsustainable winning % in one score games. This team feels more legitimate. Primarily, because Rodgers is having probably the second best year of his historic career. MLF is a great play caller and Rodgers know the offense now and has bought into it. His fundamentals seem better to me too.

[Zool]

This is where it seems like drive to drive we made improvements over last year. I wouldn't be surprised if we are doing pretty well in 3 & out percentage. Red zone defense is like turnovers. There's a lot of volatility year-to-year--which is a primary reason why many predicted massive regression for the Packers. Last year, we were a 10 win team that won 13 games because of turnover margin, red zone defense, and an unsustainable winning % in one score games. This team feels more legitimate. Primarily, because Rodgers is having probably the second best year of his historic career. MLF is a great play caller and Rodgers know the offense now and has bought into it. His fundamentals seem better to me too.

It's not reality, but QB pressures seems down this year. I mean they went from 8.3/game last year to 7.8/game this year so far. So it's down a half, but not much.

2.7 sacks/game this year, 2.6 last year. They are actually up in QB hurries this season. It's just not consistent, so it's a little maddening to watch teams march on their prevent in the second half. For once, I'd like to see a 14 or 17 point lead grow.

[RashanGary]

Questions: They apparently played more man coverage vs. PHI. Does it make sense to play zone against established vet QBs, or man? Wouldn't a vet QB like Rivers or Stafford know exactly where the holes in the zone would be? Would that be a reason to play MORE man coverage, not less? I expect zone prevents more big plays and busted coverages, but it also seems like it's more leaky, especially if the QB gets the ball out in 2.5 seconds.

I think veteran QBs do best when they know what the defense is pre snap. They’re so developed that they’ll be looking right and KNOW beyond a doubt that they’re gonna go left and it’s all preplanned. You have to make it look like man but have it be zone or make it look like zone but be close enough to the line to get in a man stance right before the snap.... things like that. That way the vet has to change plans after the snap. If you can’t play a lick of zone, and only man, then just like Rodgers Lafleur and adams, they call plays to beat the defense they know you’ll be playing and it’s over

[RashanGary]

Zool, is it possible that last year they played more man defense because they’re better at it and once they have a lead this year, they use that as time to develop the zone defenses more?

Seems like an awful lot of zone defense and zone defense growing pains when we have the lead. Possibly intentionally so, because that’s the best time for it to not cost you the game

[RashanGary]

A reason I’m optimistic, and it’s only one play, but the Packers got a free runner on Stafford with a great zone blitz. We didn’t see that, almost ever last year. Seems like he trusts the zone defense now, after so much growing tape, to actually start using it as a weapon not just something to practice when we’re up 2 scores

[Zool]

Zool, is it possible that last year they played more man defense because they’re better at it and once they have a lead this year, they use that as time to develop the zone defenses more?

Seems like an awful lot of zone defense and zone defense growing pains when we have the lead. Possibly intentionally so, because that’s the best time for it to not cost you the game

So they bleed yards and points in the 4th quarter and you think people will be rational? This is the second year in a row with the same scenario playing out in the wins.

If you got the lead playing one way, keep playing that way.

[Fritz]

Questions: They apparently played more man coverage vs. PHI. Does it make sense to play zone against established vet QBs, or man? Wouldn't a vet QB like Rivers or Stafford know exactly where the holes in the zone would be? Would that be a reason to play MORE man coverage, not less? I expect zone prevents more big plays and busted coverages, but it also seems like it's more leaky, especially if the QB gets the ball out in 2.5 seconds.

I think the Packers started the Detroit game playing the Pettine-preferred soft zone, and of course that was a recipe for Stafford to march the Loins right down the field for an easy touchdown. When Pettine switched it up a little later and went to man, Stafford/Bevell called three screens in a row for big gains.

[run pMc]

So they bleed yards and points in the 4th quarter
It's not just the 4Q. Stafford had close to 200 yards passing in the first half. The thing that saved them was they sacked him 4 times.
How many of their starters have less than 32 games under their belts? This isn't a defense loaded with rookies. They've been in Pettine's system for a while and should know what to do.

If you have a top 15 offense starting from their 25 vs. this defense in a gotta-score a FG series, what percent of the time does the offense succeed?

Not trying to be a Debbie Downer or complainer...but I think this defense is mediocre at best and often underperforms to its talent.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Not trying to be a Debbie Downer or complainer...but I think this defense is mediocre at best and often underperforms to its talent.

Nobody is arguing against this. The thing is the Packers have the best offense in the league according to most metrics (just ahead of Kansas City). Both teams have mediocre defenses. Mediocre might be good enough to win a Super Bowl. KC has the special teams edge though. Defensively, we need some turnover luck and do better in the red zone (drive to drive, we aren't bad), and we have a chance.

[Fritz]

Nobody is arguing against this. The thing is the Packers have the best offense in the league according to most metrics (just ahead of Kansas City). Both teams have mediocre defenses. Mediocre might be good enough to win a Super Bowl. KC has the special teams edge though. Defensively, we need some turnover luck and do better in the red zone (drive to drive, we aren't bad), and we have a chance.

You're right, Harv. However, it's still aggravating to those of us oldsters who enjoy good defense. But I fear you are correct that it might be the special teams that is the team's undoing.

[texaspackerbacker]

As one of those oldsters, I don't recall the Packers ever being defensive bullies like the Bears most of the time over the decades or the Lions of the Lombardi era or whatever. Even with Nitschke, Willie Davis, Adderly, et al, they were more like bend don't break. Ditto that with the Reggie White dominated teams. The offense has literally always dominated, as for this oldster, I prefer it that way.

Yeah, maybe less D talent has made the special teams not very special, but I'd blame coaching more for that. On that long return last week, who did we have on the edge to turn the returner in? Some guy named Dafney! I guess we had Scooby on the other side (or am I mixing my cartoons).

[Zool]

Nobody is arguing against this. The thing is the Packers have the best offense in the league according to most metrics (just ahead of Kansas City). Both teams have mediocre defenses. Mediocre might be good enough to win a Super Bowl. KC has the special teams edge though. Defensively, we need some turnover luck and do better in the red zone (drive to drive, we aren't bad), and we have a chance.

Exactly. It's been the same story for a long time. The D just isn't quite good enough to win a game when the O needs a lift. Its offense or nothing, and it would be cool to see the D carry some weight.

KC v GB would be a cool matchup. Sort of old school V new school coaches and QBs.

[Upnorth]

Maybe not appropriate to the thread but this

packerswire.usatoday.com/2020

Combined with a few more big defensive plays would be unstoppable.
A good ilb could really help both run d and zone passing d

[Upnorth]

I feel rgs thread should be bumped after this last game. Holding a top o to what the Titans produced is a good sign.

Also for most of this season it feels like everyone has been saying the AFC is so much better than the nfc. After the last few weeks im not buying it. Not saying the afc is trash but the top of the afc is struggling of late. KC looks weakest the Steelers are rusty and the Titans were just destroyed. Bills still look solid to me but the nfc has the pack Saints Seattle rams and Tampa.
Closer than what the media is saying

[RashanGary]

I thought this was gonna happen last year but I was dead wrong. We were a one dimensional man defense last year and got chewed up by the 49ers who created a perfect run plan to exploit the defense. It's easier to execute any play call when you know the defense before the snap. And its easier to game plan and call plays when you know what you're facing.

Last year I was dead wrong.

This year, however, the Packers had leads and it gave the defense real game time opportunities to expand their zone defense experience without actually losing games. Down the stretch here, you see Pettine with a much bigger arsenal where he's leaning on the man coverage strength but now also mixing in zone defense with zone blitzes. Gonna be much harder for elite QB's and elite run offenses to exploit such a newly well rounded defense.

It is exactly what I thought I saw a few weeks ago but also means exactly nothing considering my very mortal track record of being wrong as much as I'm right.

Still, i take my lumps, for 20 years straight every time I'm wrong, so Imma enjoy being right when I'm right too.

[Zool]

https://i.redd.it/j7rqckwrq5861.jpg

[GB-Brandon]

That’s what I was saying. “A+ Safety Play”. When your getting that and then you have a cover corner like Jaire it allows for a lot of things.

This team should make it to the Super Bowl. Anything else would be a complete let down.

[Bretsky]

God I hope it's better than I think :))))

[RashanGary]

Last year the defense had to win games for us while the offense got going. They just hung their hat on what they did best and grinded out 13 games without ever really developing a zone option.

This year the offense carried us and allowed pettine to develop the unit while still winning games. The D is taking off now that they've done away with development and are going all out with what they have (which is significantly more diverse after all the zone growing pains from the games we had a lead)

[GB-Brandon]

One thing about me is I’m gonna call it “Both Ways”. If it’s bad I’m gonna call it what it is. If it’s good then the same deal. Right now it’s “GOOD.” I’m not going to call something that is good, bad.

If they can continue to play like they did Sunday Night this team can not just go to the Super Bowl but they can WIN IT! I have friends that are die hard Chiefs fans and they are even getting nervous how are secondary and defense match up against them!!!!!

What the Packers showcased Sunday Night sent a message and people saw it. That’s why I said that game was so big for many many reasons!!!

[GB-Brandon]

Tennessee is supposed to be some big Bully team with Henry and we out Bullied the Bully!!

That was big time!!

[George Cumby]

Tennessee is supposed to be some big Bully team with Henry and we out Bullied the Bully!!

That was big time!!

It was one of the more gratifying wins in a long time.

It was a matchup I was concerned about and they rose to the occasion.

[Upnorth]

I haven't seen any next level analysis on how we slowed Henry yet. Was it just our lead forcing them to be one dimensional? He did touch 100yrds at a 4.3 ypc clip. Nothing to shout from the roof tops.
I really think it was our lead and secondary or am I missing something?

[George Cumby]

I watched Gary a lot and he played containment very well.

Other posters said the Smith brothers played with similar discipline.

[Joemailman]

I haven't seen any next level analysis on how we slowed Henry yet. Was it just our lead forcing them to be one dimensional? He did touch 100yrds at a 4.3 ypc clip. Nothing to shout from the roof tops.
I really think it was our lead and secondary or am I missing something?Packers played a lot of 6 man fronts to slow Henry down. Henry had 9 carries for 51 yards after the Packers had taken a 26-14 lead. At that point I suspect Packers were willing to let Henry have all the 5 yard runs he wanted as long as he didn't break a long one. Up until that point, Henry had averaged about 3 YPC.

This shows some of the unusual fronts Packers were using. https://www.packers.com/news/what-you-might-ve-missed-unconventional-looks

[Fritz]

It was one of the more gratifying wins in a long time.

It was a matchup I was concerned about and they rose to the occasion.

It was, as many have said, one of the most satisfying wins in a long time.

Matt LeFleur thinks so, too:

https://previews.123rf.com/images/bialasiewicz/bialasiewicz1502/bialasiewicz150201091/36998106-young-handsome-man-smoking-cigarette-after-sex.jpg