Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Improve This Article: Reasons Packers Retreated To 6-10

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Improve This Article: Reasons Packers Retreated To 6-10

    I respect the job journalists have. However, I often am incensed at the way they go about writing the ultimate product. Greg Bedard at the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel in an article titled Spiraling In Control posted on June 20th, 2009 makes the following observations:

    He states that with Rodgers the Packers fell from 13-3 to 6-10 and in eight losses, were within a touchdown up or down at the beginning of the fourth quarter. He then tells us that given his statistical performance this can't be Rodgers fault, but that wins and losses are what count and that's just too bad for Rodgers. He tells us in the middle of the story that he does not believe his own story's premise, but he makes only the feeblest attempt to defend his assertion.

    This is how a coward writes. He makes no attempt to shuffle through the debacle, the sometimes conflicting data and results. He does not do a good job of understanding where Rodgers fell short, not to mention looking at other areas of the team. If your editor insisted on an article on Rodgers, then you really should not submarine your own piece by telling us you don't trust its central fact mid-story.

    An actual reporter would have dug into the vast and confusing number of reasons for the backtrack by the team. He might have to write an article about some other player or position on the team.

    Let's do his job for him.

    1. Poor judgments about the defensive line. I was already concerned about the pass rush prior to 2007, a season when Kampman, a part-time pass rush KGB and Corey Williams looked like men possessed. But Jenkins, Williams, Jolly and KGB got banged up and it wasn't the same pass rush by the end of the season. Going into 2008, KGB was coming off surgery, Jenkins might have proven he could not play at 100% all season and Williams was gone. Where we thought we had run stuffing depth was disproved after Pickett developed a bad arm and the run defense collapsed, especially after Jenkins was lost for the season. We knew there was little depth in pass rush from 2007, in 2008 we knew there was little depth in run D on the line.

    No team can carry NFL starter depth at every position. But in Sanders defense, he needed a pass rush and run D from his front four in standard matchups. We did not have those players in 2008.



    Your turn, someone do Reason #2 why the Packers Fell to 6-10.
    Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.

  • #2
    2. Special Teams. Thompson made a huge blunder by letting Mike Stock talk him into relasing P Jon Ryan mere days before the opener. The position never got settled as they went through multiple punters. The coverage units regressed and were regualry giving up significant position to the opposition while the return units couldn't gain any postion.

    Comment


    • #3
      Just a suggestion, but if folks take up the offer to keep this going, you might want to announce what topic you are going to hit. That might allow you to put some time and research into it, and avoid getting your topic hijacked in the meantime.
      Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.

      Comment


      • #4
        Bottom line: Aaron Rodgers is not responsible for the team's difficulties in defense and special teams! These were the main reasons for the Packers' decline in '08, not the change of starting quarterbacks.

        Comment


        • #5
          #4) Predictability in the running game

          Packers coach Mike McCarthy has sworn up and down since he got here about wanting to have an identity as a tough running team, but this has never actually shown up on the field. Why not? Simply put, offensive tackle play. The Zone Blocking system essentially has four plays: Inside Zone Left/Right and Outside Zone Left/Right. With both offensive tackles losing a step or more due to age and injuries in 2008 compared to in 2007, none of the outside zone runs were even the least bit effective. The Packers were effective at running the inside zone runs, but the outside zone runs consistently yielded 0-2 yards. So in order to keep the linebackers from jumping the inside gaps every time they anticipated run (which they did, sometimes, see the at Minnesota game for example), the Packers threw away a bunch of plays on 0-2 yard runs just so their running game wasn't wholly predictable.

          Why is the outlook for this year less bleak? Clifton can't run block, but he's an adequate pass blocker and will stay around if he's healthy. Whoever ends up winning the RT spot this year is going to be an upgrade over the Mark Tauscher of 2008, as his play was mistake ridden and he got beat by even mediocre LDEs in both pass and run blocking. Tony Moll wasn't much of an upgrade, because he's even more error prone but Daryn Colledge was excellent at RT in the Detroit game, and hopefully one of the youngsters competing for the position can either be a relatively mistake-free player (more probably Lang) or be more of a dominating physical presence in the running game (more probably Barbre or Giacomini).

          Also, McCarthy was forced to adapt to the faiure of the ZBS due to his inadequacies at Tackle by mixing it up with more power running. With the addition of Quinn Johnson to be the proverbial hammer of god on short yardage, and with a whole offseason to add and implement twists to the running game, plus a healthier Ryan Grant should give a running attack improved over the lackluster 2008 performance.

          At the very least, we should be able to run 3 of the four ZBS plays, which is 50% more than last year.
          </delurk>

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by cpk1994
            2. Special Teams. Thompson made a huge blunder by letting Mike Stock talk him into relasing P Jon Ryan mere days before the opener. The position never got settled as they went through multiple punters. The coverage units regressed and were regualry giving up significant position to the opposition while the return units couldn't gain any postion.
            2nd here. Ryan was a great locker room presents as well from what I had read.

            Comment


            • #7
              Nice job, PB. I can't believe things like that are never written.
              Formerly known as JustinHarrell.

              Comment


              • #8
                [b]#5. SES syndrome (Seven-Eleven Syndrome).

                This team could not close, be it offensively, defensively or on special teams. Despite what the statistics say, this team was horrible in the second half of games. Until this changes they will stay near 6-10.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by cpk1994
                  2. Special Teams. Thompson made a huge blunder by letting Mike Stock talk him into relasing P Jon Ryan mere days before the opener. The position never got settled as they went through multiple punters. The coverage units regressed and were regualry giving up significant position to the opposition while the return units couldn't gain any postion.
                  To add to this or rub salt into the wound of a judgement of a late cut of a previous starter at a vital position that appeared on the mend:

                  Jon Ryan had a very solid season punting in Seattle as I recall. Good for Jon Ryan.
                  ** Since 2006 3 X Pro Pickem' Champion; 4 X Runner-Up and 3 X 3rd place.
                  ** To download Jesus Loves Me ring tones, you'll need a cell phone mame
                  ** If God doesn't fish, play poker or pull for " the Packers ", exactly what does HE do with his buds?
                  ** Rather than love, money or fame - give me TRUTH: Henry D. Thoreau

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Lurker64
                    #4) Predictability in the running game

                    Packers coach Mike McCarthy has sworn up and down since he got here about wanting to have an identity as a tough running team, but this has never actually shown up on the field. Why not? Simply put, offensive tackle play. The Zone Blocking system essentially has four plays: Inside Zone Left/Right and Outside Zone Left/Right. With both offensive tackles losing a step or more due to age and injuries in 2008 compared to in 2007, none of the outside zone runs were even the least bit effective. The Packers were effective at running the inside zone runs, but the outside zone runs consistently yielded 0-2 yards. So in order to keep the linebackers from jumping the inside gaps every time they anticipated run (which they did, sometimes, see the at Minnesota game for example), the Packers threw away a bunch of plays on 0-2 yard runs just so their running game wasn't wholly predictable.

                    Why is the outlook for this year less bleak? Clifton can't run block, but he's an adequate pass blocker and will stay around if he's healthy. Whoever ends up winning the RT spot this year is going to be an upgrade over the Mark Tauscher of 2008, as his play was mistake ridden and he got beat by even mediocre LDEs in both pass and run blocking. Tony Moll wasn't much of an upgrade, because he's even more error prone but Daryn Colledge was excellent at RT in the Detroit game, and hopefully one of the youngsters competing for the position can either be a relatively mistake-free player (more probably Lang) or be more of a dominating physical presence in the running game (more probably Barbre or Giacomini).

                    Also, McCarthy was forced to adapt to the faiure of the ZBS due to his inadequacies at Tackle by mixing it up with more power running. With the addition of Quinn Johnson to be the proverbial hammer of god on short yardage, and with a whole offseason to add and implement twists to the running game, plus a healthier Ryan Grant should give a running attack improved over the lackluster 2008 performance.

                    At the very least, we should be able to run 3 of the four ZBS plays, which is 50% more than last year.
                    Where are we really in the running game after Ryan Grant? This is a problem area on our 'O' that stays with us. We must see a power runner come out of the mix. The consequence of a continued lack luster to up and down performance on our OL will translate negatively as the opposition keys on the performance of Aaron Rodgers and our receivers.

                    Aaron Rodgers had a solid rookie season but now he needs to stand up in his second season. It's not uncommon to see a dip in performance in a second year starter. The league knows better how to defend against him and without pressure off with a better running game, Aaron may place too much pressure on himself.

                    We are still a team in transition with a brand new defense. I believe we only need to see some overall improvement to be encouraged beyond 2009.

                    GO PACK GO!
                    ** Since 2006 3 X Pro Pickem' Champion; 4 X Runner-Up and 3 X 3rd place.
                    ** To download Jesus Loves Me ring tones, you'll need a cell phone mame
                    ** If God doesn't fish, play poker or pull for " the Packers ", exactly what does HE do with his buds?
                    ** Rather than love, money or fame - give me TRUTH: Henry D. Thoreau

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by woodbuck27
                      Originally posted by cpk1994
                      2. Special Teams. Thompson made a huge blunder by letting Mike Stock talk him into relasing P Jon Ryan mere days before the opener. The position never got settled as they went through multiple punters. The coverage units regressed and were regualry giving up significant position to the opposition while the return units couldn't gain any postion.
                      To add to this or rub salt into the wound of a judgement of a late cut of a previous starter at a vital position that appeared on the mend:

                      Jon Ryan had a very solid season punting in Seattle as I recall. Good for Jon Ryan.
                      I'm still trying to understand Stock's reasoning on that one. If TT hadn't found Kapinos, during the season, we'd have been completely screwed.
                      "Greatness is not an act... but a habit.Greatness is not an act... but a habit." -Greg Jennings

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        At one point in the season, Ryan was ranked right at the bottom in the major statistics. Not sure how he finished out.
                        Busting drunk drivers in Antarctica since 2006

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          When the Packers went 13-3 they won many games in the 4th qtr w/ special teams, fumble recoveries, and long pass plays ie Denver OT game. Green Bay wasn't blowing teams out or have large winning margins. They were winning by scratching and clawing their way through 60 minutes hopeing for a break that would win the game for them.
                          2008 all of those breaks went away and injuries along w/ questionable personnel decisions left the team 6-10.
                          I guess what I'm saying is the the Packers were fortunate to win 13 games in 2007. Last year the ball bounced away and they ended up w/ losing record.
                          This season what it appears to be a team that has some depth on the DL/OL which means they should be able to run the ball and stop the other from doing it. The 3-4 MAY slow it down in the early part of the season but should come on like game busters in the latter half.
                          The Packers should make the play-offs and if the right breaks happen...get hot at the end of the season.
                          Been there done that!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            #5) Specific Injuries

                            I thought that two injuries in particular has a major negative affect on the team, KGB and Bigby.

                            With KGB, the Packers had a low-mid range starter and elite situational player behind Cullen. He was probably our single best backup at any position prior to '08. You never had to worry about an injury to Cullen because of KGB. Sure the D may drop a hair, but KGB's weaknesses were well defined and the team knew how to adjust to minimize them. With KGB's drop to basically a useless player with his surgery (a routine surgery too that Clifton gets biannually, and 10% of just about any starting team gets on a given year), that is what really made Cullen's injury devastating. We immediately went from first to 3rd string. Nobody has starting quality players as 3rd stringers.

                            Bigby was another crushing blow. He simply did not have a backup. The SS is an integral part of the run defense of most teams. Peprah and Bush are FS's, corners that aren't great in coverage, but with the athleticism to function as the deep line of the defense. Rouse is physically built to be a dominant presence at SS, but he just doesn't have it mentally to play the position. To our overall run defense, I think that Bigby and Pickett are our two most important players. We may have railed on Manuel for his play in GB, but compared to who we were lining up at SS after Bigby went down, Manuel was an upgrade; as it relates to the run, Manuel is a legitimate SS.

                            If you note, TT's top 3 offseason acquisitions, Antony Smith, Raji, and Matthews, addresses each of these positions. Antony Smith's game is similar to Bigby, he is a legitimate SS and can be relied on to be an effective box player. Raji is a legit backup for Pickett should injury strike there, and Matthews is probably the player most similar to KGB that TT has drafted.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Partial
                              [b]#5. SES syndrome (Seven-Eleven Syndrome).

                              This team could not close, be it offensively, defensively or on special teams. Despite what the statistics say, this team was horrible in the second half of games. Until this changes they will stay near 6-10.
                              I've studied this through historical records of the seasons of several teams, over several years going back decades, and have well over 150 data points.

                              There is absolutely no correlation to anything when it comes to winning/losing close games.

                              Carolina lost more close ones than they won for about a 4 year stretch, that is the biggest that I could find. If I recall correctly the Packers are +9 in close games W-L since 1970, since 1992 they win them at a rate of 58%, well below the teams non-close rate. This holds true for all teams in the NFL all QB's, over a given length of time, any teams W-L record in games decided by less than a TD is closer to 50% than their record in decisive games.

                              When a game is close, roll the dice, the winner of the game is practically decided by pure random chance. There is no such thing as a "winner", that closer than wins in the clutch.

                              In season the team developed negative momentum last year. With a new season, it takes 1 game to break that type of momentum.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X