Packers D now rank 3rd.

[Maxie the Taxi]

I don't have to wait. The Packers' defense is top notch. So is Capers.

I think he screwed up last time against the Vikes concentrating on Peterson. I'd rush the hell out of Farve. Play it just like Pittsburgh did. So Peterson gets a long TD. Rather that than Favre having half a minute in the pocket.

[bobblehead]

When playing 2 premier qbs the Packer D did not play as well. Granted the scheme has adjusted to allow AK more pass rushes, CM, improved Hawk play and Bigby. This week is a better test as to how good the defense is.

Couldn't you say that about every team--even the good ones? Most teams pad their stats against poor teams. It will even out by the end of the year, but this is true for all defenses.

The teams ranked ahead of the Packers in defense:

Denver played Cleveland and Oakland.

Indianapolis played Jacksonville, Miami, Tennessee, St. Louis, and Seattle (without Hasselbeck)

New England played Buffalo, the Jets, Tennessee, and Tampa Bay.

The Jets played Tennessee, Buffalo, and Oakland.

No, its only relevant to discount the packers....those other teams are legit.

[MJZiggy]

I thought it was only relevant to discount the Lions??? Though admittedly, there is some serious competition for the league toilet right now. Glad to be in the competition going the other direction.

[retailguy]

Re: Packers D now rank 3rd.

RG, I agree some other things are relevant, but honestly, stats matter. If we were 30th in the league, but had played a horrendous schedule would you claim the D was good??

To date the Lions put 13+ on the board in every game but one. They got 20+ all but 3. That one game, and one of the 3 was when we held them to....ZERO!

To date the Browns Have gotten 20 twice...once against Minnesota. (man that vikes D must SUCK) They got 14 against the steelers. They got 3 off us in 8 quarters counting preseason.

Now, I'm not ready to declare us the '85 bears yet, but we held 2 NFL teams to 3 points in our last 8 quarters...if you can't give SOME credit for that you are as guilty as anyone who tries to claim it makes or D dominant.

If I said that Dilfer is just as good as BF cuz he won a superbowl as well, would you cite any stats to say otherwise??

You make some good points and I agree with them. Stated clearly, my biggest point in both threads is that you can "interpret" stats however you like. I can see stats as showing a problem, you can see stats as movement in the direction of the solution. Who is right at the end of the day? Both of us, perhaps.

Look, our defense shut down Peterson, as MPF said. That was GREAT. Unfortunately, that meant that BF had way too much time to throw the ball and the end result was no different than if Peterson had run for 200 yards and 3 tds...

I am on board the 3-4 train. I question how we're using Kampman, and whether or not our DL is up to the transition. Other than that, I'm on board. We need to trade Kampy, and we need another 3-4 lineman. Montgomery is a bad fit, as is poppinga. But overall, I like the solution.

But saying we've got a great defense because stats say so? After all we're ranked third. Problem for me. I watched the games. We aren't a great Defense. We're improving, but not great. Probably not even good yet. Getting there. Improving. For 6 weeks, I am happy with that.

I really meant it when I said I was looking for IMPROVEMENT this weekend. I don't even need to see a win. I want a good, hard fought, 4 strong quarters of football. We haven't seen that yet this year, EXCEPT against Cleveland. Cleveland is in the NFL, but we need to be able to play that way against other teams too.

[pbmax]

Football Outsiders has us as the 4th ranked team for Week 7. We jumped from 8th last week. They adjust their rankings for a team's opponents, but this early in the season, the adjustment is only 70% of normal effect. Which means the victories over the Browns and the Lions are inflated slightly compared to what they will contribute after Week 9. DVOA is an offensive measurement. So positive numbers are good for offense and ST, you want Defenses to be negative.

Sorry, not sure how to make the code font bigger.

....TEAM....TOTDVOA...W-L...NOADJVOA....ESTWINS..RANK..PASTSCHED...RANK...FUTURESCHED...RANK....VAR...RANK
1...NO….....43.1%.....6-0.....47.9%.....6.3.....1........0.4%......14.....-14.2%........31......6.4%.....7
2...IND.....42.4%.....6-0.....51.6%.....5.8.....2.......-7.8%......26.......4.4%........8......14.9%.....18
3...NE......38.6%.....5-2.....39.1%.....5.1.....5.......-3.9%......22.......8.1%........7......18.5%.....24
4...GB......35.1%.....4-2.....47.6%.....5.0.....6......-18.4%......30......-2.1%........21.....15.3%.....19
5...DEN.....34.7%.....6-0.....38.4%.....5.5.....3.......-3.7%......21.......1.5%........15......4.4%.....4
6...PHI.....33.0%.....4-2.....48.4%.....4.6.....10.....-17.5%......29......10.2%........5......21.7%.....29
7...BAL.....27.9%.....3-3.....31.9%.....4.9.....8.......-0.7%......18......-1.8%........20.....10.2%.....13
8...MIN.....24.6%.....6-1.....31.8%.....5.2.....4.......-9.8%......28......-4.7%........25.....3.6%......1
9...NYG.....22.8%.....5-2.....21.4%.....4.1.....12......-7.0%......25......12.3%........4......14.8%.....17
10..ARI.....22.0%.....4-2.....18.8%.....5.0.....7........8.0%......7......-21.2%........32.....28.4%.....31
11..DAL.....21.5%.....4-2.....24.1%.....4.8.....9.......-5.8%......24......10.0%........6.......9.3%.....12
12..PIT.....14.6%.....5-2.....29.1%.....4.6.....11.....-18.9%......31.......2.8%........11......4.2%.....2
13..MIA.....12.7%.....2-4......4.2%.....3.9.....15......11.5%......5.......-3.9%........23.....17.4%.....23
14..ATL......7.7%.....4-2.....12.6%.....3.9.....16.......2.5%......11.......0.5%........17.....16.5%.....21
15..CIN......5.1%.....5-2......8.0%.....4.0.....14.......7.6%......9......-12.2%........29.....16.7%.....22
16..JAC......3.5%.....3-3......1.3%.....4.0.....13......-4.5%......23......-4.2%........24.....21.3%.....28
17..NYJ......3.4%.....4-3.....12.6%.....3.6.....17......-2.1%......20.......2.6%........12.....13.7%.....15
18..HOU.....-2.7%.....4-3......5.8%.....3.6.....18......-9.6%......27.......3.8%........9.......6.6%.....8
19..SEA.....-2.9%.....2-4.....-6.0%.....2.7.....23......-0.4%......16.....-10.9%........28.....20.9%.....26
20..SD......-4.0%.....3-3.....-5.6%.....3.4.....19.......1.2%......12......-6.3%........27......4.2%.....3
21..SF......-6.6%.....3-3.....-9.3%.....3.0.....21.......0.5%......13......-3.7%........22.....10.3%.....14
22..WAS....-10.0%.....2-5......0.6%.....2.9.....22.....-21.8%......32......14.5%........2.......5.3%.....6
23..BUF....-12.0%.....3-4....-13.1%.....3.1.....20......-2.0%......19.......3.3%........10.....15.4%.....20
24..CHI....-18.7%.....3-3....-16.1%.....2.6.....24.......0.3%......15.......2.3%........14.....21.2%.....27
25..CAR....-29.8%.....2-4....-35.5%.....1.8.....25......-0.6%......17......19.3%........1......13.8%.....16
26..KC.....-31.6%.....1-6....-31.3%.....1.7.....26.......5.9%......10......-1.2%........19......9.0%.....11
27..CLE....-37.4%.....1-6....-50.5%.....1.6.....27......18.6%......1......-12.2%........30.....22.5%.....30
28..TB.....-44.4%.....0-7....-43.4%.....0.8.....32.......9.1%......6.......13.3%........3.......7.2%.....9
29..TEN....-44.7%.....0-6....-57.1%.....1.3.....29......14.2%......2........0.8%........16.....35.4%.....32
30..STL....-45.3%.....0-7....-53.0%.....1.5.....28......12.3%......4.......-5.1%........26......4.9%.....5
31..OAK....-49.7%.....2-5....-56.4%.....1.0.....30.......7.9%......8........2.3%........13.....19.2%.....25
32..DET....-57.2%.....1-5....-65.2%.....0.9.....31......12.7%......3........0.4%........18......9.0%.....10

[Smidgeon]

Re: Packers D now rank 3rd.

Look, our defense shut down Peterson, as MPF said. That was GREAT. Unfortunately, that meant that BF had way too much time to throw the ball and the end result was no different than if Peterson had run for 200 yards and 3 tds...

The way I see it, no matter how it felt during the game, GB didn't get completely torched by MIN. It wasn't a blowout victory. It wasn't 30-10. The final score was 30-23. Yeah, GB would have had to recover one of the two onside kicks to win it, but that was with GB having ten defenders and MIN having 12 on offense for much of the game (I'm counting Derrick Martin as part of the Viking's passing attack). With five to seven seconds per pass and barely a sniff of Favre's jersey by our pass rush, the final score difference should have been dramatically wider if the defense hadn't done something to account for the competitive advantage that was Derrick Martin.

I think that if Bigby had been there instead, the game would have been a lot less desperate than two attempted onside kicks and a prayer. I'm not saying that GB would have won, but it wasn't equivalent to AP getting 200 yards and 3 tds. It was equivalent to blown coverages by a player who was seeing his first significant playing time, hardly an indictment on the entire defense.

[retailguy]

Re: Packers D now rank 3rd.

Look, our defense shut down Peterson, as MPF said. That was GREAT. Unfortunately, that meant that BF had way too much time to throw the ball and the end result was no different than if Peterson had run for 200 yards and 3 tds...

The way I see it, no matter how it felt during the game, GB didn't get completely torched by MIN. It wasn't a blowout victory. It wasn't 30-10. The final score was 30-23. Yeah, GB would have had to recover one of the two onside kicks to win it, but that was with GB having ten defenders and MIN having 12 on offense for much of the game (I'm counting Derrick Martin as part of the Viking's passing attack). With five to seven seconds per pass and barely a sniff of Favre's jersey by our pass rush, the final score difference should have been dramatically wider if the defense hadn't done something to account for the competitive advantage that was Derrick Martin.

I think that if Bigby had been there instead, the game would have been a lot less desperate than two attempted onside kicks and a prayer. I'm not saying that GB would have won, but it wasn't equivalent to AP getting 200 yards and 3 tds. It was equivalent to blown coverages by a player who was seeing his first significant playing time, hardly an indictment on the entire defense.

Yeah, I know what you're saying. Not sure I agree totally, but I see your point.

I think Minny let up on the gas, and played a bit of prevent there. They definitely stopped blitzing on the last two packer drives. That allowed Rodgers to get into a groove.

But, you're right. Martin played poorly. Can't argue with that at all. Not sure the game was as close as you feel, but I hope that is the case on Sunday. If it is, that's good enough improvement for me in the past month.

BTW - WELCOME to the forum. Good to have you!

[Smidgeon]

Re: Packers D now rank 3rd.

Look, our defense shut down Peterson, as MPF said. That was GREAT. Unfortunately, that meant that BF had way too much time to throw the ball and the end result was no different than if Peterson had run for 200 yards and 3 tds...

The way I see it, no matter how it felt during the game, GB didn't get completely torched by MIN. It wasn't a blowout victory. It wasn't 30-10. The final score was 30-23. Yeah, GB would have had to recover one of the two onside kicks to win it, but that was with GB having ten defenders and MIN having 12 on offense for much of the game (I'm counting Derrick Martin as part of the Viking's passing attack). With five to seven seconds per pass and barely a sniff of Favre's jersey by our pass rush, the final score difference should have been dramatically wider if the defense hadn't done something to account for the competitive advantage that was Derrick Martin.

I think that if Bigby had been there instead, the game would have been a lot less desperate than two attempted onside kicks and a prayer. I'm not saying that GB would have won, but it wasn't equivalent to AP getting 200 yards and 3 tds. It was equivalent to blown coverages by a player who was seeing his first significant playing time, hardly an indictment on the entire defense.

Yeah, I know what you're saying. Not sure I agree totally, but I see your point.

I think Minny let up on the gas, and played a bit of prevent there. They definitely stopped blitzing on the last two packer drives. That allowed Rodgers to get into a groove.

But, you're right. Martin played poorly. Can't argue with that at all. Not sure the game was as close as you feel, but I hope that is the case on Sunday. If it is, that's good enough improvement for me in the past month.

BTW - WELCOME to the forum. Good to have you!

How many of the eight sacks were from blitzes (asking--don't know)? For goodness sake, JA got 4.5 of them on straight rushes simply because he didn't let up. With how long AR held onto the ball looking for receivers, it felt like they only rushed four most of the game and had everybody (except Derrick Martin) in coverage. I do know that their offense didn't let up. After all, BF did try the long throw towards the end of the game on 3rd and short (I think) that ended up incomplete in an attempt to ice the game. I'm not doubting that their defense let up (because I don't remember), I'm just wondering if their most effective rush was actually just making sure the receivers were covered and letting JA go to work.

Also: thanks. It's good to be here. I've been reading for a couple months and finally joined up. Looking forward to some good discussion.

[pack4to84]

Don't forget the Packers was a drop pass (D.Lee in the end zone on 4th down) away from tying the game. If Lee catches that well thrown ball in his breadbasket that game could have been different.

[Brandon494]

Don't forget the Packers was a drop pass (D.Lee in the end zone on 4th down) away from tying the game. If Lee catches that well thrown ball in his breadbasket that game could have been different.

Might have been different but I don't think it would have changed the outcome of the game, the Vikings pretty much went into chew the clock mode most of the 2nd half and let up a lot on offense.

[Smidgeon]

Don't forget the Packers was a drop pass (D.Lee in the end zone on 4th down) away from tying the game. If Lee catches that well thrown ball in his breadbasket that game could have been different.

Might have been different but I don't think it would have changed the outcome of the game, the Vikings pretty much went into chew the clock mode most of the 2nd half and let up a lot on offense.

Did they let up or did Capers' defense step up and the Vikings took what was available? They did throw the ball long along the sidelines on one of their last possessions. That doesn't seem to me to be letting up on offense. Now, I know that's one play, so I allow that if I'm just remembering the one play and the remainder of the second half was 'chew the clock' mode, then I withdraw my contention.

I agree that none of these surmisations mean that GB would have won. One team was rolling and one wasn't. I just think the game wasn't as completely one sided as people would like to think, which means this week's game could be more competitive.

[Partial]

I think this game will be more competitive, but I think they have an offense that is tough to defend. Favre can still wing it around as good as anybody and Peterson is the best in the biz.

I suspect the Pack will load up the box against Peterson on first and second down. I suspect that Caper's is keeping his gameplan under wraps with his comments, but I suspect we'll see a lot more heat sent against Favre on 3rd downs.

If the OL play is stabilized, I could see us winning this game. Rodgers was lights out Sunday and I could see this continuing.

[denverYooper]

Don't forget the Packers was a drop pass (D.Lee in the end zone on 4th down) away from tying the game. If Lee catches that well thrown ball in his breadbasket that game could have been different.

Might have been different but I don't think it would have changed the outcome of the game, the Vikings pretty much went into chew the clock mode most of the 2nd half and let up a lot on offense.

A TD to tie the game vs a TO on downs is a huge momentum difference. The game would definitely have been different... probably would have led to a FG difference btw victor and fallen instead of a TD.

[dahammer001]

Correction! The packers are ranked second defensively in the league


YDS YDS/G PASS P YDS/G RUSH R YDS/G PTS PTS/G
1 Denver 1575 262.5 1097 182.8 478 79.7 66 11.0
2 Green Bay 1629 271.5 1044 174.0 585 97.5 96 16.0
3 Carolina 1697 282.8 898 149.7 799 133.2 145 24.2
4 Philadelphia 1722 287.0 1141 190.2 581 96.8 116 19.3
5 Indianapolis 1750 291.7 1079 179.8 671 111.8 77 12.8
6 NY Giants 1834 262.0 1109 158.4 725 103.6 143 20.4
7 New Orleans 1840 306.7 1286 214.3 554 92.3 127 21.2
8 Seattle 1918 319.7 1322 220.3 596 99.3 109 18.2
9 Miami 1921 320.2 1401 233.5 520 86.7 152 25.3
10 San Francisco 1949 324.8 1416 236.0 533 88.8 122 20.3
11 Arizona 1951 325.2 1546 257.7 405 67.5 109 18.2
12 Chicago 1979 329.8 1322 220.3 657 109.5 144 24.0
13 Washington 1984 283.4 1154 164.9 830 118.6 123 17.6
14 San Diego 1994 332.3 1168 194.7 826 137.7 143 23.8
15 Baltimore 1996 332.7 1449 241.5 547 91.2 130 21.7
16 New England 2000 285.7 1234 176.3 766 109.4 98 14.0
17 Pittsburgh 2037 291.0 1501 214.4 536 76.6 129 18.4
18 NY Jets 2083 297.6 1270 181.4 813 116.1 104 14.9
19 Dallas 2087 347.8 1431 238.5 656 109.3 119 19.8
20 Jacksonville 2165 360.8 1572 262.0 593 98.8 147 24.5
21 Atlanta 2210 368.3 1504 250.7 706 117.7 114 19.0
22 Detroit 2225 370.8 1551 258.5 674 112.3 188 31.3
23 Minnesota 2310 330.0 1642 234.6 668 95.4 148 21.1
24 Cincinnati 2389 341.3 1773 253.3 616 88.0 128 18.3
25 Houston 2408 344.0 1599 228.4 809 115.6 158 22.6
26 Tennessee 2434 405.7 1864 310.7 570 95.0 198 33.0
27 Buffalo 2540 362.9 1333 190.4 1207 172.4 138 19.7
28 Tampa Bay 2635 376.4 1498 214.0 1137 162.4 203 29.0
29 Oakland 2640 377.1 1452 207.4 1188 169.7 177 25.3
30 Kansas City 2682 383.1 1765 252.1 917 131.0 181 25.9
31 St. Louis 2698 385.4 1747 249.6 951 135.9 211 30.1
32 Cleveland 2904 414.9 1710 244.3 1194 170.6 179 25.6
Glossary
YDS: Net total yards
YDS/G: Net yards per game
PASS: Net passing yards
P YDS/G: Net passing yards per game
RUSH: Rushing yards
R YDS/G: Rushing yards per game
PTS: Total points
PTS/G: Points per game
Statistics Glossary »

Data provided by Elias Sports Bureau
NFL Feedback »

[mission]

Correction! The packers are ranked second defensively in the league


YDS YDS/G PASS P YDS/G RUSH R YDS/G PTS PTS/G
1 Denver 1575 262.5 1097 182.8 478 79.7 66 11.0
2 Green Bay 1629 271.5 1044 174.0 585 97.5 96 16.0
3 Carolina 1697 282.8 898 149.7 799 133.2 145 24.2
4 Philadelphia 1722 287.0 1141 190.2 581 96.8 116 19.3
5 Indianapolis 1750 291.7 1079 179.8 671 111.8 77 12.8
6 NY Giants 1834 262.0 1109 158.4 725 103.6 143 20.4
7 New Orleans 1840 306.7 1286 214.3 554 92.3 127 21.2
8 Seattle 1918 319.7 1322 220.3 596 99.3 109 18.2
9 Miami 1921 320.2 1401 233.5 520 86.7 152 25.3
10 San Francisco 1949 324.8 1416 236.0 533 88.8 122 20.3
11 Arizona 1951 325.2 1546 257.7 405 67.5 109 18.2
12 Chicago 1979 329.8 1322 220.3 657 109.5 144 24.0
13 Washington 1984 283.4 1154 164.9 830 118.6 123 17.6
14 San Diego 1994 332.3 1168 194.7 826 137.7 143 23.8
15 Baltimore 1996 332.7 1449 241.5 547 91.2 130 21.7
16 New England 2000 285.7 1234 176.3 766 109.4 98 14.0
17 Pittsburgh 2037 291.0 1501 214.4 536 76.6 129 18.4
18 NY Jets 2083 297.6 1270 181.4 813 116.1 104 14.9
19 Dallas 2087 347.8 1431 238.5 656 109.3 119 19.8
20 Jacksonville 2165 360.8 1572 262.0 593 98.8 147 24.5
21 Atlanta 2210 368.3 1504 250.7 706 117.7 114 19.0
22 Detroit 2225 370.8 1551 258.5 674 112.3 188 31.3
23 Minnesota 2310 330.0 1642 234.6 668 95.4 148 21.1
24 Cincinnati 2389 341.3 1773 253.3 616 88.0 128 18.3
25 Houston 2408 344.0 1599 228.4 809 115.6 158 22.6
26 Tennessee 2434 405.7 1864 310.7 570 95.0 198 33.0
27 Buffalo 2540 362.9 1333 190.4 1207 172.4 138 19.7
28 Tampa Bay 2635 376.4 1498 214.0 1137 162.4 203 29.0
29 Oakland 2640 377.1 1452 207.4 1188 169.7 177 25.3
30 Kansas City 2682 383.1 1765 252.1 917 131.0 181 25.9
31 St. Louis 2698 385.4 1747 249.6 951 135.9 211 30.1
32 Cleveland 2904 414.9 1710 244.3 1194 170.6 179 25.6
Glossary
YDS: Net total yards
YDS/G: Net yards per game
PASS: Net passing yards
P YDS/G: Net passing yards per game
RUSH: Rushing yards
R YDS/G: Rushing yards per game
PTS: Total points
PTS/G: Points per game
Statistics Glossary »

Data provided by Elias Sports Bureau
NFL Feedback »

Which might make some sense if I could figure out why NYG is ranked #6 with 262.0 yards a game...