I'm So Angry...at the JSO

[pbmax]

Press Gazette's game story, 3rd paragraph. Too big a target to pass up, though the Press Gazette does not stray into the "lucky" route and leaves it open ended.

The bigger issue is whether Roethlisberger’s 503-yard game was an anomaly, or whether it exposed flaws in the Packers’ pass defense that could be a major problem the next time they face an elite quarterback surrounded by some good weapons. That's inevitable in the NFL playoffs

A big difference in presenting it as a question for discussion rather than as a fact exposed in the game.

Agree completely there. Silverstein went off the deep end calling a 9-5 team lucky to get in the playoffs after one loss.

[Fritz]

Well, I took Skin's advice and just wrote Silverstein an email expressing my dismay.

One of the points I made to him was that by his logic, teams should be drooling over the prospect of facing the Minnesota Vikings in the playoffs. Gosh, they only managed a measly seven points against a mediocre Carolina team, and their defense was ripped for almost 300 yards by a backup quarterback, and on top of that they gave up over a 100 yards rushing.

For that matter, what playoff offense wouldn't want to face the Saints? Look how many points they gave up this week!

[MJZiggy]

What do you expect? People are upset about the game and specifically the defense. People like to hear things with which they agree. The article probably accomplishes its primary goal of getting more readers. Many people will skim the headline and first paragraph and feel good that their frustration is noticed. They may even use the article as a talking point at the office/bar later that week.

Serious football fanatics will read every article they can get there hands on regardless, why cater to them? They're an already guaranteed audience.

What I expect is that fans will overreact and that "professional journalists" will at least pretend to report the game objectively. The Packers will not be "lucky" to get in. Loss or not, they are well positioned for that to happen. Loss or not, I believe Capers will look at this game and diagnose what went wrong effectively. I don't think we are nearly as vulnerable to an elite QB as the article openly states.

People may want to read what they agree with, but there are a few of us who despise people unfairly ripping on our team. They are a good team, not the Lions.

[mraynrand]

Well, I took Skin's advice and just wrote Silverstein an email expressing my dismay.

One of the points I made to him was that by his logic, teams should be drooling over the prospect of facing the Minnesota Vikings in the playoffs. Gosh, they only managed a measly seven points against a mediocre Carolina team, and their defense was ripped for almost 300 yards by a backup quarterback, and on top of that they gave up over a 100 yards rushing.

For that matter, what playoff offense wouldn't want to face the Saints? Look how many points they gave up this week!

You've misread the new culture Fritz - it's attention at any cost even if - maybe especially if - you have to humiliate yourself.

[RashanGary]

pb has made some really good points in here. The article made a real point but took it a little too far.


I think the season shows that the Packers are a really good team, but this game (along with the Viking games) have shown what a really good QB can do to our defense. I agree that teams are going to go at Bush, Bell and Underwood until they prove they can play, and I agree with the article's implied suggestion that they can't play.

It's a weakness that I believe makes this team too weak to make it through the playoffs (we WILL run into a team that can and knows how to exploit it). I think it was really exposed last night and looks to be a problem that cannot be fixed. I disagree that they don't belong in the playoffs. I'd say they belong in the playoffs, but really aren't a contender with such a glaring and exploitable weak link on defense. I think the article really highlighted the story of the game, just took it a bit too far.

[Smidgeon]

I think the season shows that the Packers are a really good team, but this game (along with the Viking games) have shown what a really good QB can do to our defense.

I don't think this is a fault of just the Packer's defense. The modern game is designed around the QB. A good QB on a hot streak can beat any team and make the defense look silly. It isn't an indictment on the defense if they happen to hit a QB on a hot streak. The game is set up to allow for that. The best you can do is hope your QB is hotter (Skin, no need for graphical representation of that last point).

[cheesner]

The oddest part of this is the fact that the Packers were the #2 ranked defense after 13 games and were the #1 ranked defense after 12 games. This author thinks it was all an illusion?

I think the story here is LeBeau, Capers former pupil, being able to help his OC with his knowledge of Capers' defense. Whatever the Pitt offensive game plan was - it worked better than any other offense this season. I see no reason to panic, however.

Even with the last TD play, I was not upset. Disappointed, certainly, but not upset. The coverage was good. Rothlisberger made a perfect pass and Wallace made a fantastic catch. It is nearly impossible to prevent that. I do wish we had rushed more, but thats the way it goes. If that pass is off 2 inches, the ball hangs up for 1/8 second more, if the receiver doesn't barely drag that first foot, if if if . . . the defensive play call would have been successful anyway.

[Fritz]

pb has made some really good points in here. The article made a real point but took it a little too far.


I think the season shows that the Packers are a really good team, but this game (along with the Viking games) have shown what a really good QB can do to our defense. I agree that teams are going to go at Bush, Bell and Underwood until they prove they can play, and I agree with the article's implied suggestion that they can't play.

It's a weakness that I believe makes this team too weak to make it through the playoffs (we WILL run into a team that can and knows how to exploit it). I think it was really exposed last night and looks to be a problem that cannot be fixed. I disagree that they don't belong in the playoffs. I'd say they belong in the playoffs, but really aren't a contender with such a glaring and exploitable weak link on defense. I think the article really highlighted the story of the game, just took it a bit too far.

Implied suggestion? "The . . . defense showed exactly where it's vulnerable and where it will be exposed..." Oh, and "You can only imagine how many playoff quarterbacks are drooling over an opportunity to play against the Packers."

That's be explicit claim.

[RashanGary]

Sorry Fritz, I'm a huge fan and as of last week, I had a lot of hope for this team, this year, but. . . .


The things Jarrett Bush and Mike Bell were doing, I don't have a lot of confidence that they'll get it fixed. Bush looked lost and even though Bell looked like he was close on that play, he had no idea where his help was and he should have been playing outside leverage more than he was.

I wouldn't say teams are "licking their chops" to get at the Packers D, but I'm sure they know the first place they are going to try to exploit and I honestly believe a good team is going to have loads of success going at Bush and Bell.


The Packers belong in the playoffs IMO, but I don't think they're a real contender. They're young and sloppy on ST's. They have a FG kicker who is just bad right now and a punter who's been bad all year. And now they've had their weak link on defense exposed for everyone to see.

I like this team, don't get me wrong. Hell, I even think we could win a game or even two if they get on a little run. I just don't see this team having the mettle to make it to or win the SB.


This team is good, and by my estimation, they're only going to get better in the coming years. There's a lot of optimism after this game and after this season, but it's not all optimism. The reality is that we have some weaknesses, and they're bad enough that I don't think we can win playoff games with them or fix them this year for that matter.

[Fritz]

I don't necessarily think this is a Super Bowl team, either. The thing is, no one really knows who is and isn't. In '07 no one thought the Giants were a Super Bowl team. Last year lots of people thought Tennessee was a Super Bowl team.

That's what irks me about the article. Silverstein speaks confidently as if he knows already. Well, he doesn't. None of us do.

I'm guessing lots of Minny fans are worried and down on their team this week - but who knows if this is just part of the gamut for them or any team?

[ThunderDan]

Sorry Fritz, I'm a huge fan and as of last week, I had a lot of hope for this team, this year, but. . . .


The things Jarrett Bush and Mike Bell were doing, I don't have a lot of confidence that they'll get it fixed. Bush looked lost and even though Bell looked like he was close on that play, he had no idea where his help was and he should have been playing outside leverage more than he was.

JH-

Give it a rest on Bell. The only way he could have taken more away on the outside would have been bumping him 18 inches and making the WR run out of bounds.

That throw was in the only place it could have been caught.

[Fritz]

I'd have to agree. I can't see that Bell could've played it much better.

Other guys got burned on the drive down, but Rohtlisberger had time to wait for them to shake open.

Matthews got burned on one. Barnett/Woodson on another. Bush, of course.

[pbmax]

I don't think Silverstein was making a flat claim that the Packers will be lucky to get into the playoffs, he was being sarcastic that their former run of luck against average passers that he lists, is likely to end in the playoffs versus Brees, Manning or McNabb.

[pbmax]

Sorry Fritz, I'm a huge fan and as of last week, I had a lot of hope for this team, this year, but. . . .


The things Jarrett Bush and Mike Bell were doing, I don't have a lot of confidence that they'll get it fixed. Bush looked lost and even though Bell looked like he was close on that play, he had no idea where his help was and he should have been playing outside leverage more than he was.

JH-

Give it a rest on Bell. The only way he could have taken more away on the outside would have been bumping him 18 inches and making the WR run out of bounds.

That throw was in the only place it could have been caught.

He was supposed to be playing man under, as three people on the Packers staff have said. He was supposed to be between the receiver and Roethlisberger no matter what. But he let the receiver get by him deep across the endzone. He was supposed to ignore the possibility of a throw over his head and let Bigby take care of that. Bigby of course, was 20 feet away.

But even given his responsibility, he was only off by a half step at most. It was a pinpoint throw.

[Patler]

I don't necessarily think this is a Super Bowl team, either. The thing is, no one really knows who is and isn't. In '07 no one thought the Giants were a Super Bowl team. Last year lots of people thought Tennessee was a Super Bowl team.

That's what irks me about the article. Silverstein speaks confidently as if he knows already. Well, he doesn't. None of us do.

I'm guessing lots of Minny fans are worried and down on their team this week - but who knows if this is just part of the gamut for them or any team?

What got me most was the suggestion that yesterday was some great revelation; as if no one knew how to beat the Packer defense until Pittsburgh and Ben Roethlisberger showed them how. Now everyone knows! If only the Packers could have kept the secret that Bush, Bell and the others are not very good corners!

Every team knows the weaknesses in the Packer defense, just like the Packers know the weaknesses in their opponents' defenses. Did any fan think the weakness was something other than the 3rd and 4th corners? It becomes a chess game, can the offense scheme to take advantage of the weaknesses, or can the defense scheme to overcome the weakness and not let the offense use it to their advantage.

Sometimes pressure can make up for poor coverage, but Roethlisberger presents challenges in that department. He can withstand direct hits by linemen, and throw them off. Jenkins had a good shot around his shoulders late in the game yesterday, and slid right off.

No discredit to Roethlisberger, but he was phenomenally accurate yesterday, and he had to be. If they played again next week Capers might have a new wrinkle for them, just as Pittsburgh might. The result could be different, because as the score indicated, these are closely matched teams overall.