Where the blame really lies

[Patler]

Good point. Detroit's front is a tough one to lose a starting OL guy against.

Except that Detroit played the entire game with one backup on their d-line, and most of the game with a second backup on their d-line. Losing Colledge is no excuse.

[denverYooper]

Bulaga was overwhelmed and confused with some funky two player alignments on his side.

On defense the mismatches were even worse IMO. The Packers running defense is not nearly as poor as the talking heads wanted us to believe and in fact have taken very little damage from running backs all year long. By no means should the lions have had that kind of success against us. Atlanta's main plan to run the ball on us involved trying to isolate Frank Zombo, Detroit did this all too easily probably due in part to the absence of Cullen Jenkins who would normally being playing next to Zombo.

Jim Schwartz's team isn't good but I have a feeling that we haven't lost our last game to him. He seems to have MM figured out and knows exactly how to attack us on offense and defense.

1.) I had to leave at halftime, but they were throwing a lot of different things against Bulaga in a game of confuse the rook. To their credit, it worked.
2.) Totally agree about our run D. I think they are willing to give up some yards to the running backs in order to control the passing game. I actually think a large part of their overall gameplan is to make it about GB's passing game vs. the other team's running game.
3.) Disagree about the Lions not being good. They're on the rise and in some ways it is unfortunate for the Packers because they're going to have to contend with a good Lions team over the next few. I have a feeling that the division past this year will be Packers/Lions because they both have a decent core of young players.

[denverYooper]

Except that Detroit played the entire game with one backup on their d-line, and most of the game with a second backup on their d-line. Losing Colledge is no excuse.

It doesn't excuse the poor line play across the board but it certainly didn't help. I'm with you that their line play has been subpar and probably masked by Rodgers's ability.

I don't see the Giants game going much better for that group because NYG's front is arguably better than Detroit's.

[Patler]

I have a feeling that the division past this year will be Packers/Lions because they both have a decent core of young players.

The question might come down to whether they can keep their starting QBs healthy.

[ND72]

So here's my thing...and I don't disagree with anything said. Our OL is just horrible, and it pains me because it seems so simple to me, and it seems simple because I saw Chicago doing this last week against Detroit, and we never once did it. Detroit plays those wide DE's....which Clifton & Bulaga struggled with. Chicago did not seem to have that problem...why? On every play, I saw Forte flare out, chipping off the DE, aka, pushing him back inside instead of allowing him upfield, and Chicago routinely was bring Olson in motion, and doing the exact same thing on the other side, so they got a TE & RB to chip on the DE's, and then they ran out into a pattern. How many times did you see this from us? McCarthy tried putting a TE in, but all that did was widen the DE further, and Crabtree got crushed.

Here are some other issues I had. Detroit ran a perfect plan. They did exactly what I expected all season long. Teams to say, screw their run game, go get their QB. So they obviously told their DL go as hard and as fast as you can and get upfield. In the mean time, that disrupts EVERYTHING else GB was trying to do.

Also...our first screen we ran? 2 minute mark left in the game. When you play a team who's DL is just storming upfield, you run screens and draws. We ran like 2 or 3 draws in the first half, and they actually kind of worked. Dislike the play selections by McCarthy. He obviously had a plan going into the game and refused to get away from it even though nothing was working.

[Freak Out]

I'm still so disgusted I can't really talk about it.

We lost to a 2 win team when our season was on the line....it was a complete failure by the players and coaches.

[3irty1]

So here's my thing...and I don't disagree with anything said. Our OL is just horrible, and it pains me because it seems so simple to me, and it seems simple because I saw Chicago doing this last week against Detroit, and we never once did it. Detroit plays those wide DE's....which Clifton & Bulaga struggled with. Chicago did not seem to have that problem...why? On every play, I saw Forte flare out, chipping off the DE, aka, pushing him back inside instead of allowing him upfield, and Chicago routinely was bring Olson in motion, and doing the exact same thing on the other side, so they got a TE & RB to chip on the DE's, and then they ran out into a pattern. How many times did you see this from us? McCarthy tried putting a TE in, but all that did was widen the DE further, and Crabtree got crushed.

Here are some other issues I had. Detroit ran a perfect plan. They did exactly what I expected all season long. Teams to say, screw their run game, go get their QB. So they obviously told their DL go as hard and as fast as you can and get upfield. In the mean time, that disrupts EVERYTHING else GB was trying to do.

Also...our first screen we ran? 2 minute mark left in the game. When you play a team who's DL is just storming upfield, you run screens and draws. We ran like 2 or 3 draws in the first half, and they actually kind of worked. Dislike the play selections by McCarthy. He obviously had a plan going into the game and refused to get away from it even though nothing was working.

This. We've seen this all year. Players coming from four-point stances, pass rushing personnel playing every down, Detroit was so confident in their rushing defense that they could spread and stack DEs in all sorts of places in order to get to the QB. Ironically it seems even more important to keep the running game reps up for a team that can't run the ball. It might be preferable to beat your head against the wall trying to run the ball as long as it means teams have to expect it even if they don't respect it.

[denverYooper]

I'm still so disgusted I can't really talk about it.

We lost to a 2 win team when our season was on the line....it was a complete failure by the players and coaches.

Yup.

I've defended M3 on several occasions for his team coming up flat in big games but this one is indefensible.

[denverYooper]

This. We've seen this all year. Players coming from four-point stances, pass rushing personnel playing every down, Detroit was so confident in their rushing defense that they could spread and stack DEs in all sorts of places in order to get to the QB. Ironically it seems even more important to keep the running game reps up for a team that can't run the ball. It might be preferable to beat your head against the wall trying to run the ball as long as it means teams have to expect it even if they don't respect it.

I agree that they should have pounded the middle of the line more. The other problem with the run game was that they were splitting carries too much. 15 carries by the 3 running backs (Jackson 7/20, Starks 6/8, Nance 2/4) without letting any one of them or the line get into any kind of groove. I left right after Flynn threw that pick in the end zone but was flabbergasted that they didn't even try to run once in that trip to the red zone and felt that they set him up for failure there.

[Scott Campbell]

OK. Serious this time. I started a few goofy threads to lighten the mood for a serious, hopefully analytical and not emotional discussion. Many of you saw the threads for what they were, a suggestion that we should all take a deep breath, then discuss the fiasco we witnessed today.

The defense played very well.
Special teams played well/good enough to win.

Some individuals made some mistakes, but that happens. You have to accept that no one is perfect, not even Greg Jennings, and once in a while a ball will get away from him.

However, the one group that got overwhelmed continuously was the O-line, and it wasn't just an occasional play made by a great player like Suh. It was a total failure of the O-line as a unit, with each and every one of them being dominated by the man across from them. There was no place to run, there was no protection in the passing game. While there are solid players and a budding star in Suh, this was three good, but not great d-linemen and Suh absolutely dominating first 5 blockers, then six when a TE was kept in, or even 7 with a back; all trying to handle four Lions, with little blitzing.

Unfortunately, this was not unique. There has been little running room all year, and the protection given to Rodgers has been very, very shoddy. He rarely has a clean pocket, and only his willingness to run and his ability to make throws on the move have kept the offense going.

But, in the end, a good O-line is essential to win consistently, because they take over close games and get you the points when you need them by opening holes for the backs, and giving the QB time and confidence to execute the passing game.

Sadly, this is what the O-line has been under MM each and every year. I believe that there is either a basic philosophical flaw in what they do as a unit, or the coaching is bad, because even average NFL linemen should not be absolutely dominated play after play after play by the four d-linemen the Lions have. The Packer O-line was not prepared to handle what the Lions brought. Because of that, the Packers lost.

Almost total agreement with your assessment. But I'm really, really ticked about Jennings. And not becase he dropped the ball, but because he quit on the play and let his emotions interfere with his responsibility. I heard someone say he probably thought it was incomplete, but it takes very little effort to turn your head around to see what happened. But he was too busy feeling sorry for himself. Horrible mental error. And this guy is supposed to be a team leader.

[vince]

Regarding the Packers' run D, I didn't keep track specifically but the Packers were in nickel pretty much the whole game. Even so, the Packers pretty much bottled up the Lions rushiing attack, except for the QB scrambles/designed drop-back runs. Take away Stanton, and the Packers held the Lions to under 4 yards a carry with only 2 d-linemen in the game.

In spite of the Packers utter futility on offense, time of possession was equal because of the performance of the D. The Packers D forced punt after punt if they weren't intercepting the ball, along with a missed long FG, one TD and the end of half and game. Stanton wasn't sharp passing the ball, but the defense did it's job, including defending the run IMO.

[ND72]

I heard an ESPN "expert" say, "Can you beleive the Packers gave up over 200 yards rushing to Detroit?"....I yelled at the TV, mostly because Detroit had what, like 50 rush attempts?

[bobblehead]

This. We've seen this all year. Players coming from four-point stances, pass rushing personnel playing every down, Detroit was so confident in their rushing defense that they could spread and stack DEs in all sorts of places in order to get to the QB. Ironically it seems even more important to keep the running game reps up for a team that can't run the ball. It might be preferable to beat your head against the wall trying to run the ball as long as it means teams have to expect it even if they don't respect it.

YEs, Yes, yes. You can't run the ball 13 times a game and win. I don't care what anyone here says or what half ass stat you might show, to win in the NFL you MUST be able to run the ball effectively (and have a QB that can convert manageable 3rd downs).

[bobblehead]

I heard an ESPN "expert" say, "Can you beleive the Packers gave up over 200 yards rushing to Detroit?"....I yelled at the TV, mostly because Detroit had what, like 50 rush attempts?

But, this is partially the reason they eventually broke through with a TD. Our D finally broke down against a team committed to the run....theirs did not against a team not committed to the run.

[vince]

Stanton sucks, but I don't care what anyone says. You hold a team to one score, you've done your job. End of story. The problem was on the other side of the ball.