Key to Bears game this Sunday

[Packers4Glory]

To be fair, Quarless is still a rookie. I agree that he isn't offering much and that strategy likely won't be used this year, but he's doing a lot for a rookie TE. Look no further than Finley's rookie year. I for one am glad he was drafted.

/thread jack

This is true, but I'd not be surprised if MM adds this into the game plan. The TE has been forgotten since Finley went down. I doubt the bears are preparing for anything like week 3. If MM can get Quarless into the plan some it could be the surprise edge they need. I can't say I have faith in Q but if he could make some grabs down the seem snd in the middle...you jus opened up things considerably and have them scrambling to try snd cover it. Could be key.

[Packers4Glory]

The last key is the players need to want to win this game as badly as I do! If they do then it's in the bag!

[Freak Out]

The TEs have not been forgotten.....they remaining guys just haven't been used the way JF was.

[mraynrand]

Wasn't he forced into conservative because of how Warner was carving up the blitzes?

Packers secondary was thin that day, and got thinner with injuries. The worst part was the confusion where LBs and dbacks had trouble passing off receivers in coverage. Packers have been a whole lot better at that this year, and have improved as the year has gone along. Peprah is a nice surprise, and having Woodson in his hybrid role, roving around, instead of having to coverage a lot has helped too. even though Bishop and Hawk are a step slower than what you'd like as MLBs in a 3-4, they are more consistent and assignment sure than when Barnett was in there, particularly Bishop. For all his quickness, Barnett was out of position far too often.

[Smidgeon]

Packers secondary was thin that day, and got thinner with injuries. The worst part was the confusion where LBs and dbacks had trouble passing off receivers in coverage. Packers have been a whole lot better at that this year, and have improved as the year has gone along. Peprah is a nice surprise, and having Woodson in his hybrid role, roving around, instead of having to coverage a lot has helped too. even though Bishop and Hawk are a step slower than what you'd like as MLBs in a 3-4, they are more consistent and assignment sure than when Barnett was in there, particularly Bishop. For all his quickness, Barnett was out of position far too often.

I still think history will look at this defense and call it the Green Bay 2-4. Kind of like the Bears' 46 or something. Don't historically different schemes arise from certain players? The Dallas D that Bates brought in required certain kinds of DEs, for example.

Now, I'm mostly talking out of turn because I really don't know, but I think it conceivable that the secondary and DL of GB allow them to do things that no other team can. With Raji and Pickett on run downs and Raji and Jenkins on pass downs, with Shields and Williams on the outside, Woodson on the inside, and Collins deep to clean up, I can potentially see this defense being historically significant. Just sayin'.

[sharpe1027]

To be fair, Quarless is still a rookie. I agree that he isn't offering much and that strategy likely won't be used this year, but he's doing a lot for a rookie TE. Look no further than Finley's rookie year. I for one am glad he was drafted.
/thread jack

Yep, I didn't mean to imply that he was a bad pick. I just don't expect to see him suddenly making a huge leap in productivity. Although I will be very happy if he does.

[Smidgeon]

Yep, I didn't mean to imply that he was a bad pick. I just don't expect to see him suddenly making a huge leap in productivity. Although I will be very happy if he does.

Okay. I can accept that. And agree with it.

[RashanGary]

I still think history will look at this defense and call it the Green Bay 2-4. Kind of like the Bears' 46 or something. Don't historically different schemes arise from certain players? The Dallas D that Bates brought in required certain kinds of DEs, for example.

Now, I'm mostly talking out of turn because I really don't know, but I think it conceivable that the secondary and DL of GB allow them to do things that no other team can. With Raji and Pickett on run downs and Raji and Jenkins on pass downs, with Shields and Williams on the outside, Woodson on the inside, and Collins deep to clean up, I can potentially see this defense being historically significant. Just sayin'.

They should call it that, but they won't.

Regardless of what they call it, I'll always remember having Collins, Woodson and Tramon in the same secondary and Raji/Mattews rushing the passer. This has been a special pass defense.

[Smidgeon]

They should call it that, but they won't.

Regardless of what they call it, I'll always remember having Collins, Woodson and Tramon in the same secondary and Raji/Mattews rushing the passer. This has been a special pass defense.

Personally, I think it's an exceptional case of a coordinator tailoring a defense to fit the players. GB was in nickel over 70% of the season and still weren't terribly easy to run on (except for some QBs at the beginning of the year). That's simply impressive.

[3irty1]

I still think history will look at this defense and call it the Green Bay 2-4. Kind of like the Bears' 46 or something. Don't historically different schemes arise from certain players? The Dallas D that Bates brought in required certain kinds of DEs, for example.

Now, I'm mostly talking out of turn because I really don't know, but I think it conceivable that the secondary and DL of GB allow them to do things that no other team can. With Raji and Pickett on run downs and Raji and Jenkins on pass downs, with Shields and Williams on the outside, Woodson on the inside, and Collins deep to clean up, I can potentially see this defense being historically significant. Just sayin'.

The Packers also have a 3-3 nickel package that we've been seeing quite a bit of. Dom seems to have a special nickel just for first down that uses his big hogs up front to stop the run but still has his best cover guys in order to not give up a big play. The actual 3-4 is a run defense.

[RashanGary]

Nice post, 3irty1. I didn't notice we were playing more of that, but it makes a ton of sense.

1. We're HUGE up front so we can stop the run
2. Raji and Matthews are special pass rushers so we still apply pressure
3. Woodson is still a rover/LB role where QB's have no clue what he might be doing


With our personnel, that's a really nice base package. It's what I'd run against the Bears.

[mraynrand]

One subtle point that could lead to huge success or terrible failure for the Pack would be who wins the cat and mouse game with the hot reads. Woodson can show blitz or show coverage. If Cutler thinks blitz, he loves to throw that quick dump off to TE 81 and occasionally other WRs depending on alignment. If Woodson can flash blitz and then drop into that passing lane, possibilities exist for big plays. If he guesses wrong, misses the formation, or Cutler gets the ball out before he gets there (or pulls it back in seeing Woodson jump the lane), Chicago could catch us in a bad spot. Hopefully Woodson does his homework, knows all the tendencies and has Cutler figured out. even when Woodson blitzes though, Cutler as a tough time throwing an accurate quick ball - I'd say less than 50% of the time it's a catchable ball.

[Fritz]

How does Cutler do against blitzes? Is he good at picking them up and getting the ball out? Anybody know?

[billy_oliver880]

52 sacks on him this year.

Also Martz doesn't let him check out of plays. So if the blitz comes he has to get rid of it quick.

[mraynrand]

How does Cutler do against blitzes? Is he good at picking them up and getting the ball out? Anybody know?

He's gotten a whole lot better as the season has progressed. And by better, I mean better getting the ball out and not getting sacked. He's still somewhat shaky with accuracy on those hot reads, but they've hit quite a few of them.