Whats with the D?

[AtlPackFan]

I don't have answers...I just have questions. I was hoping y'all would have answers.

Do we miss Cullen Jenkins that much?
Do we miss Nick Collins that much? I seem to think the D sucked before he went down.
Have others in the D regressed?
Have other teams figured out Caper's schemes?

I heard the announcers on WSSP this morning saying they don't care about the D...that the offense can outscore anyone. To me that is stupid. Anyone remember the Giants clamping down on the Patriots a few years back after the Patriots went...what, 18-0? The Patriots were putting up crazy, unbelievable numbers and the Giants shut them down. I still remember the Giants stating they were going to hold the Patriots under a certain amount of points and Brady laughing about because no one had. Well the Giants did it and the same is going to happen to the Pack if they don't find a D.

You have to have at least some semblance of a D. We are getting lucky right now with the turnovers but at some point, someone is going to figure out how to slow down our O just enough and then we are going to be screwed because this D doesn't seem to be able to stop anything. You can't rely on turnovers forever.

[Joemailman]

There's nothing lucky about the turnovers. Packers are 1st in INT's in 2011, were 2nd in 2010 and 1st in 2009. They're giving up too many big plays for a number of reasons. Lack of communication in the secondary, greater reliance on blitzing because lack of a pass rush, and loss of Collins. It also seems like the blitzes are less effective this year.

There is still time to improve, but I wouldn't expect this defense to really resemble what we saw last year.

[3irty1]

Its hard to tell the quality of a D when you are only looking at wins.

The scheme has been pretty vanilla by Capers standards which is to be expected since these games don't mean much. In fact I've wondered if we're purposely bending more than usual as a form of clock control. Running the ball to control the clock is pretty hard, allowing opposing teams to sustain long time-consuming drives is really, really, easy. As long as your offense can do whatever it wants that might be a real strategy.

The individual efforts of the players however can be questioned for sure. Raji hasn't been the factor he was last year, the guy is a workhorse for us but we could really go for another quality D lineman to spell him. He's just getting run down. Walden and Green who were both pleasant surprises last year have been non-factors this season. Hawk and Tramon aren't playing at their pay-grade. Wilson isn't contributing much either.

[pbmax]

Losing Jenkins and Neal has left the pass rush with one less alternative. Its also affected the scheme and the number of plays for Raji and Pickett. Without Jenkins/Neal and the Psycho package, that's another 10 snaps per game the base D line get to line up for.

Collins being hurt is clearly affecting the secondary. Its not everything, as they were porous before, but several times the Packers have misplayed route combinations. At times like this, I wonder if having split CB/safety coaching hurts. Take three plays, first, a 2nd half TD to the bottom of my TV screen, Williams and the safety were talking about coverage right through the snap, the safety came up to fill the middle (TE I think) and the CB let the WR get deep. Second, the corner Oakie with Woodson at safety, Wood ran up to the middle and let the WR get behind him before reacting and giving help to Shields. Both this plays looked like the CB was to play underneath the receiver while receiving help over the top. Third, the goal line TD pass where 3 Packer defenders all played the same short route and the deeper player got open and scored. The safety was again late to help if he had deep responsibility. I am not sure that was the problem because in goal line, deep in the endzone is not all that deep and tough for a safety to get to from the middle of the field.

Few OLB options. Last year, the Packers had a Jones/Zombo option at OLB and while neither was a pass rush terror, Capers let Matthews roam while the other side wasn't terrible. When Zombo got hurt, Walden came in and provided a different look.

This year, Zombo has been hurt and isn't up to speed while Walden has been underwhelming at times. For some reason, they are very reluctant to give Jones snaps now. I think last year's mismash of talent and injuries was more favorable to the Packers interests than this years, in some odd way. Mainly, that Zombo isn't up to speed, Jones has sunk further on the depth chart and Capers is not sending Matthews around the formation as much. And that last part is odd as Matthews claimed just a while back he had the green light to switch sides.

Lastly, all the shuffling has really stifled the blitz. I am not sure there is less of it, but its been less effective. Case in point, late in game Rivers audibled after Packers showed blitz. Hawk and Matthews began to gesticulate wildly. I would guess that they thought either the play had changed or they wanted to bring pressure from the other side if he slid protection. At the snap, Matthews on D left dropped to coverage and four rushed from the defense's right. But something went wrong in coverage and while the pass rush did get close to Rivers, he had time to find Matthews with two receivers around him and completed a pass to the sideline. The Packers have not been getting successful adjustments. The back end of the D looks like 2009 again.

[bobblehead]

My biggest gripe is that once we have a lead MM plays too scared. He goes into those shell coverages and teams march right down the field on us. I would rather he simply stays with having dom call an aggressive game regardless of score, but he is more obsessed with "the way its done" than I am with insisting you have to stop the run being equal to playing good pass D.

[pbmax]

My biggest gripe is that once we have a lead MM plays too scared. He goes into those shell coverages and teams march right down the field on us. I would rather he simply stays with having dom call an aggressive game regardless of score, but he is more obsessed with "the way its done" than I am with insisting you have to stop the run being equal to playing good pass D.

They had players back because Capers was blitzing like a maniac at the end. He sent no less than 5 most downs on the last three drives.

McCarthy actually threw the ball quite a bit in the phone booth offense twice before going three runs in the last drive. And at that point, running made some sense considering the last 3 pass drive was a 3 and out. That 3 and out contained an actual Rodgers misfire, a rare occurrence lately. Starks was one arm away from a first down on his 8 yard run. He was beastly.

[AtlPackFan]

There's nothing lucky about the turnovers. Packers are 1st in INT's in 2011, were 2nd in 2010 and 1st in 2009. They're giving up too many big plays for a number of reasons. Lack of communication in the secondary, greater reliance on blitzing because lack of a pass rush, and loss of Collins. It also seems like the blitzes are less effective this year.

There is still time to improve, but I wouldn't expect this defense to really resemble what we saw last year.

Apologies. Lucky was the wrong word but it seems like some games you get a bunch and other games...not so much. My fear is that if the D doesn't step up, we are going to run up against a very good team that takes care of the ball and slows down the offense just enough to hang a L on the Pack...and that it will happen in the playoffs.

But then I am a pessimist by nature...

[hoosier]

My biggest gripe is that once we have a lead MM plays too scared. He goes into those shell coverages and teams march right down the field on us. I would rather he simply stays with having dom call an aggressive game regardless of score, but he is more obsessed with "the way its done" than I am with insisting you have to stop the run being equal to playing good pass D.

The shell coverages is Capers, not MM. If MM is guilty of going too conservative with the lead it's because he tends to take his foot off the gas a little on offensive playcalling. As far as Capers's schemes, it is hard to argue with his tendency to rush three and drop everyone else back, given that (a) the secondary has shown a tendency to give up big plays this year and (b) even when they bring pressure they're really not getting to the QB the way they did last year.

[pbmax]

There is less luck involved in INTs, but it still requires the assistance of the offense. At some point, good QBs are going to stop giving it to them.

[AtlPackFan]

Its hard to tell the quality of a D when you are only looking at wins.

The scheme has been pretty vanilla by Capers standards which is to be expected since these games don't mean much. In fact I've wondered if we're purposely bending more than usual as a form of clock control. Running the ball to control the clock is pretty hard, allowing opposing teams to sustain long time-consuming drives is really, really, easy. As long as your offense can do whatever it wants that might be a real strategy.

The individual efforts of the players however can be questioned for sure. Raji hasn't been the factor he was last year, the guy is a workhorse for us but we could really go for another quality D lineman to spell him. He's just getting run down. Walden and Green who were both pleasant surprises last year have been non-factors this season. Hawk and Tramon aren't playing at their pay-grade. Wilson isn't contributing much either.

Interesting theory.

I heard someone say that Jenkins leaving and Neal being out has resulted in Raji playing more end than nose and that he isn't as dynamic at end as he is at nose. Anyway...just what I heard.

I have always been a Hawk fan but I wonder if the Packers would have been better off letting him go? He doesn't seem to be more than just a body...at least from what I have heard. Didn't see the game yesterday...they didn't show it in ATL and I don't have Sunday Ticket.

[PA Pack Fan]

I have always been a Hawk fan but I wonder if the Packers would have been better off letting him go? He doesn't seem to be more than just a body...at least from what I have heard. Didn't see the game yesterday...they didn't show it in ATL and I don't have Sunday Ticket.

Hawk is playing way above average. He is more reliable than last year, and his covearge skills improved. Letting him go would've been a terrible move.

[Bossman641]

The D is honestly pathetic right now, and I don't think it can be traced to any one level of the defense. The D line and OLB aren't getting consistent pressure, Hawk and Bishop are getting exposed in pass coverage, and the secondary breakdowns are unacceptable.

I keep waiting and waiting for them to turn it around, but it just isn't happening. At this point I hope they can just reach the level of an average defense. It's really hard to believe this is all due to the loss of Jenkins and I think it's asking an awful lot of Neal to expect him to come in and single-handedly improve the pass rush.

[denverYooper]

Someone tweeted this to Neal:

http://twitter.com/#!/JokerNick1983/status/133583188520996864

@mneal96 So, are you Justin Harrel v2.0? I mean, talk about injury prone

Interesting thing is that he re-tweeted it.

[denverYooper]

I cannot put my finger on what's up with the D. They'll put teams in 3rd and long and then give it up. They'll look horrible until they need a stop and then they'll come through (like the last 2 drives yesterday). I don't know that things are all that different than the end of last year, where they closed multiple games out with a last minute TO, doing just enough. They're giving up more as the offense is rolling harder than Optimus Prime on C1al!s.

The only way that I can find to describe their play is "clutch", although the way that they get to the clutch looks pretty fugly. In ways, they're like the Eli Manning (or Big Ben) of defenses: they look like shit until it's crunch time, then they pull it out.

[sheepshead]

Are we missing the talent from these guys? Or maybe leadership. Collins, Jenkins and Ill throw another name out there JUST from a leadership stand point- Barnett.