TIME TO BE CONCERNED ?

[wist43]

I'm still not too concerned... but I'm not surprised we lost - not happy about it, but not surprised.

As I said in the game day thread - this team is built soft. My hope is that getting beat up like this; and after getting beat up by New York in the playoffs last year, and also getting smacked around pretty good by the Chiefs, that MM and Capers will get their heads out of their asses and start doing some game planning and coaching.

If there is such a thing as a good loss, this might be it.

[RashanGary]

I'm still not too concerned... but I'm not surprised we lost - not happy about it, but not surprised.

As I said in the game day thread - this team is built soft. My hope is that getting beat up like this; and after getting beat up by New York in the playoffs last year, and also getting smacked around pretty good by the Chiefs, that MM and Capers will get their heads out of their asses and start doing some game planning and coaching.

If there is such a thing as a good loss, this might be it.

This is pretty much how I feel. I did like that they played Pickett and Raji inside quite a bit. If they're going to go small like that, they might as well use the two strongest lineman to do it.

The Packers have big problems against running teams with good defenses. Great defense almost always seems to slow down great offense. The Patriots, since their defensive hay day, have gotten beaten by great defense in the post season year after year after year. The Packers are looking like that sort of team now.

My biggest concern, the one I don't know if we'll have an answer to, is our zone defense. We seem to be built to play man defense. Shields just seems lost in space, but he mans up pretty well. Problem is, we can't just man up against a great running team and turn our backs. Then there is the safeties, they seem lost too. And Perry, obviously he looked lost.

Balanced offenses are going to have their way with us. When Collins was here, he covered the whole deep middle by himself. We could play straight man defense outside with one over and still not get beat. Then we had that 8th guy in the box. Teams couldn't run, and since that 8th guy was Woodson, they couldn't pass either. Now it's a different story. We can't just man up. We have to play good zone defense. Problem is, we've never done it and I don't know if we have the guys to do it.

Maybe Hayward or House come in and prove they can do what Bush or Shields cannot (play zone defense), but that's a pretty big friggin if.

Actually, I take it back. I am concerned. I think we can win a lot of games, but I don't see how we'll ever knock off a SF team like that if our zone defense looks that damn lost all season. They were awful all last season at it, who's to say they won't this year?

[pbmax]

My biggest concern, the one I don't know if we'll have an answer to, is our zone defense. We seem to be built to play man defense. Shields just seems lost in space, but he mans up pretty well. Problem is, we can't just man up against a great running team and turn our backs. Then there is the safeties, they seem lost too. And Perry, obviously he looked lost.

Agree with the problem of zone coverage to combat a run game. Very much takes this defense out of it comfort zone. I want to say there is hope due to the second half, but we'll see. McMillan and Hayward might have something to say about it.

Perry looked lost in coverage and lost his leverage against a receiver twice but otherwise he acquitted himself OK I thought.

[RashanGary]

Agree with the problem of zone coverage to combat a run game. Very much takes this defense out of it comfort zone. I want to say there is hope due to the second half, but we'll see. McMillan and Hayward might have something to say about it.

Perry looked lost in coverage and lost his leverage against a receiver twice but otherwise he acquitted himself OK I thought.

Yeah, I only remmeber two really bad plays too. We can win a lot of games with this defense, even the way it is, but to actually advance to the SB or win it. . . . That's going to be awfully hard. We just don't have an identity. In 2010 our identity was leave Collins alone in the middle, man up outside and play 8 in the box to stop the run. It was a dominant defense for us.

When we tried that last year, after NC went down, we just got destroyed outside. If we try to go back to that, could Burnett cover the middle and shrink that sideline window the way Collins did? I'm going to give a big hell-no to that. So now we have to learn to play sound, disciplined zone defense, with only 7 in the box like the Bears do and still stop the run. . . . . Haha. Doubt it.

[gbgary]

it's one game, the first game. had a chance to win it but didn't. a quality win over the bears will go along way to making everyone feel a lot better. short turnaround. hope no one got hurt today.

[mmmdk]

it's one game, the first game. had a chance to win it but didn't. a quality win over the bears will go along way to making everyone feel a lot better. short turnaround. hope no one got hurt today.

Well I hope the whole teams pride is hurt! Other hurst hopefully not so severe.

[RashanGary]

Cobb should play RB more. He's a far more talented player than any RB we have on the roster. Brian Westbrook was a heck of a RB and he was the same size. . . . Not saying Cobb should be a workhorse or anything, but maybe we should have went to him earlier, instead of a last resort thing. Maybe he should be a bigger part of our backfield. He just brings our talent level up a notch, a big notch.

[Rutnstrut]

It seems to me that this coaching staff really can't/won't make adjustments when the game doesn't go as they plan.

[George Cumby]

No.

That being said......

Perry is a player.

The defensive backfield is a concern.

The team is soft. ( I am now officially joining Wist and Nutz here.)

M3's play calling includes some WTF? moments.

Jmike is what he is. A head-case. He can't catch the balls he needs to in order to prolong a drive. Cya.

It is a long season. 3-3 still doesn't concern me........

[Pugger]

It hurts to lose but SF is a quality team that will be a terror all season. We could be NO and look horrid against Washington and a rookie QB.

[pbmax]

I really want to know what got Jennings benched for a rookie in a confused secondary.

[Packers4Glory]

Defense still concerns me a great deal, as well as special teams coverage. I only caught some of the 1st and 2nd last night but nothing I saw changed my concerns coming in. I saw them give up a good return after the Nelson TD.

yup. nothing new to report on this aspect.

ST, well, thankfully we were allowed a block in the back.

[rbaloha1]

Time to be concerned -- not yet -- only seriously concerned with a Bears loss.

Random thoughts

-- Packer's offense "panics" when it falls behind. MM and AR when they are best with a lead. It was disturbing to watch AR throw deep when it was not there. Must remain disciplined and take what the defense gives you.

-- Stay committed to the run game. MM preaches it but panics and disregards it.

-- Defense is not blessed with smart players.

-- Shields was too tentative.

-- Front was dominated.

-- Slow to adjust to 49er offensive play calls -- CK qb run, toss sweeps to Gore, etc.

-- Continue secondary miscommunications

-- Improved tackling.

-- Despite the defensive problem agree with Woodson the defense is better than 2011.

[LEWCWA]

the 2 inside lb'ers and safteys are terrible. When you are soft up the middle your def. is going to suck. Mathews blows up a running play, but where is the pusuit? Hawk is so slow he has already changed his angle to try and stop the rb 10 yards deep.....fucker is terrible....

[Packers4Glory]

I'm kinda amazed that with all the fat fucks we've had up front (looking at you Raji and Pickett) that we aren't harder to run the ball on. Shit. you gotta be good at SOMETHING up front. Our D-line is atrocious, and we are 2 DB's short of having a decent secondary. IDK even know how to judge the LB crew w/ the soft fatty's up front who suck so bad.