2010 Packers vs 2012 Packers

[Joemailman]

Some people have started to draw comparisons between the 2 teams.

Offensively, I think the 2012 Packers could have an edge with a healthy Nelson. The 2012 foursome of Jennings, Nelson, Cobb and Jones in my mind is better then the 2010 foursome of Jennings, Nelson, Driver and Jones. The 2012 offensive line, while perhaps a bit weaker in pass pro, is I think a better run blocking unit. Colledge and Clifton were a real weak link in run blocking in 2010. The RB trio of Green, Grant and Harris is as good as Starks and Brandon Jackson. Finley is better than any TE on the 2010 playoff roster. And Rodgers is still playing great.

Defensively though, I have some concerns. Desmond Bishop has been replaced by Brad Jones. Nick Collins has been replaced by Morgan Burnett. Tramon Williams, while still very good, is not as good as he was in 2010. Woodson, even before he got hurt this year, was not making a lot of big plays. The play of Mike Neal and Casey Hayward gives me hope, but I still wonder if they'll be able to come up with the big plays that Tramon Williams and Nick Collins made in 2010.

Thoughts?

[pbmax]

House and Hayward are upgrades in D backfield. Prior to Wood injury, it was Shields, Bush and Lee.

Wood for Peprah is an upgrade. Shields at outside CB is upgrade over Woodson there (lot more flexibility with single coverage).

Hawk is better this year and Jones might be Bishops equal in coverage though I would like to see him tested in deep drops and versus vertical TE.

[hoosier]

I've been thinking about the resemblences too. The 2010 team had an advantage of circumstances that cannot be reproduced: having their playoffs effectively begin in week 15, and so completely battle tested by the time they got to Philly. The 2012 version will have to get last year's monkey off their backs. If they can do that then I will like their chances.

[RashanGary]

Athleticism/Speed comparison

Williams = Williams
Shields = Shields
Woodson > Peprah
Burnett << Collins
Hayward > Woodson

We still have a very fast secondary. We lose one of the fastest safeties in the league, but we also lose one of the slowest.



Experience/awareness/Instincts/ball skills

Williams>Williams
Shields>>Shields
Woodson>>>Peprah
Burnett<<<Collins
Hayward<<<Woodson

I think this is a wash too. We're more well rounded at CB, showing big improvements playing zone defense the last 3 weeks or so. Again, losing Collins was a huge punch, but Hayward stepping up as a young playmaker and Woodson moving to safety gives us some real inside savvy and ball skills.


Tackling/Toughness

Williams<Williams
Shields>Shields
Woodson>Peprah (Peprah actually was a very good tackler)
Burnett<<<<Collins (Yuck)
Hayward<<Woodson (The Marshall bitch slap is fresh in our minds, but Hayward has been a hell of a tackler this year. Reminds me a lot of Woodson. It's not like he's a LB, but he has that way about him, he just gets guys down)


This, IMO, is our big loss from the secondary. We were a great tackling team in 2010 in large part thanks to Collins being one of the best tacklers at any position in the entire league. IMO, the games I watched, he was the best in the game. Most LB's can be evaded. Most safeties can be knocked over. Collins had no weakness in his game. His speed allowed him to make tackles he had no business making, and he was great at sifting through traffic and/or avoiding/beating blocks. Just a superstar. Patrick Willis is the guy who comes to the top of my mind and Dashon Gholston from SF too. I'm sure there are others, but I never saw anyone I thought was just plain better than Collins in the NFL.




Since the DL and LBs are more similar, I'll make this short. Clay and Raji are the same Clay and Raji as of late. Pick is Pick. Daniels and Neal are bringing what Jenkins brought. There is a little more depth in the base/run downs once Wilson comes back. Wilson and Wynn kinda sucked back then.

LB's. Clay is clay, but smarter. Walden is solid step up over the rookie Zombo and 1st year starter Walden. Hawk is Hawk. Jones is a big step down from Bishop.




The 2010 defense was a top 2 defense if I remember right. Mostly we're pretty similar with the star power of Collins (especially as a tackler) being the big loss. We got our pass rush back. We added some experience in our zone defense (Shields, Williams, Walden, Matthews.) 2010 we were almost exclusively a nickel, man coverage on the corners defense with 8 in the box. This year, with a more well rounded group of players, we're mixing it up and starting to play both pretty well. I think that's an edge we didn't need then, but didn't have either.

It's a different defense. We have one truly dominant player and no real weak links. Then we had 3 dominant players with a couple weak links (Zombo/Walden, Peprah and the inability "or unwillingness" to play zone defense on the corners)



The offense can really start clicking here. It has more talent. MM has committed to being more balanced and it's slowed us down. But. . . . it's starting to pay off. I think we're just about to see what they have to offer. Jennings, Nelson, Jones and Cobb all healthy will be fun to watch.

ST's. . . . If by some miracle, Crosby finds his stroke or we bring in Longwell for field goals, we have a much improved kick return game. That would be an edge for us.



This is a really long post, but end of the day, the 2010 team seems like the more talented team because Collins. This team though, with the commitment to running the ball all year and the commitment to playing zone defense all year. . . . .We have this months punch word "well rounded" to throw into the discussion. Being able to mix coverages on D and mix the run with pass on O gives us an edge we didn't really have in 2010 (even if Starks had that 100 yard game against Philly)

[RashanGary]

I don't think there is much separating GB, ATL, SF, NYG, DEN and NE. The Giants have played great and played like shit. They're just about to get another boost to the health of their team in some pretty important spots (namely the secondary.) I went and watched that game today. Manning had a tipped ball INT. The other INT was a great play by a defense I think is very underrated. The Giants failed on 3 4th downs, had 1 missed field goal, had a near deep throw for a TD while ATL hit theirs. . . By the middle of the 3rd quarter, NY had outgained ATL and beat them in time of possession and was down 24 to zero. That's when the refs called a down by contact on a fumble at the end of the 3rd quarter. That's all I needed to see.

Long story short, NY is a sleeping giant. I would not count them out, not in the slightest.



As excited as I am about this team. . . of the six teams I think are at the top, NY is the one nobody sees as a contender after the ATL debacle (I call it a aberration.) The best you're going to get on SB odds for the top 6 is 15/2. NY sits at 20:1. Anyway, I threw 250 at NY to win 5,000. It's one of those, yeah, you're probably going to lose, but the odds are so good with the public opinion going completely off the cliff, I think it has a chance to pay. A better chance than 20:1 and a fuck of a lot better than the 15/2 Green Bay is getting. During NY's healthy stretch they beat down the Packers and 49ers. Their next healthy stretch starts next week.

[woodbuck27]

I don't think there is much separating GB, ATL, SF, NYG, DEN and NE. The Giants have played great and played like shit. They're just about to get another boost to the health of their team in some pretty important spots (namely the secondary.) I went and watched that game today. Manning had a tipped ball INT. The other INT was a great play by a defense I think is very underrated. The Giants failed on 3 4th downs, had 1 missed field goal, had a near deep throw for a TD while ATL hit theirs. . . By the middle of the 3rd quarter, NY had outgained ATL and beat them in time of possession and was down 24 to zero. That's when the refs called a down by contact on a fumble at the end of the 3rd quarter. That's all I needed to see.

Long story short, NY is a sleeping giant. I would not count them out, not in the slightest.



As excited as I am about this team. . . of the six teams I think are at the top, NY is the one nobody sees as a contender after the ATL debacle (I call it a aberration.) The best you're going to get on SB odds for the top 6 is 15/2. NY sits at 20:1. Anyway, I threw 250 at NY to win 5,000. It's one of those, yeah, you're probably going to lose, but the odds are so good with the public opinion going completely off the cliff, I think it has a chance to pay. A better chance than 20:1 and a fuck of a lot better than the 15/2 Green Bay is getting. During NY's healthy stretch they beat down the Packers and 49ers. Their next healthy stretch starts next week.

Today the way the GIANTS look on 'D' and especially the way the DL is playing and overall giving up huge yards. They will not make the playoffs. The crunch will come down on them this week in Baltimore. Sadly for them hosting Philly in week 17 won't matter.

It's so tough to repeat as Super Bowl winner.

[woodbuck27]

I'm looking at the Packer team I see today as I compare this team to the one that ran to the Super Bowl title in 2010.

Defense:

That 2010 team inspite of so much adversity (injuries) became so ready with TT's work bringing in replacements (ie Eric Walden) That 2010 team became so focused. That team was hungry and once on a roll...unstoppable.

That 2010 team had a newly acquired and inspirational tackling machine in Eric Walden.That team had a force to neutralize strong TE's in Desmond Bishop. That team had a younger, healthier and hungry Charles Woodson. That team had Nick Collins. That team had heart on 'D'.

Our 2012 defense is poor Vs the run. I hope that the defense we will see VS the Vikings in week 17 will change that view. That defense will have to stop Tennessee RB Chris Johnson this week; see if it's ready to stop Adrian Peterson.

Any playoff team that isn't tough VS the run is set up to fail because that team should lose the battle of the clock.

Offense:

That team had healthy WR's. That team had a four WR option not 'a Greg Jennings' coming off an injury. Not Jordy Nelson with a recurrent hammy issue.

James Jones is focused and very productive inspite of plenty of attention by opposition 'D's'.

Aaron Rodgers is still looking to Greg Jennings and that continues to misfire. Aaron Rodgers has James Jones and Randall Cobb (skills) and and on/off Jermichael Finley to pass to. We're weaker 'today' in terms of passing options.

The running game.

It's showing signs of life but not as good as we saw in 2010 with James Starks being a real force. With issues on our OL we need a running game to keep our QB on his feet. That will take pressure off of Aaron Rodgers to need to scramble. That he will have to do enough; if his receivers don't run good routes and come back to the ball. Aaron Rodgers will not force the ball and MM has to game plan for pass options. What happened to the screen pass?

Kicking Game:

What kicking game!?

That 2010 team had a kicker. This 2012 team. Well.... what are you seeing?

We may have enough to get a playoff game in San Fran. As I see it now. With only two games remaining in our regular season; only two games to remaining 'to jell'.

Our season will end in San Francisco. I understand the seafood is good !

GO PACK GO !

[denverYooper]

Another nice writeup JH. Just a couple thoughts to add on it:
1.) Burnett is not a bad tackler, and not that far below Collins in that department. He's not as savvy or as fast as Collins but there is a reason they often bring him down when the other team looks to try to run the Packers off of the field -- he's a decent tackler.
2.) There's a good chance we get more out of Mike Neal in this year's playoffs than Jenkins in 2010 if he stays healthy.
3.) Giants are longer odds to get a playoff spot because they no longer control their own destiny. They need to win out AND have Washington lose at least one (or other WC teams drop off). All other teams have locked up the spot so when you're looking at probabilities, the teams above them get to set P(make playoffs) to 1 while the Giants have something less than 1 there. If they get in, you'll likely see their odds shift.