Official Wild Card Round Game-Week Discussoin: Packers vs Vikings win or go home edition

[RashanGary]

Well, the Vikings earned their way in and are playing excellent football at the right time.


Now young Ponder goes on the road into an extremely hostile crowd. Their DL loses a step. AR gains an edge. Their OL is going to be getting off the ball a split second late with the noise. That makes for a few holding calls and pre-snap penalties per game. . .


I don't think the Packers played bad. AP is a fucking beast and he showed it. I don't know how much that's going to change. I don't think the Packers are going to be all too different of a team 6 days later.

They should have Woodson back. The secondary looked completely lost out there. Our young guys have played fantastic for young guys, but we need to shore that back end up if we want to roll. Our zone defense rared it's ugly head once again. We can't play a lot of man defense against a running team like Minnesota, and for the first time we played more zone than man since our winning streak began. As it turns out, our first real test was a big failure, even with Ponder at QB. Now we find out if replacing one of those young guys with Woodson really makes a difference. . . . We just can't lapse in coverage like that. You leave guys that wide open and even Ponder will rip you apart. Proof positive yesterday.



To be honest, we lost, but I like our chances. I think we're the better team, although I give them a lot more respect after yesterday than I did going in. Even so, I don't see Ponder repeating that performance. I do see our offense repeating theirs. I'm a pissed off Packer fan right now. I want blood Saturday.

[denverYooper]

Way to get things rolling JH. Nice writeup.

Woodson should help against a team like the Vikings. People can disagree about his coverage these days, but I'm willing to bet he will sell out on AP if need be and he can still be effective on the short game the Vikes generally play (even with the virtually guaranteed PI/holding penalty he'll draw).

[denverYooper]

Also, stuck in my memory is the number of 2nd/3rd and longs the Packers gave up just enough yards to get the first down. Like they let up a bit when they thought they had Minny pinned. I don't see the Vikings doing that again or Ponder getting away without turning the ball over again. There were 3 good chances for and INT yesterday and the Packers didn't get it done.

[Packgator]

There were 3 good chances for and INT yesterday and the Packers didn't get it done.

The one in the endzone stands out. As that play developed it looked like a sure INT the whole way.

[pbmax]

The D played horrible. The game featured two distinct attempts to shut down the run game and each left the defense gashed.

1. Early, the Packers played very straight up 2 gap. If it was not technically 2 gap, the D line were holding onto gaps tightly with little movement or rush up the field. It doesn't seem like they were slanting to penetrate at all. This tended to cluster Peterson's runs in the 4-8 yard range. He was never bottled up, but it wasn't gash after gash after gash. He got a good read into the lien but there were bodies all around.

But then the Vikes discovered their fullback, one on one versus Hawk or Jones, could blow the LB out of the way, giving AP free run into the secondary, where on the left side, Tramon was unwilling to take him head on. He had monster holes that way.

2. In order to stop the longer drives that the previous effort allowed, the D Line started to slant and head for gaps quickly. This is when Raji shined and took AP for several losses. But it also reduced the clutter at the LOS if someone missed or AP got through the first wave and he could start getting 10+ yards plus some more bombs.

This defense is mismatched in the front. Neither linebacker can withstand good FBs. And the D line has trouble in base getting any production out of 2 gapping. That brings in sub player and/or sub packages which reduces the size of the line and creates more holes even if the quicker players make more plays behind the LOS.

Forget OT and kicker. The Packers need new ILBs next year. 2 of them.

[denverYooper]

The one in the endzone stands out. As that play developed it looked like a sure INT the whole way.

No kidding! I thought for sure it would at least be incomplete.

[ThunderDan]

The D played horrible. The game featured two distinct attempts to shut down the run game and each left the defense gashed.

1. Early, the Packers played very straight up 2 gap. If it was not technically 2 gap, the D line were holding onto gaps tightly with little movement or rush up the field. It doesn't seem like they were slanting to penetrate at all. This tended to cluster Peterson's runs in the 4-8 yard range. He was never bottled up, but it wasn't gash after gash after gash. He got a good read into the lien but there were bodies all around.

But then the Vikes discovered their fullback, one on one versus Hawk or Jones, could blow the LB out of the way, giving AP free run into the secondary, where on the left side, Tramon was unwilling to take him head on. He had monster holes that way.

2. In order to stop the longer drives that the previous effort allowed, the D Line started to slant and head for gaps quickly. This is when Raji shined and took AP for several losses. But it also reduced the clutter at the LOS if someone missed or AP got through the first wave and he could start getting 10+ yards plus some more bombs.

This defense is mismatched in the front. Neither linebacker can withstand good FBs. And the D line has trouble in base getting any production out of 2 gapping. That brings in sub player and/or sub packages which reduces the size of the line and creates more holes even if the quicker players make more plays behind the LOS.

Forget OT and kicker. The Packers need new ILBs next year. 2 of them.

I hope Bishop comes back and solves the problem of 1 ILB. Hawk has had a good year but disappeared for the most part yesterday. He had a few flashes but that was all. I think the DL being more solid this year has certainly helped the ILB play. If we could find two studs at ILB we could be very stout on D next year.

[King Friday]

The Vikings won...but they played about as well as they could with no mistakes, while Green Bay had some glaring failures. The game being at home certainly helped the Vikings. They won't have that same advantage next week...and eventually AP is not going to get 200 on us.

[Packgator]

The Vikings won...but they played about as well as they could with no mistakes, while Green Bay had some glaring failures. The game being at home certainly helped the Vikings. They won't have that same advantage next week...and eventually AP is not going to get 200 on us.

Getting an early lead will be important. Jump them early and force Ponder to throw.

[denverYooper]

Getting an early lead will be important. Jump them early and force Ponder to throw.

The unsettling thing yesterday was that when he was in obvious passing situations he did pretty well. Shades of 2011 in a way, but I don't think he gets the same luxury 2 weeks in a row.

[denverYooper]

M3 with a message for the fans today:

"Fans, I know you’re going to be there. Someone said something about you selling tickets, don’t do that. I want you out in full support. It will be a great environment. I mean Sunday night football, Saturday night football in Lambeau Field. The Vikings obviously have done a great job to get into the tournament, and we respect that, but this is a different deal. This is what everybody’s been fighting for, and this is what we’re excited about."

[mraynrand]

21>22, but the grabbing has to stop

[mraynrand]

The D played horrible. The game featured two distinct attempts to shut down the run game and each left the defense gashed.

1. Early, the Packers played very straight up 2 gap. If it was not technically 2 gap, the D line were holding onto gaps tightly with little movement or rush up the field. It doesn't seem like they were slanting to penetrate at all. This tended to cluster Peterson's runs in the 4-8 yard range. He was never bottled up, but it wasn't gash after gash after gash. He got a good read into the lien but there were bodies all around.

But then the Vikes discovered their fullback, one on one versus Hawk or Jones, could blow the LB out of the way, giving AP free run into the secondary, where on the left side, Tramon was unwilling to take him head on. He had monster holes that way.

2. In order to stop the longer drives that the previous effort allowed, the D Line started to slant and head for gaps quickly. This is when Raji shined and took AP for several losses. But it also reduced the clutter at the LOS if someone missed or AP got through the first wave and he could start getting 10+ yards plus some more bombs.

This defense is mismatched in the front. Neither linebacker can withstand good FBs. And the D line has trouble in base getting any production out of 2 gapping. That brings in sub player and/or sub packages which reduces the size of the line and creates more holes even if the quicker players make more plays behind the LOS.

Forget OT and kicker. The Packers need new ILBs next year. 2 of them.

Good analysis, but the bolded part states the obvious. The packers switched to a 3-4 in scheme but have not yet made the switch with ILB personnel. Seems strange that a TT-led team would do this, but hey, in the NFL, the money is typically better spent elsewhere.

[pbmax]

Haven't seen a good review of the second half adjustment, but here is the line and Matthews I clogging the interior in the first half. Hawk, I think, has outside contain. Hawk doesn't defeat the block but goes around it. Partially this might be due to his area of responsibility, but regardless he isn't free to make a tackle. However, the play has developed so that Jones has a free shot filling on Peterson as he runs it off tackle. But he is a step late, Peterson can sidestep him (and Jones hits him high anyway) on impact and shed him for a 20 yard run. He was never in danger of going down until he hit the sideline.

Hawk does force Peterson toward help, so he played his leverage correctly. But his running mate is not there in time or with a deadly enough tackle to stop the play.

[sharpe1027]

Both Jones and Williams looked particularly bad in their run support. They need to work on their pad level.