CBS Sportsline Packer Preview

[Cheesehead Craig]

I would've given a 4th, a 5th, and my left testicle for Marshawn Lynch. Dude was a known stud even back then.

A known stud traded for a 4th and 5th? Not quite that studly. He lost his starting job in Buffalo, wasn't happy about it and wanted to be traded; also he didn't produce when he was in that last season there. He had potential sure, but at that time his attitude, declining performance, and legal issues (I think he was one more incident away from a big suspension at the time) got him sent out of Buffalo.

Add in Seattle is far more committed to establishing the running game than GB is and Lynch had a much better chance of flourishing there. I find it difficult to believe that he would be so "studly" in GB with the OL we have had.

[Smidgeon]

A lot of people have been lamenting the Packers defense isn't physical enough. I think a defense with Perry, Datone Jones, House and McMillian on the field would bring a more physical presence than what we've seen the last 2 years. Worthy and/or Jolly could also figure into that as well.

I like the potential of this defense.

I read someone on the forum once say that the identity of the team (toughness/softness) comes from the MLB. But once I read this list, I'm thinking it comes in GB from the corners. With Al Harris mugging receivers, we felt like a tough team. If House and "The Missile" McMillian can stay healthy and assignment-sure, we will be feared again. My opinion.

[Upnorth]

I read someone on the forum once say that the identity of the team (toughness/softness) comes from the MLB. But once I read this list, I'm thinking it comes in GB from the corners. With Al Harris mugging receivers, we felt like a tough team. If House and "The Missile" McMillian can stay healthy and assignment-sure, we will be feared again. My opinion.

The whole assignment sure is a very important key. When I look back at the 49ers game watching how out of place Walden lead to some big plays for the 9ers. If that continues to happen with Jones now we will continue to puke up yards and points at an alarming rate.

[3irty1]

Packer run defense has been a problem since 2009. Even with hallowed Hall of Famer Culen Jenkins on the team in 2010, the run D suffered compared to 2009.

Year   Rush Rush Rush Rush
        Att  Yds   TD  Y/A
2012     13   17   16   26
2011      5   14    6   26
2010      6   18    3   28
2009      3    1    1    2

Conclusion? Johnny Jolly was pretty good And younger Pickett was a better NT than Raji.

But as Joe pointed out, it was clear the Packers chose to play nickel more often (probably changed their standard for how to respond to their opponents chances of pass vs. run) starting in 2010. What was different about 2010 was that when they needed to, the Packer could go jumbo out there (Raji-Pickett-Green) or 4-4 (Raji-Pickett-Green-Jenkins) and get stops.

The 49er problem (and the AP problem) is one of assignment and speed. Its a tough nut to crack. The Packers previous solutions to facing tough run attacks would be death versus Kaepernick or RG3.

In my mind, the players under the most pressure on D will be the ILBs. And maybe the 2nd safety.

Those stats are pretty misleading as there was some serious retooling of the D between '09 and '10. 2010 was when we really started riding the 2-4 as a run defense. I've always assumed that Capers took what the Packers were spectacular at (stuffing the run) and tried to leverage that strength into a solid all-around defense. The result was put your kickass run stuffing personnel into a pass stopping formation. When it mattered, the 2010 defense was just as good against the run as it was in 2009. Hard to say where that strength slipped away from us, because running the ball against the 2011 Packers was bringing a knife to a gun fight. Until last season, the Packers hadn't really been beaten because of an opponents running game since 2008.

packer4life,
About the Lynch stuff a page back or so, remember that the trade happened the year we won the superbowl and Lynch wasn't a sure thing at that point either. He had NFL success for sure, but nothing like he's had in Seattle. There was a reason his team was dumping him for a song despite lofty draft status. Actually making that trade could have drastically altered history for the Packers in that it could well have cost them the 2010 superbowl. If we get Lynch, he doesn't go to Seattle where he doesn't go into god-mode in the playoffs against the Saints and single-handedly knock them out which means the Saints play the Bears. That could very well end with us playing the Saints in the NFCC instead of the shitty Bears and yielded a different outcome.

Ted works in mysterious ways.

[packer4life]

A known stud traded for a 4th and 5th? Not quite that studly. He lost his starting job in Buffalo, wasn't happy about it and wanted to be traded; also he didn't produce when he was in that last season there. He had potential sure, but at that time his attitude, declining performance, and legal issues (I think he was one more incident away from a big suspension at the time) got him sent out of Buffalo.

Add in Seattle is far more committed to establishing the running game than GB is and Lynch had a much better chance of flourishing there. I find it difficult to believe that he would be so "studly" in GB with the OL we have had.

Stud:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=odRprM5At-A

Show me any RB on the packers roster that could ever come close to this.

[packer4life]

Buffalo was in complete rebuild mode when they jettisoned trent edwards and lynch. Don't forget they had a young Fred Taylor (equivalent stud) and C.J. Spiller as cheaper, younger options. As an aside, CJ is going to take over the league this year (seriously, draft him on your fantasy team).

A 4th and 5th was a no brainer at that time. Most of this forum was pissed we didn't pull that trigger. It's interesting for everyone to retrospectively now say that he wasn't worth it. Stop kidding yourselves, he would have saved us 3 years of shit running. Talented RBs make up for a pass-blocking-focused finesse OL.

OK, I'm done with the Lynch topic, we still won in 2010.

Thank God we at least have a chance to have a 3rd and short effective back this year (Lacy). But nothing is certain, especially since the guy is half-depressed and spends 24 hours straight in bed on off days...

[pbmax]

When it mattered, the 2010 defense was just as good against the run as it was in 2009. Hard to say where that strength slipped away from us, because running the ball against the 2011 Packers was bringing a knife to a gun fight. Until last season, the Packers hadn't really been beaten because of an opponents running game since 2008.

Agree about 2010, but that was with Jenkins and Green. Since then, and yes I include 2011 in this, its been a poor run defense in base or not. Most teams could not hang with the Packers in 2011 by running, but when they wanted to the yards were there. Those YPC averages aren't good and unlike 2010, there has not been an uptick in the last two years when they go heavy. I did think that 2012 would have looked better (minus playoffs) and I think Peterson is much of the problem there.

Not every season was the same and we would need to look at scoring and first downs to see how much those carries hurt, but it hasn't been the same run D for the past 2 years and scheme is only a part of it.

Lately, I think it has been more about run fits than personnel. Teams also schemed to run versus an ever present 2-4 in some passing downs. San Fran in the playoffs was poor execution along with every other symptom.

[mraynrand]

You could not pull Woodson shallow and allow him to roam unless you could cover the entire deep backfield with 3 guys only 1 of which, Collins, was deep at the snap. Peprah was no help back there a lot of the time.

yup

[mraynrand]

Packer run defense has been a problem since 2009. Even with hallowed Hall of Famer Culen Jenkins on the team in 2010, the run D suffered compared to 2009.

that's my kind of sarcasm. repped

[packer4life]

New article on JSO with an interesting stat that had me scratching my head:

"On the other hand, the line did improve its number of sacks, knockdowns and hurries from just 37 in 2011 to 641/2 last year"

2011 was God-awful pass rush, but how in the hell did Capers manage to almost double that output with only the additions of guys like Worthy and Daniels, who weren't all that active anyway. Did Neal help bolster? Was Clay back after an underachieving 2011, or was he just finishing better? Did scheme dictate this, with more blitzing at the expense of run defense?

[mraynrand]

New article on JSO with an interesting stat that had me scratching my head:

"On the other hand, the line did improve its number of sacks, knockdowns and hurries from just 37 in 2011 to 641/2 last year"

2011 was God-awful pass rush, but how in the hell did Capers manage to almost double that output with only the additions of guys like Worthy and Daniels, who weren't all that active anyway. Did Neal help bolster? Was Clay back after an underachieving 2011, or was he just finishing better? Did scheme dictate this, with more blitzing at the expense of run defense?

I'm just guessing, but the competition also slipped. Playing the Bears and Lions O-line four times had to pad the stats. Lions were so pass-happy you didn't even have to defend the run. Chicago O-line was pure garbage. And what about teams like Jacksonville, TN, AZ. Didn't the Packers have 26 sacks or pressures against TN alone?

[Upnorth]

That was probably offset by the quality of the other OL they played. 9ers, seahawks, saints, texans rams, giants, and vikings all have good to very good olines.

[pbmax]

New article on JSO with an interesting stat that had me scratching my head:

"On the other hand, the line did improve its number of sacks, knockdowns and hurries from just 37 in 2011 to 641/2 last year"

2011 was God-awful pass rush, but how in the hell did Capers manage to almost double that output with only the additions of guys like Worthy and Daniels, who weren't all that active anyway. Did Neal help bolster? Was Clay back after an underachieving 2011, or was he just finishing better? Did scheme dictate this, with more blitzing at the expense of run defense?

It was Neal and Daniels. Raji was OK pushing the middle too, just rarely got the QB on the ground.

[Bossman641]

So are the Packers going to play more base this year? That question occurred to me when they decided to sign Brad Jones to starter money, and let Bishop go. My thinking there being that coverage ability by LB's is more important if you're not going to have as many DB's out there.

Magic 8 ball says Not Likely

Dom Capers has coached the 3-4 defense for, well, ever. And as much as the Green Bay Packers defensive coordinator loves the scheme, he acknowledges that the way the NFL game has evolved in recent years, you’ll be seeing less and less of the base defense he’s run for so long.

“What you have to realize is, the percentage of 3-4 that we played 15 years ago compared to what you play now has changed. Just because the offenses have changed so much,” Capers explained in advance of the Packers opening up their fifth training camp running the 3-4 – and his 28th season in the league. “You don’t see a lot of teams – unless they’re the Minnesota Vikings with Adrian Peterson and two backs back there – pounding you. You’re spread out and (they’re) trying to utilize speed, more wide receivers.”

Thus, the amount of “Okie” defense, as Capers calls it, remains on the decline. Last year, according to Capers, the Packers continued their trend of playing sub packages much more frequently than they played their base defense, even though Capers began using his six defensive-back dime unit more often than in the past.

http://www.espnmilwaukee.com/common/...8221&is_corp=1

[Joemailman]

579!

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap100...ed-in-playoffs

"It got to a point," Kaepernick said, "where we could hear (the Packers' defenders) arguing while we were in our huddle. 'You're supposed to do this,' or 'You have to do this, then the other.' At that point, our offense was like, 'it's over.' As soon as you start turning on your teammates, you're not going to be productive. You know you have them in the palm of your hands."

This kind of confirms what I felt about that game. The biggest problem the Packers defense had in that game was that they were ill-prepared for what they were facing. Players need to know what their assignments are before the game starts. That was not the case. The lack of preparation was a real black eye for Capers and his staff.