What we saw last night

[pbmax]

That isn't even a nickel max - b/c they aren't taking a LB out, they're taking DL out. It's more like a penny defense.

Nearly all 3-4 teams run it this way. The only time you see 3-3-5 is against a team that cannot pass (Jets).

[wist43]

What wist wants is 3 DL. But that puts a safety on a WR. Pick your poison. Seahawks are running 3 WR, 1 TE and 1 RB. Something the Packers do a lot of.

Wilson counts and sees nickel and/or 3 CB. Chooses run and aligns the TE to FB. Its nothing clever, but the D needs to execute. I think Francois should not have jumped around the center. Once he does that he is useless. Jolly gets trashed meaning the RB has a clear path to the second level. if Jolly can hold ground, it squeezes the RB and brings help closer.

Yes max... "pick your poison" - give up a 43 yd TD run, or a 43 yd TD pass. Those are the options, lol...

How is it that other teams manage to get stops?? It's an amazment I guess.

Good grief.

[wist43]

so this is the part I don't get. Is Capers supposed to design a defense where he expects Jolly to get beat on a single block and two guys to blow their assignments? What does that look like?

It looks like Michael's 43 yd TD run

Just the way Capers designed it...

It's unsound b/c it doesn't account for the run in any way - get it?? It's unsound?? get it??

Do you understand what unsound means??

[Fritz]

It may have been a preseason game - but what we saw last night was simply a continuation of what we saw against power teams last year.

Our OL getting pushed around, MM calling his 3 running plays; Capers playing as small and soft as possible - giving up explosive plays all over the place...

Given the schemes we run, and the philosophies of the team - we are pretty much helpless against power teams. You would think that getting the living hell kicked out of you so many times, in the same way every time, would push you to consider that maybe there is something wrong with your approach, but that seems to have never crossed the minds of the brain trust at 1265.

Capers is a complete disaster... so nothing can be done for the defense until he is fired.

On offense, we might as well pass it every down and put it in Rodgers hands. We're a QB driven team - and need Rodgers to play lights out perfect every game.

The philosophies of this team on both sides of ball are fundamentally flawed. Against other finesse teams we're probably the SB champ every year; but against power teams we're helpless. They push us around and beat us up... and there's nothing we can do about it.

I think we have good enough players to compete, but the passive philosophies of the coaching staff negate the talent.

I agree that the offensive line play was extremely troubling last night, from all I have read. EDS was supposed to be an upgrade on Saturday, but he played more like Wednesday (Adaams Family) or Tuesday (Weld). Lang really just does not seem to be a good guard. And the team is starting an UDFA at one tackle spot and a 4th round rookie at the key left tackle spot.

However, what you ascribe to some seemingly deliberate attempt to be "passive" and "finess" can be explained in other, more logical ways. First, you keep trumpeting how much more "real" you are than anyone who does not agree with your sky-is-falling feelings.

So, if you want to be "real," you really must acknowledge that even in the injury-plagued world of the NFL it's unusual to have two first round tackle picks (taken in two of the last three drafts) go down to injury - one with a single, shattering injury, the other, over and over.

Of course it's hard to say how good Sherrod might have been or could be. Opinions are all over the board. But it's fair to say that talent-wise he was better than Newhouse or Barclay, and possibly Bahkteria. I would argue had Sherrod not suffered that injury, OR had Bulaga not gotten hurt (again) - notice I say OR and not AND - this team's offensive line play would at least be a little better, particularly in terms of protection.

I do think the team has fallen short in terms of acquiring guard/center talent - but wait, they did draft a player they'd projected to center. But he got hurt, too.

Injuries are not excuses, no. But when we are on this forum trying to understand and explain why the line play has been so poor, injuries must be considered as one factor. In my estimation, a much more reasonable factor than the idea that McCarthy likes finesse and really, doesn't want to field a tough team. That, to me, is a patently ridiculous idea. McCarthy attacks defenses - sometimes too much, in my opinion. Sometimes, when a six yard completion will do the trick, he calls for long pass plays (or Rodgers maybe chooses the big play over the shorter completion; it's hard to say).

I do think that Thompson might want to reassess the types of players he drafts to play center and guard. I think, though I do not know for sure, that Sitton was a guard in college. IF so, he's the only one on their line who was, I believe. I know Lang was a tackle in college, as was Tretter. I think most Packer linemen were tackles in college. And I understand that thinking, but maybe a little more physical strength and a little less mobility would work better at the guard spots. Sitton is fine, but it's Lang I'm thinking of here. And EDS at center.

While you clearly decided to jump all over this one exhibition game to support your contentions, I will try to forego that one-sample-proves-my-point should the Packers play well against SF, particularly if they run the ball well and stop SF defensively. It's a long season. Things can, and do, change.

I grew up a University of Michigan fan in the Bo "Run the football" Schembechler era. He used to say they played what he called "Smaishmouth football" (he had a funny way of pronouncing "smashmouth." I listened to an old U of M broadcast; a 1970's game against Michigan State. Michigan passed the ball three times - in the whole game.

So I come from a background in which I learned that running the ball is good. Passing is dangerous. Controlling the line of scrimmage is done by running the ball. So it's not like I don't have a natural affinity for the idea of power football.

However, watching the game over the years, both NFL and college, it's clear that the game has evolved. The rules have evolved, too. McCarthy's air-attack approach works way better than anyone who might try to run the ball all the time, like back in the day. So while it makes me uncomfortable (I still yell "run the damn ball!" about fifteen times a game when Rodgers goes back to pass), I have come to realize that maybe I need to try to learn to live with the new game. Because it mostly works.

Now, the Packers still need a better running game, and that does start with the offensive line. But they don't need to hang their hats on running the ball with power as their primary mode of transporting the football.

The Packers still attack - it's not "soft" to attack what you see as weak spots in the other team's defense. It's just not what you think of as "attacking."

[pbmax]

If you go here, where I got the screen cap: http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/201308...ghts&tab=recap

at 31 seconds you can pause and see Daniels, Francois and Lattimore all in the same gap backside. It can't be Daniels fault because he is trailing from backside and beat his guy.

Either Lattimore is aligned wrong OR Francois should have done something, ANYTHING other than jump to (screen) left. When Jolly is beat, the (screen) left A and B gap is wide open.

On this play this alignment is unsound. But its mostly unsound because somehow has failed to man a gap. We will never find out and that drives me bonkers.

[Tony Oday]

My god Wish send your insights, no matter how wrong, to the team I am sure MM will fire Capers in a second and take on your highschool defensive schemes. Face it the first team d held the offense in check and with AR and Lacey in the whole game we win by three TDs.

[wist43]

You guys are such a hoot... we get absolutely pounded; all of the same problems we had last year on display over and over again; and you guys can't call a spade a spade... just excuses and defending the status quo. Amazing.

Now if you'll excuse me - I have a horse to go train

[Fritz]

On second and eighteen, I would think it irresponsible if a D-coordinator ran a run-defense formation out there.

I'm curious as to PB's analysis - I wonder who fudge up the assignment, besides Jolly getting killed one-on-one? Was it Lattimore, or Francois? These guys are the top two backup ILB's.

[Freak Out]

I watched the 1st QTR and saw what I expected really. Backups for a couple of starting WRs making some mistakes....the OL letting Rodgers get knocked around a bit...and Harris running into the pile. Oh yes....and guys getting hurt.

[Freak Out]

I want VY as the backup QB....is that wrong?

[pittstang5]

What we saw last night could be a preview against the 49ers. The Packers are going to have to set up the pass to establish the run against teams like the Seashawks, Giants and 49ers. This O-line is just not built to pound big, tough, nasty d-lines like those teams I mentioned. The o-line is what it is and is not going to get better, might even get worse if anyone gets hurt. But, from what I saw last night, the Packers CAN run the ball, but everybody has to be in sync - including the RBs and the QB. EDS probably had the worst game last night. He really pissed me off. There's a reason he was a back-up for so long. But, as I said, we're stuck with these guys until, at least, next year. Bitching about it and saying, " I told you so," isn't going to help the situation. We just have to deal.

[Pugger]

I would think the big guys will get better as the season progresses. I would think having them watch tape of this game will be a learning opportunity of nothing else. After the first series I was pleased with the D for the most part. Seattle got one TD on a gift turnover late in the game.

[Fritz]

I do hope the sphincters of the offensive linemen pucker in shame as they watch that game tape.

[mraynrand]

It looks like Michael's 43 yd TD run

Just the way Capers designed it...

It's unsound b/c it doesn't account for the run in any way - get it?? It's unsound?? get it??

Do you understand what unsound means??

If one guy gets beat one on one, and two guys execute improperly, won't that defense be unsound regardless of the scheme. Let's say you have in a nickel and one corner gets beat flat out and a safety and the other corner execute poorly. Isn't that unsound too - won't that get beat more often than not? Having poor players is unsound.

[pbmax]

What we saw last night could be a preview against the 49ers. The Packers are going to have to set up the pass to establish the run against teams like the Seashawks, Giants and 49ers. This O-line is just not built to pound big, tough, nasty d-lines like those teams I mentioned. The o-line is what it is and is not going to get better, might even get worse if anyone gets hurt. But, from what I saw last night, the Packers CAN run the ball, but everybody has to be in sync - including the RBs and the QB. EDS probably had the worst game last night. He really pissed me off. There's a reason he was a back-up for so long. But, as I said, we're stuck with these guys until, at least, next year. Bitching about it and saying, " I told you so," isn't going to help the situation. We just have to deal.

I wouldn't confuse the Giants defense with the West Coast. Giants have had some awful trouble with the run defense lately.