How do you beat the Seahawks?

[KYPack]

Wist has become what he hates the most - one who alters reality to fit his preconceived notions.

The Packers' defense is pretty much exactly what it is - a poor defense that got better over the bye to become a top 10 defense. They can be had of course, just not as easily as at the beginning of the year. Dallas scored more on Seattle and Detroit than on GB. Some say forcing turnovers is luck, while others see it as good defense. Certainly Wist wouldn't attribute Seattle's forced turnovers to luck.

Familiarity is the culprit: we know what the Packers' weaknesses are, and when other teams are able to exploit those same weaknesses, it looks bad to us. But it's just another version of the broken tile syndrome. Or the grass is greener phenomenon.

The reality is that Seattle has the best defense in the NFL and is playing at home. That's a tall task for the Packers offense. Defense will have to keep the bleeding to a minimum to give the offense a chance. Wonder if we'll see the same "react/contain" defense we saw in the opener? I kinda doubt it.

This is exactly what I was going to post.

Wist, you range from the voice of reason to the echo of doom on here. Sometimes you are right, sometimes it's the same old drone. This season, Capers elevated this defense from the toilet to a respectable unit.

We were dead last in rush D in the first part of the year. Your gloomy posts were the stone truth. But as the D improved, you keep to the same message. Capers totally re-tooled this defense to make 'em an effective unit. We moved from 32 in rush D to 23. We had to improve a lot to be in the bottom third. Capers addressed some of your criticisms in that make-over. In his 6 front nickel he went 3-3 in the front a lot more, giving less snaps in your hated 2-4. He still played 2-4, but brought Burnett down in the box in run support. In base, he moved Clay to ILB and got Barrington on the field. Peppers got his sea legs and was positioned perfectly by Capers, while getting the plays off he needs to stay fresh. In a real sound move, he used Nick Perry as a bull type OLB and lessened his coverage responsibility. On the back end, he went to a cover 3, playing Dix as a one high, shading him to the strong side.

in short, Capers made off-season moves in the middle of the year. He even addressed some of Wist's criticisms and did a makeover.

Go ahead and claim a little credit Wist. Some of your points were valid, but you should recognize Capers many changes. Most of 'em worked.

[pbmax]

Holmgren's Plan (woodrow's link)

1. Run on second down (pass rushers are in)
2. Pass on first (big uglies are in)
3. Line up receiver in bunch formations to make DBs switch off and to thwart press coverage
4. Take the 6 or 7 yard pass
5. Don't turn it over (said every coach not named Urban Meyer ever)

[mraynrand]

Holmgren's Plan (woodrow's link)

1. Run on second down (pass rushers are in)
2. Pass on first (big uglies are in)
3. Line up receiver in bunch formations to make DBs switch off and to thwart press coverage
4. Take the 6 or 7 yard pass
5. Don't turn it over (said every coach not named Urban Meyer ever)

LOL at the championship game reference.

I like point 4. Think back to the fail mary game and the halftime adjustment. Packers were playing their vertical passing offense and Seattle said, hey, we're gonna play you like it's the fourth quarter and we're up by 20 - all out pass rush and zero respect for the run. Bulaga was getting killed (as were others) because there was a wild abandon in the pass rush. So Stubby goes run heavy in the second half and wins the game. In the last two off seasons he and TT agree they need to be able to go to that adjustment as a way of life, so they draft Lacy and maybe even linsley so that they can maul a little bit. But they're still a pass first offense and still a deep passing offense. It may be now that the Rodgers injury and the running game will provide the balance they need to work the ball, instead of always looking for the home run, with the higher risk of getting sacked.

Also enjoyed seeing Holmgren's stubborn love of going against tendency. It worked well for him throughout his coaching career. Stubby is stubborn in the reverse I think - he goes with his best plays thinking "by god, these are our best plays with our best players, they damn well better work!"

[Bossman641]

They have a Harvin replacement but he doesn't touch the ball as much. They aren't running as many Jet Sweeps, but are still doing a lot of misdirection.

Paul Richardson? He's most similar to Harvin but he has no rushes on the year. Do they use him on swing passes like they did Harvin? He's out with a torn acl.

[pbmax]

Paul Richardson? He's most similar to Harvin but he has no rushes on the year. Do they use him on swing passes like they did Harvin? He's out with a torn acl.

That would be a definitive explanation about his low level of involvement. My work here is done.

[Bossman641]

That would be a definitive explanation about his low level of involvement. My work here is done.

Haha, well he just got injured on Sunday. I just wasn't sure whether they were using him or somebody else in the Harvin role over the second half of the year.

[smuggler]

That would be a definitive explanation about his low level of involvement. My work here is done.

Except he just tore his ACL against Carolina. The true explanation is that Seattle just doesn't run it much this year.

Edit: What Bossman said.

[3irty1]

IMO seattle isn't a particularly bad matchup for our defense. They know how to run the ball but this is still the NFL and that's not enough. Our secondary is no legion of boom but against Baldwin and Kearse they might as well be. Without Percy's contributions as a receiver and rusher I expect a weaker opponent against a better defense than we saw in week 1.

My questions are on offense. Its a big exaggeration to say we need to be perfect, if any NFL offense is perfect its a blowout. It'd sure help the cause if we didn't string together three possessions where we turn it over on downs, throw a pick, and fumble for a safety. Its going to take a lot less Sherrod and a lot more of a running game if we want to knock out the champs.

[wist43]

As I said - our defense against the Cowboys was shit... I gave 3 game changing plays that had they gone the other way, we would have given up 40ish points and 450ish yds - at least.

Those 3 plays went our way, we got lucky - and the Cowboys did us favor after favor with their very questionable playcalling.

We won, so we take it - now we go to Seattle and face the music.

As I said, I think Seattle is beatable - but I think it requires a team that is built differently than we are. They ran for 207 yds against us in the opener; Wilson did anything he wanted - and laughed about it; they gimmicked us several times - and laughed about that!!!

We're simply overmatched in the coaching department - our defense vs their offense; and their great strength, their defense, is greater than our great strength, our offense.

That's the way the game shapes up... similar score to the opener I think. We have a punchers chance, but we need a shit-ton of luck, and bounces, and timely penalties go our way to have any chance at all.

Anybody seen what the line is??

[smuggler]

Once again, the Seattle O-line is noticeably less awesome than the Dallas O-line, and in general, the Dallas offense is much better than Seattle's offense.

[Bossman641]

Anybody seen what the line is??

Somewhere around 7.5

[CaptainKickass]

How do you beat the Seahawks?

Well - here's one way:

[hoosier]

I'm no expert on the Sea Squawks but whenever I turn them on I see Wilson completing big play passes to Baldwin and Kearse, and sometimes even their anonymous TEs. I am sure that is at least partly attributable to the amount of attention the opposing defense is paying to the running game, but it does make me wonder whether their wides are really that bad or if they're just underutilized. In what ways do they suck?

[wist43]

I'm no expert on the Sea Squawks but whenever I turn them on I see Wilson completing big play passes to Baldwin and Kearse, and sometimes even their anonymous TEs. I am sure that is at least partly attributable to the amount of attention the opposing defense is paying to the running game, but it does make me wonder whether their wides are really that bad or if they're just underutilized. In what ways do they suck?

I think they do a great job of setting defenses up... like they did to us in the opener, when Lockette scored on that 30 somthing yd TD.

They had run that read option to Shields side a few times, and saw that dunderdummy was crashing Shields and turning coverage of the WR over to the Safety - rookie HHCD. They faked the read option - and as it turns out Lynch didn't even dive into the line, he drifted out in front of Wilson to provide passpro, if needed; HHCD had far too much distance to cover to get to Lockette, Wilson delivered the ball and Lockette had plenty of time to make a move on the hard charging HHCD - easy, and embarrassing TD.

The Seattle coaching staff simply outcoached dunderdummy on that play... which is easy enough to do.

But that is how they spring their under-talented WR's... they set defenses up for it beautifully. Yes, accounting for the run has a lot to do with it, but that doesn't mean a defense has to go unsound to account for the run and still leave their DB's in sound coverage.

In terms of the chess match - dunderdummy is way out of his depth against the Seahawks. I'll be shocked if they don't hit us for multiple big, easy, embarrassing plays, and it has nothing to do with talent, everything to do with coaching and preparation.

[oldbutnotdeadyet]

I think they do a great job of setting defenses up... like they did to us in the opener, when Lockette scored on that 30 somthing yd TD.

They had run that read option to Shields side a few times, and saw that dunderdummy was crashing Shields and turning coverage of the WR over to the Safety - rookie HHCD. They faked the read option - and as it turns out Lynch didn't even dive into the line, he drifted out in front of Wilson to provide passpro, if needed; HHCD had far too much distance to cover to get to Lockette, Wilson delivered the ball and Lockette had plenty of time to make a move on the hard charging HHCD - easy, and embarrassing TD.

The Seattle coaching staff simply outcoached dunderdummy on that play... which is easy enough to do.

But that is how they spring their under-talented WR's... they set defenses up for it beautifully. Yes, accounting for the run has a lot to do with it, but that doesn't mean a defense has to go unsound to account for the run and still leave their DB's in sound coverage.

In terms of the chess match - dunderdummy is way out of his depth against the Seahawks. I'll be shocked if they don't hit us for multiple big, easy, embarrassing plays, and it has nothing to do with talent, everything to do with coaching and preparation.

Well, gee, u sorta take all the fun out of being a packerrat, and hoping there is some way for us to beat the seachickens this weekend.