The Packers defense is better than you think

[Joemailman]

I wonder where we rank in defense three and out percentage and red zone percentage? It feels like we play well for several drives each game, but our red zone percentage is getting worse as the season goes along. We've also given up points and yards late with big leads.

Packers defense ranks 28th in red zone pct at 67-5 %. 27 TD's on 40 attempts. Last year they were 10th at 50%. 24-48. No idea on 3 and outs.
.

[RashanGary]

I wonder where we rank in defense three and out percentage and red zone percentage? It feels like we play well for several drives each game, but our red zone percentage is getting worse as the season goes along. We've also given up points and yards late with big leads.

A. Don't lose when you have the lead
B. Develop the ability to play some zone so good offenses can't go right at you, knowing what you're running
C. The redzone defense is a concern. Maybe putting too much energy into developing the zone defense that they haven't put the work in to keep the red zone sharp. If you put energy in one spot, it takes away from another at practice.


All of the problems can be solved right now. Instead of developing new major zone concepts, accept the growth you've gotten, Ride what you got and go back to red zone as the primary growth focus. They're already light year's ahead of last year's zone defense when it was so bad he couldn't even call it and the defense got killed by good man beater teams.

[Bossman641]

Red zone defense by TD allowed - Packers rank 28 giving up TD 67.5% of time.

[RashanGary]

We have not had one single game as bad as Sandiego, SF and SF from a year ago. That took development time in practice and games to round out those other defenses. I say just go with what you got now and dig into redzone for the final growth stretch. Pettine can mix defense now. He can zone blitz and he can play man with 2 deep and have some undociplined rushed that get home like last year. He can also play safe zone with two deep. They've developed a lot and it's about to come together!

[RashanGary]

2019

San Diego
San Francisco
San Francisco


2020.... Nothing even remotely as helpless as those three. Development! Now lean into that development and focus on redzone. Fixed!

[Zool]

2019

San Diego
San Francisco
San Francisco


2020.... Nothing even remotely as helpless as those three. Development! Now lean into that development and focus on redzone. Fixed!

I would counter with Tampa and the second MN game. They are giving up 110 per game on the ground playing with the lead most of the time. Scoring on the first drive 11 times this year has been the recipe for success. The D is just okay. They got burned deep by Chase Daniel in the 4th on a zone. They are inconsistent as all hell. No one is saying they are the Jets or the Jags on D, but they are pretty far from a top 10 squad right now. Individual drive they will look fantastic, then come out the next series and lay an egg.

[run pMc]

Stafford
Stafford
Matt Ryan
Drew Brees
Phil Rivers
Tom Brady
Watson
Cousins
Cousins

Questions: They apparently played more man coverage vs. PHI. Does it make sense to play zone against established vet QBs, or man? Wouldn't a vet QB like Rivers or Stafford know exactly where the holes in the zone would be? Would that be a reason to play MORE man coverage, not less? I expect zone prevents more big plays and busted coverages, but it also seems like it's more leaky, especially if the QB gets the ball out in 2.5 seconds.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Packers defense ranks 28th in red zone pct at 67-5 %. 27 TD's on 40 attempts. Last year they were 10th at 50%. 24-48. No idea on 3 and outs.
.

This is where it seems like drive to drive we made improvements over last year. I wouldn't be surprised if we are doing pretty well in 3 & out percentage. Red zone defense is like turnovers. There's a lot of volatility year-to-year--which is a primary reason why many predicted massive regression for the Packers. Last year, we were a 10 win team that won 13 games because of turnover margin, red zone defense, and an unsustainable winning % in one score games. This team feels more legitimate. Primarily, because Rodgers is having probably the second best year of his historic career. MLF is a great play caller and Rodgers know the offense now and has bought into it. His fundamentals seem better to me too.

[Zool]

This is where it seems like drive to drive we made improvements over last year. I wouldn't be surprised if we are doing pretty well in 3 & out percentage. Red zone defense is like turnovers. There's a lot of volatility year-to-year--which is a primary reason why many predicted massive regression for the Packers. Last year, we were a 10 win team that won 13 games because of turnover margin, red zone defense, and an unsustainable winning % in one score games. This team feels more legitimate. Primarily, because Rodgers is having probably the second best year of his historic career. MLF is a great play caller and Rodgers know the offense now and has bought into it. His fundamentals seem better to me too.

It's not reality, but QB pressures seems down this year. I mean they went from 8.3/game last year to 7.8/game this year so far. So it's down a half, but not much.

2.7 sacks/game this year, 2.6 last year. They are actually up in QB hurries this season. It's just not consistent, so it's a little maddening to watch teams march on their prevent in the second half. For once, I'd like to see a 14 or 17 point lead grow.

[RashanGary]

Questions: They apparently played more man coverage vs. PHI. Does it make sense to play zone against established vet QBs, or man? Wouldn't a vet QB like Rivers or Stafford know exactly where the holes in the zone would be? Would that be a reason to play MORE man coverage, not less? I expect zone prevents more big plays and busted coverages, but it also seems like it's more leaky, especially if the QB gets the ball out in 2.5 seconds.

I think veteran QBs do best when they know what the defense is pre snap. They’re so developed that they’ll be looking right and KNOW beyond a doubt that they’re gonna go left and it’s all preplanned. You have to make it look like man but have it be zone or make it look like zone but be close enough to the line to get in a man stance right before the snap.... things like that. That way the vet has to change plans after the snap. If you can’t play a lick of zone, and only man, then just like Rodgers Lafleur and adams, they call plays to beat the defense they know you’ll be playing and it’s over

[RashanGary]

Zool, is it possible that last year they played more man defense because they’re better at it and once they have a lead this year, they use that as time to develop the zone defenses more?

Seems like an awful lot of zone defense and zone defense growing pains when we have the lead. Possibly intentionally so, because that’s the best time for it to not cost you the game

[RashanGary]

A reason I’m optimistic, and it’s only one play, but the Packers got a free runner on Stafford with a great zone blitz. We didn’t see that, almost ever last year. Seems like he trusts the zone defense now, after so much growing tape, to actually start using it as a weapon not just something to practice when we’re up 2 scores

[Zool]

Zool, is it possible that last year they played more man defense because they’re better at it and once they have a lead this year, they use that as time to develop the zone defenses more?

Seems like an awful lot of zone defense and zone defense growing pains when we have the lead. Possibly intentionally so, because that’s the best time for it to not cost you the game

So they bleed yards and points in the 4th quarter and you think people will be rational? This is the second year in a row with the same scenario playing out in the wins.

If you got the lead playing one way, keep playing that way.

[Fritz]

Questions: They apparently played more man coverage vs. PHI. Does it make sense to play zone against established vet QBs, or man? Wouldn't a vet QB like Rivers or Stafford know exactly where the holes in the zone would be? Would that be a reason to play MORE man coverage, not less? I expect zone prevents more big plays and busted coverages, but it also seems like it's more leaky, especially if the QB gets the ball out in 2.5 seconds.

I think the Packers started the Detroit game playing the Pettine-preferred soft zone, and of course that was a recipe for Stafford to march the Loins right down the field for an easy touchdown. When Pettine switched it up a little later and went to man, Stafford/Bevell called three screens in a row for big gains.

[run pMc]

So they bleed yards and points in the 4th quarter

It's not just the 4Q. Stafford had close to 200 yards passing in the first half. The thing that saved them was they sacked him 4 times.
How many of their starters have less than 32 games under their belts? This isn't a defense loaded with rookies. They've been in Pettine's system for a while and should know what to do.

If you have a top 15 offense starting from their 25 vs. this defense in a gotta-score a FG series, what percent of the time does the offense succeed?

Not trying to be a Debbie Downer or complainer...but I think this defense is mediocre at best and often underperforms to its talent.