Keys To A Monday Night Win In Philly

[Bretsky]

Re: Offense

Speaking of the hurry up offense, would'nt it be fantastic to see MM start the game with a no huddle offense? I never understood why Sherman did'nt give Favre the same chance that Manning or Palmer have. Take advantage of his experience and go with it. MM seem's to like the shotgun so what the hell, give it a try.This way you take away the Philly D's advantage and you dictate to them. There is a HUGE advantage in checking their defensive alignment BEFORE calling the play. The QB mike works up to the 15 second mark so MM will still have input.

Good points; gosh, while you are a bit more outspoken on your views than I tend to be, I've noticed in your posts that we agree on just about everything.


Cheers,
B

[Bretsky]

First off, Phily is on another level than Green Bay so we need to play as well as we can and Phily needs to be off to win.

What I'd like to see is Andy Reid NOT outcoach the Green Bay staff for once. Sherman lost several games to Reid with more talent, yet he was outsmarted and maneuvered.

I think Ahmad Carroll has to have a very solid game and play often. He needs to be that 3rd reliable cover guy to blanket either Westbrook, Brown, or Stallworth. Collins isn't going to be able to stick to those guys well enough IMO.

I think Monday will be a long night for us.

B

[mraynrand]

What I'd like to see is Andy Reid NOT outcoach the Green Bay staff for once. Sherman lost several games to Reid with more talent, yet he was outsmarted and maneuvered.

Interesting POV. Perhaps, due to Philly injuries, the 2003 team was better. I'd say they were equally matched when Sherman won his first game in Lambeau (6-3 if I recall correctly) and with injuries to both teams they were about the same last year too. The 2004 Philly team was clearly better.

When you have to rely on converting a 4th and 26 to stay alive, you're really not outsmarting anyone. More than anything else, you got lucky.

[pbmax]

Are there man elements in the covers that Pack uses?

Hell yeah

Solo technique IS man cover and almost any Dback will find himself in Man through out the course of a games. When the D does there roll-overs to give support on the strong side, the weak safety will find himself in single technique with the Z receiver, fer instance. if the WS gets beat, it is his fault, but he ain't in man to man. It's still a zone cover.

Many other covers have man AND Zone elements.
Cover 3 can be Zone on top, Man underneath, Fritz Shurmur was a cover 3 and cover 4 pioneer,

Cover 4 can be quarters (zone) on top, Man underneath.

The Bates zone runs some zone on top man underneath, but it isn't a true man to man.

Thanks for the explanation. Esp. pointing out difference between solo technique and man coverage.

But if Bates/Sanders runs zone on top, and it seems in base, zone underneath middle, with the CBs in solo technique, do we want MORE man coverage?

In base defense, does anyone want more safety's in man coverage? Or Poppinga? Maybe Hawk on the RB is OK.

My point is that both are safeties have struggled in coverage, as has the SAM. And while there has been problems executing the zone, I can't imagine this getting better if anyone of these three players are asked to cover someone solo.

I say stick with what you have and find a way to execute it better.

[MJZiggy]

"Key" to winning, ..... simple, .....
1. Block better
2. Protect Favre better
3. Tackle better
4. Protect Favre better
5. Special teams..... better
6. Protect Favre better
7. Run pass paterns better
8. Protect Favre better
9. play the game of football better
10. Did I mention, Protect Favre better ?

Good luck Monday Night ! (you are goning to need it)

GO BEARS !

I thought they protected Favre fine last week. No sacks and I recall one play off the top of my head where Favre had time to reload twice before launching a long pass. I'm far more concerned with the pass coverage than the pass protection. And we're supposed to have better than no missed field goals and a 44 yard punting average? Admittedly, this team does have its problems, you've just managed to miss every single one of them.

[wist43]

They need to play nickel as their base defense. I don't think Philly can run the ball between the Tackles, so play nickel and make sure Westbrook is accounted for with either Hawk, Barnett, or a Safety.

I don't think Sanders will be able to figure it out though.

[HarveyWallbangers]

They need to play nickel as their base defense. I don't think Philly can run the ball between the Tackles, so play nickel and make sure Westbrook is accounted for with either Hawk, Barnett, or a Safety.

I've thought the same thing. Philly isn't going to kill us running the ball, so replace Poppinga with Carroll, and let Collins concentrate on covering Westbrook out of the backfield.

[ahaha]

"Key" to winning, ..... simple, .....
1. Block better
2. Protect Favre better
3. Tackle better
4. Protect Favre better
5. Special teams..... better
6. Protect Favre better
7. Run pass paterns better
8. Protect Favre better
9. play the game of football better
10. Did I mention, Protect Favre better ?

Good luck Monday Night ! (you are goning to need it)

GO BEARS !

You seem to think our biggest weakness is pass protection. But, that's one area that's actually looked pretty good. Favre has only been sacked 5 times, which is tied for 9th best in the NFL. That's not too shabby when you consider the fact the Packers have attempted the most passes of any team in the NFL.

[pbmax]

They need to play nickel as their base defense. I don't think Philly can run the ball between the Tackles, so play nickel and make sure Westbrook is accounted for with either Hawk, Barnett, or a Safety.

I don't think Sanders will be able to figure it out though.

This is what killed me in the Detroit game and on several other plays. Where has Carroll been?

I thought Hawk together with Barnett was going to bring back the 4-2-5 (3 CB) nickel?

Has McGinn given the pecentages of nickel defense in his game grades each week?

[packers11]

They need to play nickel as their base defense. I don't think Philly can run the ball between the Tackles, so play nickel and make sure Westbrook is accounted for with either Hawk, Barnett, or a Safety.

I don't think Sanders will be able to figure it out though.

This is what killed me in the Detroit game and on several other plays. Where has Carroll been?

I thought Hawk together with Barnett was going to bring back the 4-2-5 (3 CB) nickel?

Has McGinn given the pecentages of nickel defense in his game grades each week?

man... thats what ive been yelling @ my tv about.... I ALWAYS SEE 3 lb's even on long passing plays... HMM... Carroll is pretty good why not put him in there?? Look what he did last week, the hot head caused a int td ....
Ill go Carroll > Pooppinga in coverage anyday....

[BEARMAN]

"Key" to winning, ..... simple, .....
1. Block better
2. Protect Favre better
3. Tackle better
4. Protect Favre better
5. Special teams..... better
6. Protect Favre better
7. Run pass paterns better
8. Protect Favre better
9. play the game of football better
10. Did I mention, Protect Favre better ?

Good luck Monday Night ! (you are goning to need it)

GO BEARS !

I thought they protected Favre fine last week. No sacks and I recall one play off the top of my head where Favre had time to reload twice before launching a long pass. I'm far more concerned with the pass coverage than the pass protection. And we're supposed to have better than no missed field goals and a 44 yard punting average? Admittedly, this team does have its problems, you've just managed to miss every single one of them.

Hey, I'm trying....

GO BEARS !

[BooHoo]

What I'd like to see is Andy Reid NOT outcoach the Green Bay staff for once. Sherman lost several games to Reid with more talent, yet he was outsmarted and maneuvered.

Interesting POV. Perhaps, due to Philly injuries, the 2003 team was better. I'd say they were equally matched when Sherman won his first game in Lambeau (6-3 if I recall correctly) and with injuries to both teams they were about the same last year too. The 2004 Philly team was clearly better.

When you have to rely on converting a 4th and 26 to stay alive, you're really not outsmarting anyone. More than anything else, you got lucky.

We have been out-coached by Andy Reid. Maybe we should have tried to hire him to replace Sherman. Actually, I wonder if someone "off the record" gave him a call to see what his interest was. Let's see if our new brain trust can give Andy a run for his money.

[KYPack]

Are there man elements in the covers that Pack uses?

Hell yeah

Solo technique IS man cover and almost any Dback will find himself in Man through out the course of a games. When the D does there roll-overs to give support on the strong side, the weak safety will find himself in single technique with the Z receiver, fer instance. if the WS gets beat, it is his fault, but he ain't in man to man. It's still a zone cover.

Many other covers have man AND Zone elements.
Cover 3 can be Zone on top, Man underneath, Fritz Shurmur was a cover 3 and cover 4 pioneer,

Cover 4 can be quarters (zone) on top, Man underneath.

The Bates zone runs some zone on top man underneath, but it isn't a true man to man.

Thanks for the explanation. Esp. pointing out difference between solo technique and man coverage.

But if Bates/Sanders runs zone on top, and it seems in base, zone underneath middle, with the CBs in solo technique, do we want MORE man coverage?

In base defense, does anyone want more safety's in man coverage? Or Poppinga? Maybe Hawk on the RB is OK.

My point is that both are safeties have struggled in coverage, as has the SAM. And while there has been problems executing the zone, I can't imagine this getting better if anyone of these three players are asked to cover someone solo.

I say stick with what you have and find a way to execute it better.

I'd think your last statement is sound advice.

I'll comment on few more of these points when I hit the office tommorrow.

[LEWCWA]

score early and often!!!!

[pbmax]

Are there man elements in the covers that Pack uses?

Hell yeah

Solo technique IS man cover and almost any Dback will find himself in Man through out the course of a games. When the D does there roll-overs to give support on the strong side, the weak safety will find himself in single technique with the Z receiver, fer instance. if the WS gets beat, it is his fault, but he ain't in man to man. It's still a zone cover.

Many other covers have man AND Zone elements.
Cover 3 can be Zone on top, Man underneath, Fritz Shurmur was a cover 3 and cover 4 pioneer,

Cover 4 can be quarters (zone) on top, Man underneath.

The Bates zone runs some zone on top man underneath, but it isn't a true man to man.

Thanks for the explanation. Esp. pointing out difference between solo technique and man coverage.

But if Bates/Sanders runs zone on top, and it seems in base, zone underneath middle, with the CBs in solo technique, do we want MORE man coverage?

In base defense, does anyone want more safety's in man coverage? Or Poppinga? Maybe Hawk on the RB is OK.

My point is that both are safeties have struggled in coverage, as has the SAM. And while there has been problems executing the zone, I can't imagine this getting better if anyone of these three players are asked to cover someone solo.

I say stick with what you have and find a way to execute it better.

I'd think your last statement is sound advice.

I'll comment on few more of these points when I hit the office tommorrow.

Looking forward to it. Also curious, if Fritz was a pioneer in cover 3 and 4, did he change his approach with the Pack?

I remember Butler with lots of responsibility for the TE and LOS, also Simmons trying to beat the Bejeesus out of Brent Jones, Jay Novacek and Wesley Walls. Was this cover 3?