Packer Defensive Rank thru 5 weeks

[run pMc]

Something has to be done. There's no way our players are that bad.

I'd say our run defense is about where it should be -- LB upgrade vs. last year, and we didn't lose much (except 40 lbs) by replacing Grady w/ Pickett. The pass defense has underperformed. Harris is just OK, Woodson coasts, and Collins has regressed. Manuel is showing he's OK vs. the run and terrible vs. the pass. I don't think the starters are that bad; our defensive depth is OK at best.

3.7 ypc is so-so...I'm not surprised that's in the middle. I bet there are several teams averaging about that, and 3.6 or 3.5 vaults you about 8 spots.

Is Manuel better than Roman?

[HarveyWallbangers]

I'd say our run defense is about where it should be -- LB upgrade vs. last year, and we didn't lose much (except 40 lbs) by replacing Grady w/ Pickett. The pass defense has underperformed. Harris is just OK, Woodson coasts, and Collins has regressed. Manuel is showing he's OK vs. the run and terrible vs. the pass. I don't think the starters are that bad; our defensive depth is OK at best.

3.7 ypc is so-so...I'm not surprised that's in the middle. I bet there are several teams averaging about that, and 3.6 or 3.5 vaults you about 8 spots.

Is Manuel better than Roman?

Spot on with this post. Is Manuel better than Roman? That's a tough question. Roman was horrible under Schottenheimer in 2004. He was almost adequate in 2005. Manuel is better than the 2004 version. He's probably worse than the 2005 version. Tough to say though. Manuel does lay the lumber against the run. Roman could be just as poor in coverage as everybody else in the secondary with Schottenheimer as coach--just like he was in 2004.

[snottrag]

Don't worry guys. All we have to do is pay charles woodson more money and our secondary will improve. We got rid of Ahmad and now he's in Jacksonville. After the bye we play Miami, Arizona, and a bunch of other crappy teams, so watch for the stats to improve. Were a good team. We should finish the season 9-7 maybe 10-6 if we can take New England. The Bears and the Seahawks are our toughest matchups for the remainder. By the time we play the bears they should use their 3rd string cheerleaders so there is hope. Every team we've played and lost to is 4-1 or better. We could win out the remainder but I doubt it.

[Chester Marcol]

tied for 6th in sacks is surprising considering teams have had a lead and had to run on us.

Fortunately, our run D is the bright spot. Teams know they can pass on us, especially on downs when we would expect a run, so they do irregardless of score. Since we are doing a halfway decent job on stopping the run, it doesn't surprise me that teams will exploit our weak pass defense.

And really, did we expect much of a pass rush when we returned the same 2 ends from last year? I like Kampman as an end on the opposite side of a probowl end because he's smart enough to try something different, not like Baja's one or two moves.

[BooHoo]

I am surprised with how badly we are playing on defense. What is the deal? We brought in FAs and drafted defense.

[superfan]

I am surprised with how badly we are playing on defense. What is the deal? We brought in FAs and drafted defense.

I think many, many people are in agreement that it's coaching. Let's see, the personnel is approved on defense, at least on paper. What has changed to precipitate such a freefall? Coaching.

[Chester Marcol]

I am surprised with how badly we are playing on defense. What is the deal? We brought in FAs and drafted defense.

I think many, many people are in agreement that it's coaching. Let's see, the personnel is approved on defense, at least on paper. What has changed to precipitate such a freefall? Coaching.

I will agree somewhat. The back seven has underperformed so far considering the talent we brought in to add to what we had, however, it's basically the same front 4 from last year. I don't think anyone short of God himself will be able to coach anything more than we are getting out of our ends. If one of the top defensive coaches couldn't produce steady pressure with what we had last year, what makes you think there's a coach out there that will do better?

The simplest way I can put my take is, get the best race car driver to ever live and put him in a Pinto and I'll get into that 500+HP Mustang. I don't care what kind of track we are on, I'm guessing I could beat them. I'm not saying we have Pinto's, but when you watch defenses like the Bears and Vikings, I feel we are trying to win a race with less under the hood.

The toughest thing to realize is that our team is a work in progress and hopefully TT sees this, but if our GM is overvaluing our DL, don't look for us to get out of 3rd place in our division anytime soon. If there are people here that see top 10 defensive talent on our line, than I guess we will just have to be at odds over the reason why we aren't pushing the O-line the whole game like our 2 division rivals. KGB is being handled like a rag doll.... must be lousy coaching.

[Fritz]

I do think people overvalue the Green Bay defensive line a little. Marc Bulger had time to clip his toenails back there and still heave one downfield. The fastest way to a better secondary is a better defensive pass rush.

[Chester Marcol]

I do think people overvalue the Green Bay defensive line a little. Marc Bulger had time to clip his toenails back there and still heave one downfield. The fastest way to a better secondary is a better defensive pass rush.

Exactly.

The opposite, however, can not be said.

[wist43]

Schottenheimer is a complete disaster, Sanders is in over his head, and the scheme is weak.

Even though I didn't expect much - I am suprised that they are as bad as they are... In terms of yardage ranking, I figured they'd come in somewhere in the low 20's.

Sadly, I don't see them making many changes, if any, during the '07 offseason. Everybody is under contract (I don't think anybody is up), Sanders has been involved with this scheme forever, and there are plenty of young guys under development, so there is a justification to ignore the defensive side of the ball in the draft.

This defense is designed and built to be mediocre - I hate it.

[woodbuck27]

I am surprised with how badly we are playing on defense. What is the deal? We brought in FAs and drafted defense.

BooHoo and ALL:

Reference:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VU_R7zTADkY

1. The series and spotlight on LCB Al Harris:

St. Louis Rams at 12:50

1-10-GB37 (12:50) S.Jackson right end to GB 35 for 2 yards (N.Barnett; B.Poppinga).

2-8-GB35 (12:12) M.Bulger right guard to GB 23 for 12 yards (K.Gbaja-Biamila).

1-10-GB23 (11:33) S.Jackson right guard to GB 23 for no gain (B.Poppinga, K.Gbaja-Biamila).

2-10-GB23 (10:56) S.Jackson right guard to GB 16 for 7 yards (N.Barnett, R.Davis).

3-3-GB16 (10:16) (Shotgun) M.Bulger pass short right to K.Curtis ran ob at GB 6 for 10 yards (P.Dendy).

To this point in this series the attack is to 'the right'. Suddenly...!!!

1-6-GB6 (9:54) M.Bulger pass short middle to T.Holt for 6 yards, TOUCHDOWN. [/b} **

** GB closest defender on that TD was LCB Al Harris.

1a) See 00:11 of the Video for what happened:

LCB #31 Al Harris gets lost in space... trying? To defend against the pass on Rams #81 WR Tory Holt?

Maybe Al Harris was expecting another play right or a running play?

Look at Harris's position. Isn't he too far off the line of scrimmage? Isn't he playing Tory Holt from the outside. Rather than bumping him in the 5 yard zone, riding Holt's right hip... to force Holt outside, so Al Harris would be bet. Holt and the Rams QB, Marc Bulger Enabling a possible play, unless on the delay Holt beat him to OUR right side of the endzone.??

Instead - Al Harris gives Tory Holt the entire inside route / inside of the field, even assists Holt with a weak push... inside, so Holt can take an easy pass into his body naturally? Harris gave Bulger and Holt " the BEST Case Scenario". He gave us ZERO on that play!

Position is alot if not everything on "D". Al Harris looked no better than a pylon in this instance.

I feel that Al Harris' position, his slowness and willingness to quit, made that TD pass automatic.

Do we blame that on coaching? ( maybe ) but Al Harris is playing opposite/defending against none other than Tory Holt and he didn't. Al Harris may as well, sat down on the field prior to the snap.

OK ...

I've analyzed the first RAMs gain of a TD. Should I blame it on Al Harris?

His actions on that play are certainly less than satisfactory, and how much of that is contributing to OUR secondary's overall poor pass coverage?

Try going through this video and using it and the Full play-by-play of "the Ram's Game (Link Below):

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/playbyplay/NFL_20061008_STL@GB

See what you see from what's available for us here, and we may use to objectively assess it.

a) What I see in this Video, is OUR Team throwing the RAMS game away.

b) I see us time after time shoot OURSELVES in the foot.

c) I see too many dropped pass's (count them and see who's guilty of dropping pass's that you or I would catch) at OUR best, haha .

I am shocked! It just wasn't Bubba Franks.

Look at how many pass's Greg Jennings dropped. Oh yea... he's a Rookie.

If that's it, why are we counting on any Rookie and I take nothing away from Rookie WR Greg Jennings, bur DD is not at 100% and Ted Thompson has us in a position, to be forced into relying on a Rookie WR?

OK that's the way it is but...

These are NFL Pro's dropping these easy pass's, even one's that they have caught and can't secure... time after time.

Are "the Football God's conspiring against us", or are we seeing a team "under the gun", trying way too hard?

Yes there are questions that are difficult to answer.

Yet, game in - game out, those same ?'s shouldn't exist.

A question implies a response. A problem demands an answer.

d) Observe the play of TE Bubba Franks and explain that? He looks drugged out there. Maybe he's just "in shock and all nerved up to have his # called on a passing play"?

He's mostly utilized "in protection". It's time to take a look at Donald Lee again. DAM I have loved Bubba, but that new Contract has fed him too well. He's not in shape.

Donald Lee is the hungry player, so maybe it's time to play him again? Can he block?

It's not easy. What are the priorities?

One question ...discovers another.

Bubba's flailing at the ball... a drop in the endzone on the softest pass Brett Favre can make, is outrageous.

It's also tres funny.

What else ???

e) Watch carefully for the play/no play of DT Ryan Pickett.

" Tip toe... through the tulips". Good Gaud!!

f) Watch how many huge holes are opened up by OUR much maligned OL and ask yourself, if this is the criticle area of concern?

I am seeing that OUR OL play is on, or ahead of schedule and overall I am impressed. Only thing is. Everyone's on the ground and there's no upfield blocking. That's where a two TE set may be utilized isn't it?

Bring back "the Packer Sweep". Well... for one game.

I thought that overall, RB Noah Herron played an excellent game. He played hungry for recognition. He hit holes faster than I ecpected he would, but the OL created Jaws sized holes.

g) Spiking the ball ??

What "in moldy cheese", is the right time to do that?

I say late in a game (like really )when you are setting up to kick a game winning FG, or the QB feels the "D" alignment is weighing in against the current play call or the option of an audible.

None of these conditions applied to Sunday's call for... 'a SPIKE' !! What?

Certainly not when you have the opposition up against it, and out of breath. For Gauds sake... Go for it !!

If your fighting a pit bull, and you've got him by the throat and he's choking with paralysis... do you release your grip or put him in an unconscious state??

I would finish business ASAP.

Take my advantage, not turn that over to the BAD GUY.

I am weighing in with "the fact" that Brett Favre did look to the sideline or to ( Mike McCarthy ) and then spiked the ball; but that has to be worked out well inadvance in what's called practise.

There. In practise.

That has to be drilled into any possible combination of players on the field. The hurry up is an essential strategy that must be relied upon whenever it's obviously the way. Like when the oppositions "D" is gasping for air.

To lay it out and excuse the SPIKE on the premise that certain players lack experience in OUR game plan is faulty logic. That is a terrible excuse for us spiking the ball, when it's certainly not the correct play.

Arguments... of well if we had continued play and Favre fumbled (which he soon did) or maybe otherwise we had a turnover if one/some player curently on the field miss's an assignment on the hurry up play... is moot if you don't run that correct hurry up as the situation screamed for us to do.

Look at the top of this post for proof to support my stance here.

I make my point.

Spiking the ball is... in the condition we faced late in Sundays game pure n' simple a waste of a play. We had "the Rams " by the throat.

We allowed the RAMS "D", to get off the hook, like a poorly played Atlantic Salmon. We lowered the rod tip. [bWas that SMART?

h) RCB Charles Woodson spends way too much time flailing around and parking his butt on the grass to stay with the play /make a play. Is he "in shape" ? Is Al Harris "in shape" ? Are both of them zoned out ? Burnt Out ? Over the hill useless as CB's? or...

Is it Coaching... "the Defensive System"... that allows too much of a cushion for the opposition to make soft plays, beat us with jabs until the knockout punch is available. Then under pressure we see OUR secondary fold up !? Why?

i) When do we ever turn to the hurry up "no huddle" must do scenario? That address's time or clock management and "the fact of" when it's time, or the sense of urgency is upon OUR team. That responsibility has to lie with the man calling the game plan or Coach Mike McCarthy. He has the responsibility of ensuring adequate clock management.

Suddenly... I see shades or "the Ghost of Mike Sherman" in regards to poor clock management.

j) OUR LEADER on Offense - Brett Favre

Good LORD but this criticism that we read fr. the bozo's / so called experts... in respect to Brett Favre and he's over the hill, playing poorly or otherwise has to be gone /benched?

Is anyone here going to take that seriously, giving that we see alot more than these focused on the -ve clowns.

They have one agenda Packer fans.

To ensure as much heat as possible is placed on Brett Favre's broad shoulders, so that he will possibly buckle and fail in pursuit of breaking Dan Marino's TD passing record. That is all it is..nothing else.

Don't ever imagine these False Prophet's (to borrow a Biblical term ) not otherwise draw any comparison of Favre to any Biblical character.

Don't ever imagine that they have the BEST interests of the GREEN BAY PACKERS at heart.They could care less.

We may argue the following:

Do the anti-Favre media hypes take time to study "the BIG Picture"?

Obviously NOT !! Why?

Because that doesn't fit their agenda. Dan Marino's record.

Last season Steve Young was all over Michael Irvin in his BS criticism's of Brett Favre. This season...a difference, mmmmm ... Why?

Could it possibly be that he was wound in ? Told to stand in for media ways that will do what's necessary to keep Dan Marino's TD Pasing Record as it is? On TOP with Marino's name beside it..

Are they seeing how hard Favre is trying and do they realize how young and inexperienced OUR Team is on "O"?

Do they not realize how much more Favre gives us, opposed to benching him, for their perceived poor play (which certainly isn't even the case). In favor of what?

In favour of Aaron Rodgers? Aaron Rodgers isn't at all ready for OUR inexperienced Offense?

We know that. Aaron Rodgers knows that. What pressure is on Ted Thompson to know that? He has to be wondering really what he has in Aaron Rodgers. To go there commits him to showing his hand.

Now if your playing Texas Holdem' and your showing pockert Aces. Do you fold that hand/round for maybe a hope for pocket Queens in a subsequent hand/round?

Favre to us (in reality) = Pocket Aces

Bench Favre? Uhhh?? Why?

Because there isn't any reason to, and as Favre is the obvious #1 QB last time I checked. Other than to see what Aaron really has to date; which doesn't make any sense, unless Ted Thompson is obviously rolling the dice on a very high Draft pick.

To go to Aaron Rodgers would alienate Packer fans, that want a REAL chance to WIN (like me) and possibly ruin this young QB's future promise?

It's still not Aaron Rodgers time.

Favre has the experience /skills to operate behind an inexperienced OL and with inexperienced RB's/WR's or at least, players new to "the Packer" playbook.

This post is long...sorry but I needed to get things out on OUR board.

Conclusion:

ALL the answers are available with competent and fair analysis, with the tools we have available to us on this Forum... similiar to what OUR HC and his staff have. What OUR GM Ted Thompson has.

The actual plays that hurt us are recorded in the play-by-play. Going to "the video" to actually see the instance of the damage enables us to analyze it objectively.

We must remain "in Faith"... we must see for OURSELVES.

GO PACK GO.

Next up after a bye week..."the Dolphins".

Will we continue... " to be their flounder "? I trust not.

[BooHoo]

If coaching is the ultimate issue than Shotty should be history at the end of the year. From statements made by the players about miscoverages it appears there is a lack of communication. Didn't the players know the plays prior to the beginning of the year?

[woodbuck27]

If coaching is the ultimate issue than Shotty should be history at the end of the year. From statements made by the players about miscoverages it appears there is a lack of communication. Didn't the players know the plays prior to the beginning of the year?

BooHoo:

Is it that simple to point a finger at the man..."the Coach"?

It could be that it's simply this. Our style of "D" has to be tweaked somewhat, BooHoo.

Maybe OUR pass coverage is simply too soft? Maybe we have players in OUR Secondary that havn't the ability now for anything else? Possibly...OUR talent in the secondary, isn't as good as it needs to be to compete on passing downs?

That would be a question of talent evaluation Vs. the system that will be employed.

Isn't the "D" in the worst case scenario, designed to give up the short play and as we get pushed back to OUR end. To tighten it up to force 4th and yards and a possible FG?

[packers11]

it looks like 2004 all over again, we just have to KEEP SCOREING... Rememvber the COLTS game in 04... It was nutz, until Jwalk fumbled and then it all fell apart ... Guess in 06 its going to be like 04... Put up over 40+ points or LOSE!

[woodbuck27]

it looks like 2004 all over again, we just have to KEEP SCOREING... Rememvber the COLTS game in 04... It was nutz, until Jwalk fumbled and then it all fell apart ... Guess in 06 its going to be like 04... Put up over 40+ points or LOSE!

We don't have near that "O" now packers11 that we enjoyed in 2004.

a) OUR OL is alot different, and we are using a ZBS and learning to make some impact with that.

We had an OL L-R :

b) Clifton, Wahle, Flannigan, Rivera and Tauscher.

c) In 2004 we had a WR named Javon Walker.

d) We had a RB named Ahman Green. A RB "by committee approach" that worked in Green,Davenport and Fischer ( because see a. above) we had one of the most highly respected and recognized for such OL's in the NFL .

e) We had a TE that was in shape and a solid sideline supporter...quiet/unspectacular, yet effective in Bubba Franks.

f) Don't mean this to be perceived as a -ve; but OUR entire Coaching staff on balance... hasn't enjoyed the wins as we have enjoyed over the past decade. We have a Rookie HC.

g) We have a GM in Ted Thompson who quite frankly (in my view) hasn't the agenda I'd enjoy seeing to be that winner now. He wants to build via the drft which quite frankly percludes winning as that would only enable a lower First Round Draft pick.

Ted Thompson has gotten himself between the Devil and "the Deep Blue Sea". Who to bring in where we have obvious need as to give Brett Favre just a little more and he'll use that "to WIN".



Is that what Ted Thompson desires?