Packers Have an Underrated Defense

Joined
Jan 2, 2009
Messages
786
Reaction score
76
Location
Kenosha WISCONSIN
Don't let the San Fransisco game and the Vikings game fool ya. The Packers have a decent defense. For the entire year, we ranked as the 11th best defense for yards and total points given up. I would say that is a huge improvement considering we were 32nd a year ago.

Reasons for further optimism- The packers are very young at every position and a lot of players could be making huge strides. Players like Nick Perry, Jerel Worthy, Jeron McMillian, Mike Daniels, Dezman Moses, Sean Richardson, and Davon House could all make impacts on the defense next year. That is 7 players who should progress and further their playing levels. These players plus any rookies from this year's draft is where we are going to see the defense take the next level.

Needs for the Defense- D Line and Safety- We are very young at both of these positions and we need better production out of both of these spots.

Fun Fact- Packers were 4th in the league with 47 sacks only 5 behind the Broncos and Rams.
 
I

I asked LT to delete my acct

Guest
So who were those guys I watched with the green jerseys and yellow helmets ?? :eek:
 

BorderRivals.com

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 12, 2012
Messages
594
Reaction score
77
Location
Minneapolis, MN
I tend to agree with the OP. The defense clearly needs help on the DL. I'd like the Packer to sign a veteran free agent to help in this dept. rather than continuing to plug in rookies that haven't panned out yet - especially when you consider Worthy is likely out for the year.

With that being said, ranking 4th in sacks is encouraging considering Claymaker was out several weeks, Perry was out for most of the season, Bishop was out all season, and Woodson (our best blitzing secondary player) was out for half the season. In addition, we only let two RB's all season rush for 100+ - Gore and AP both did it twice. That means, S. Jax, Lynch, Foster, CJ2k, and Forte were held in check. That's also encouraging.

And I've always maintained that we have the best 1-4 CB depth in the league. We all know Tramon isn't the shut-down corner we thought he'd become after the 2010 season. But, he's also a pretty good option there. Shields and Hayward shined last season. And House showed a lot of potential and really just needs the seasoning.

It's far from a finished product. But, there's the making of a pretty good defense there.
 
OP
OP
Aaron rodgers is god
Joined
Jan 2, 2009
Messages
786
Reaction score
76
Location
Kenosha WISCONSIN
Yeah if you take away the Giants, Colts, and Vikings games.

BTW, BR and CA sacks are not the best indicator of pressure on the QB. We were pretty low in that area.
I know sacks aren't the best indicator for pressure but we were vastly improved in that area compared to last year and that is including the loss of Perry and Bishop who is one of our better blitzers. All I'm saying is the perception of our defense is that it's terrible. I'm just saying its not as bad as people think considering we had 4 to 5 rookies playing major roles on a defense that was abysmal the year before.
 

BorderRivals.com

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 12, 2012
Messages
594
Reaction score
77
Location
Minneapolis, MN
Yeah if you take away the Giants, Colts, and Vikings games.

BTW, BR and CA sacks are not the best indicator of pressure on the QB. We were pretty low in that area.

We never talked about QB pressure. We just identified the fact that the Packers were 4th in sacks. I'll agree that our overall pressures didn't seem to match. But, nonetheless, being 4th in sacks is encouraging.

And I don't think either of us are claiming our defense is great. Obviously, we had some rough moments against the teams you identified. But, at the same time, the defense had some success against established upper-echelon runners and got to the QB. Those are encouraging signs for a defense that not too long ago was one of the worst in league history. So, taking that into consideration, I believe this defense showed improvements last season and there's some reason for optimism that the improvements can continue with development by House, Hayward, Perry, and McMillian/Jennings along with the return to health of Bishop and Tramon (who was still fighting the shoulder somewhat).

Do you disagree with these basic facts? Or you turning into Mr. Doom-and-Gloom Rodell? :)
 

13 Times Champs

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 24, 2011
Messages
3,924
Reaction score
424
Location
Virginia
We never talked about QB pressure. We just identified the fact that the Packers were 4th in sacks. I'll agree that our overall pressures didn't seem to match. But, nonetheless, being 4th in sacks is encouraging.

And I don't think either of us are claiming our defense is great. Obviously, we had some rough moments against the teams you identified. But, at the same time, the defense had some success against established upper-echelon runners and got to the QB. Those are encouraging signs for a defense that not too long ago was one of the worst in league history. So, taking that into consideration, I believe this defense showed improvements last season and there's some reason for optimism that the improvements can continue with development by House, Hayward, Perry, and McMillian/Jennings along with the return to health of Bishop and Tramon (who was still fighting the shoulder somewhat).

Do you disagree with these basic facts? Or you turning into Mr. Doom-and-Gloom Rodell? :)

I consider the Doom and Gloom thing a cheap shot despite the smiley face. I think I've been pretty consistent in my posts about the Packer defense. Yes the defense showed improvement over the year before. Didn't take much. As far as upper echelon runners AP tore us up and as did some lower echelon guys.
 

BorderRivals.com

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 12, 2012
Messages
594
Reaction score
77
Location
Minneapolis, MN
As far as upper echelon runners AP and a few others tore us up.

I don't understand how you can make that statement. Look at the stats. AP and Gore were the only RB's to rush for more than 100 yards. Admittedly, they did so twice each. But, Lynch, Foster, S. Jax, CJ2K, and Forte did not. And in Foster's case, he rushed for under 40 yards if my memory serves.
 

13 Times Champs

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 24, 2011
Messages
3,924
Reaction score
424
Location
Virginia
I don't understand how you can make that statement. Look at the stats. AP and Gore were the only RB's to rush for more than 100 yards. Admittedly, they did so twice each. But, Lynch, Foster, S. Jax, CJ2K, and Forte did not. And in Foster's case, he rushed for under 40 yards if my memory serves.

Bradshaw rushed for 119. I'm replying to my edited comment.:)
 

BorderRivals.com

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 12, 2012
Messages
594
Reaction score
77
Location
Minneapolis, MN

13 Times Champs

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 24, 2011
Messages
3,924
Reaction score
424
Location
Virginia
If he did, it wasn't last year.

Bradshaw had 10 carries for 58 yards and 1 rip. http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2012112511/2012/REG12/packers@giants#menu=highlights&tab=analyze

And if you go to the main schedule page (http://www.nfl.com/teams/schedule?team=GB), it lists the game's high rusher, and my stats are accurate.

So, again, how can you make that statement?

You got me there, I pulled up the wrong game. But in the November 2012 game Bradshaw and a guy named A. Brown rushed for 112 yards. The two of them averaged like 5.5 for the game.

anyway Packers gave up 4.5 yards per rushing attempt by opponents in 2012. That placed us 17. You can call them upper echelon, lower echelon, ray or jay. :)
 

jaybadger82

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 17, 2012
Messages
837
Reaction score
83
I agree with the OP. The rookies we brought in last year will be a year older and another year along in the system. The continued improvement on defense is another reason for optimism going forward. Nice to see guys getting healthy again, too.

Those that only want to criticize the defense for our struggles last season are borderline comical: the offense wasn't exactly sustaining drives like a champ during our struggles...
 

rodell330

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 18, 2012
Messages
5,611
Reaction score
493
Location
Canton, Ohio
The defense sucked last year..why are we even debating this. They made average qb's look good and i won't even mention how bad AP made us look...three times. Yes it's AP but seriously? that's unnecceptable when you play the guy twice a year. This defense is not good by any strecth i'm sorry.
 

texaspackerbacker

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 8, 2004
Messages
385
Reaction score
27
Yeah but ....... the main reason for the limited success the Packers D had was Capers's gimmicks, and when you rely on gimmicks, you leave yourself vulnerable to something. Smart offensive coaches will find that something. How many of those "pressures" - near misses on sacks - resulted in completions and often big plays because the blitz package that didn't quite get to the QB depleted pass coverage? Could that be the reason running QBs killed us? Could the reason for the Packers have so many sacks be because teams tried to pass so many times against us - and why was that? because the passing game WORKED against the Packers. I don't blame weak pass defense so much on the DBs as on the scheme. The question is: Is Capers the problem - too much messing around and gimmicks resulting in generally mediocre defense? Or is Capers the magician, making the best of a bad situation, personnel-wise. I'm not sure which way I lean on that question.
 

NelsonsLongCatch

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 7, 2008
Messages
2,808
Reaction score
270
Location
Chi-Town
Yeah but ....... the main reason for the limited success the Packers D had was Capers's gimmicks, and when you rely on gimmicks, you leave yourself vulnerable to something.

Capers has to use gimmicks because he doesn't have the players to run a traditional 3-4. The reason he has "psycho" packages is because confusion is the only way the Packers are going to get pressure. Players not named Clay Matthews can't win one-on-one matchups.
 

NelsonsLongCatch

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 7, 2008
Messages
2,808
Reaction score
270
Location
Chi-Town
Not sure how someone confuses the OP's observation that the defense was "decent" and "improved" with an argument that it was "good."

I don't want to point out the obvious, but the Packers defense was historically bad in 2011. It was impossible for the defense to not "improve" in 2012.
 

TJV

Lifelong Packers Fanatic
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
5,389
Reaction score
954
Aaron rodgers isn’t god should thank rodell330 and JenningsLongCatch(for the Vikings?) for the help they provided to make the point that some – at least a few – certainly underrate last years’ defense. The D took a large step forward from the previous season and the stats are there to support that fact. And there definitely are reasons for optimism because of the talented youngsters who gained experience in the league and the scheme last year.

Saying the D “sucked” or is “bad” is over the top IMO but I don’t think dismissing their bad games makes sense either. McGinn noted in his season ending column, “according to STATS, Green Bay ranked only 18th in percentage of pass plays in which pressure was evident.” That’s more subjective than most stats but it passes the “eye test” for me. They need to continue to improve, to increase the pressure on QBs but there’s reason to believe they will.
 

DevilDon

Inclement Weather Fan
Joined
Jan 10, 2010
Messages
1,393
Reaction score
268
You can choose to be pessimistic but I see no reason for it. I think the OP makes a good case for optimism. House and Tramon weren't 100%, Worthy and Perry missed alot of the season. The D-backs got a full year of experience and now will have the whole preseason to hone what they learned. Arguably our best ILB was out all year, his backup was out, our 3rd stringer played remarkable football. If the Packers can bolster the DLine in the draft or get and stay healthy there I see no reason not to expect better results than last year.
It just makes sense with starters back healthy they will improve. Remarkable what they did with a bunch of rookies and 1st year players. House alone could have a huge impact.
 

Members online

Latest posts

Top