Atlanta studs and duds

[Pokerbrat2000]

I think what everyone is trying to say is that we need more plays like this......

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[Mondio]

The best part was Cullen Jenkins was making sure it was called a TD before anyone else could touch that ball.

 

[Poppa San]

nobody was crying. But you mean to tell me he wasn't in an excellent position to pick that ball off? I didn't see a replay, but if he didn't touch, that's part of the problem. he should have and been gone for the game cinching touchdown. It's plays like that getting left on the field why we aren't winning big games.

IIRC both broke on the ball at the same time. The WR had inside position and a clean shot at the ball. Gunther was behind and basically would have had to take the ball out of the receivers hands. As it was the ball was not fielded cleanly by the WR because of the contact. I don't think in his mind Gunther was going for the pick, just the knockdown.

 

[PFanCan]

did they show one?

regardless, those are plays that are there to be made on defense. They need to start making them. Randall stepped in front and took the ball right away from someone earlier this year. I see those plays made and missed all the time. I'm not saying he sucks, but he was in the right place at the right time to seal this game for us. If we want to start winning against good teams, those are plays we need to make. You disagree?

Yes, they showed a replay. At first (during the initial play), I was disappointed that Gunter was unable to "hold on". But, after watching the replay, it was clear that the receiver actually touched the ball first and Gunter was able to smack his arms immediately after making the ball un-catchable for anyone. Gunter's forward motion made it look like he was starting to run with the ball and dropped it. But, the ball was never in his hands and the no real chance to be caught.

So, actually, it was an excellent play by Gunter IMO.

Edit: Just saw the post by Poppa. Sorry for the repeat post.

 

[PikeBadger]

The TV commentators' first take is often wrong, and if you're not paying attention close attention to the replays you might not notice how often they don't correct themselves either.

It looked like Gunter might have "touched" the ball, but when somebody else touches the ball first altering it's path it cannot be regarded as a missed opportunity. Mostly those balls don't get caught even by the very best receivers; when they do catch it, defender or receiver, it should be viewed as an unexpected outcome.

Same thing with Nelson's bobbling catch on that skinny post. The first commentator take was, to paraphrase, "If Nelson had caught that ball cleanly he had open space in front of him. I don't think the defender touched it." Well, the end zone replay showed the defender did in fact touch it, altering the ball's slightly path. It was a good catch.

The commetators? No correction made.

I had a flashback watching the replay of Nelson's catch. Kaboom! I saw Max McGee in Super Bowl I.

 

[PikeBadger]

He was mentioned, but just slightly to your point. There are good and bad reasons for that.

The good reason would be that a guy who has performed badly from the get go needs some extended period of out-performance or consistent improvement to be acknowledged. That seems reasonable, just as giving a guy with a record of at least decent performance deserves some slack for a bad game or two.

The bad reason would be ego...having relentlessly bashed a guy it can be difficult to flip flop even if the mind set is "what have you done for me lately".

By the way, those punts the last few games have not only been long but also well positioned.

Don't worry. When a guy starts doing good things, those that need to will find a bogeyman to replace him. We've seen this act repeated endlessly over the years.

There's always Capers, Thompson and playcalling to fallback on when things start looking better.

 

[OldSchool101]

Upon reviewing that Gunter play on the last drive. I was surprised to see we did have solid D position but Gunter wasn't as close as originally appeared. Either way, as I've said before after 2-3 games, we must do a better job getting takeaways as we're falling in a hole in that area. It's the one area that has always been stellar under Capers and has to be when we give up big pass yards

 

[Packerlifer]

http://www.acmepackingcompany.com/2...is-takes-snaps-vacated-by-cobb-and-montgomery

 

[HardRightEdge]

did they show one?

regardless, those are plays that are there to be made on defense. They need to start making them. Randall stepped in front and took the ball right away from someone earlier this year. I see those plays made and missed all the time. I'm not saying he sucks, but he was in the right place at the right time to seal this game for us. If we want to start winning against good teams, those are plays we need to make. You disagree?

Plays need to be made. That wasn't one of them.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Our secondary has a grand total of 2 interceptions this year (Burnett and Randall). That has to change IMO.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Our secondary has a grand total of 2 interceptions this year (Burnett and Randall). That has to change IMO.

It certainly does. Was it week 1 or 2 that Thomas had one right on his hands uncontested and he dropped it, to take one example. Those are the plays that need to be made.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Other than Jones who was doubled low/high all day, it's pretty clear Caper's chief concern with this call was Freeman. To your point regarding Thomas vs. Ryan, you have to keep in mind it was 1st. and 10, Atlanta having 2 timeouts and plenty of time to run a several plays. Having the standard nickel D on the field to hedge run or pass is hardly a bad decision.

Here's a little more breakdown that puts a little different slant on it:

So, Capers dialed up a 3-stack zone coverage on the defense's right side, with Hyde having underneath zone and (picking up Freeman) with Gunter and Dix low/high on Jones. Check and check.

Burnett was near the hash on the opposite side in position to defend the middle, but when Martinez released the TE Burnett had to go with him to the corner opening the middle. Martinez stayed stuck in the short middle. When the opposite wideout crossed short, Goodson went with him. It looked like Goodson had man on that side...he stayed with him all the way from press to the throw.

Martinez and Goodson could have shook hands when the ball was thrown, not a good look.

What was Martinez doing? This wasn't even play action. Spying Ryan? That would not make much sense. Hyde was in short right zone, Ryan was in the middle, Burnett could have kept the high middle position if Ryan went with that 4.70 TE.

If one wants to do woulda, coulda, shoulda, I would say Martinez should have stayed with the TE allowing Burnett to defend the middle high zone. I have not watched Butler's play breakdowns this season. He'll probably go over this play this week. I'll be interested to see what he has to say about it; remind me if I forget. I doubt the Packers will ever specify where the breakdown occurred; they rarely do for good reason.

There's another possibility I might entertain:

We were told at the start of the season that Martinez would be making the defensive calls. I've noticed from week 2 forward that Ryan is doing hand signals and moving guys around. Even on this play, he turns to the right side D backfield and gives a signal.

I don't read much analyst coverage anymore, so if it was reported that the signal calling responsibility was changed, somebody let me know. It not being reported doesn't mean it wasn't, but it would be nice to know if it can be confirmed.

It's possible there was a Ryan-Martinez miscommunication.

But we should keep in mind it was first down, with time and timeouts remaining. I suspect if it had not been this play it would have been one of the next handful.

Butler went over the fateful play in X's and O's:

http://www.jsonline.com/videos/spor...ons-and-xs-and-os-with-leroy-butler/90326198/

Note his illustration of the "pasta" call at the end of the tape where Martinez stays with the TE allowing Burnett to cover the middle as described above. Whether it was a miscommunication or Martinez blowing an assignment, we'll probably never know. Ryan looked surprised nobody was back there. Who wouldn't?

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

It certainly does. Was it week 1 or 2 that Thomas had one right on his hands uncontested and he dropped it. Those are the plays that need to be made.

Then there was the one, can't remember who ended up intercepting the ball (Joe Thomas?), but it almost appeared Hyde would strip it away from him. LOL.

As I always say, I don't really watch a lot of other games, but it sure seems like our secondary, at times, lacks in their ball skills.

 

[Mondio]

Plays need to be made. That wasn't one of them.

Why not, too far out of position? He made a great break, he could have made a great play. I'm not saying it was a routine interception, but it's not as guys in that position don't pick that ball off multiple times a season. So what if it hit the receivers hands first, it hasn't stopped opposing defenses from taking them from us when it happens.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Why not, too far out of position? He made a great break, he could have made a great play. I'm not saying it was a routine interception, but it's not as guys in that position don't pick that ball off multiple times a season. So what if it hit the receivers hands first, it hasn't stopped opposing defenses from taking them from us when it happens.

You keep complaining yet you said you did not see the replay.

 

[Mondio]

Do you have one to show me? Is my memory that horrible? I've asked a few times and still you don't answer since you've apparently seen it multiple times. Was he or was he not in position to make a play on that ball? Yes or no? Are you trying to tell me he had no shot at that ball? In a game of inches, are those plays our defense needs to start making? Or do we just wait for them to throw it right to us?

 

[Poppa San]

Do you have one to show me? Is my memory that horrible? I've asked a few times and still you don't answer since you've apparently seen it multiple times. Was he or was he not in position to make a play on that ball? Yes or no? Are you trying to tell me he had no shot at that ball? In a game of inches, are those plays our defense needs to start making? Or do we just wait for them to throw it right to us?

FWIW Gunter said he missed one. http://www.packersnews.com/story/sp...nter-left-one-out-there-near-pick-6/93037156/

 

[HardRightEdge]

Do you have one to show me? Is my memory that horrible? I've asked a few times and still you don't answer since you've apparently seen it multiple times. Was he or was he not in position to make a play on that ball? Yes or no? Are you trying to tell me he had no shot at that ball? In a game of inches, are those plays our defense needs to start making? Or do we just wait for them to throw it right to us?

I have NFL Game Pass which provides complete replays of all NFL games, including super slo-mo capability which you will not see on TV. I also looked at the fateful TD several times which is how I concluded that either the call itself was poor in not planning to have a safety in the middle or Martinez mucked it up. Or you can look at the Shaw quote that appears at the bottom of my posts.

The only way I could furnish you the replay is to give you my user name and password. You understand why I will not do that.

PFanCan in post #129 had it about right. Both were going for the ball simultaneously but Senu touched the ball first. After that it was a collision of hands.

This play, as an illustration of why the Packers are not getting picks, is a poor one.

As for the argument that the Packers' opponents make these kinds of plays, they don't. They have 4 picks in 7 games. How about ATL's Goodwin having a clean shot on a dive for that ball at the 0:14 mark. Folks tend to remember the plays the opponent make and forget the ones they don't.

If one wants to focus on the Gunter play as the missed opportunity, why not also look at the Packers' last possession?

Nelson did not come down with a contested ball at midfield at the 0:20 mark where he got to the ball first. I wouldn't blame him either, but if one wants to focus on the Gunter play then one should be an equal opportunity complainer.

 

[Mondio]

I have NFL Game Pass which provides complete replays of all NFL games, including super slo-mo capability which you will not see on TV. I also looked at the fateful TD several times which is how I concluded that either the call itself was poor in not planning to have a safety in the middle or Martinez mucked it up. Or you can look at the Shaw quote that appears at the bottom of my posts.

The only way I could furnish you the replay is to give you my user name and password. You understand why I will not do that.

PFanCan in post #129 had it about right. Both were going for the ball simultaneously but Senu touched the ball first. After that it was a collision of hands.

This play, as an illustration of why the Packers are not getting picks, is a poor one.

As for the argument that the Packers' opponents make these kinds of plays, they don't. They have 4 picks in 7 games. How about ATL's Goodwin having a clean shot on a dive for that ball at the 0:14 mark. Folks tend to remember the plays the opponent make and forget the ones they don't.

If one wants to focus on the Gunter play as the missed opportunity, why not also look at the Packers' last possession?

Nelson did not come down with a contested ball at midfield at the 0:20 mark where he got to the ball first. I wouldn't blame him either, but if one wants to focus on the Gunter play then one should be an equal opportunity complainer.

and Adams could have taken his route to the sideline like Rodgers thought he should rather than continue downfield. I'm not, nor have I ever pinned the loss on Gunter. I said he was in position to make a play to seal the game for us, and he was. Not matter how you want to slice it, he was in position to close the game, ask him, he'll tell you.

I didn't say it was a gimme play, I didn't say it was routine. I never blamed the loss on him. I said it was a play that needs to be made when you're there to make it to beat good teams. He didn't make it, we didn't win. In fact, I thought he looked over to the coaches after he missed as if to say, "you told me what was coming and I just missed it".

It would have been a great play, instead it was just good

 

[HardRightEdge]

and Adams could have taken his route to the sideline like Rodgers thought he should rather than continue downfield. I'm not, nor have I ever pinned the loss on Gunter. I said he was in position to make a play to seal the game for us, and he was. Not matter how you want to slice it, he was in position to close the game, ask him, he'll tell you.

I didn't say it was a gimme play, I didn't say it was routine. I never blamed the loss on him. I said it was a play that needs to be made when you're there to make it to beat good teams. He didn't make it, we didn't win. In fact, I thought he looked over to the coaches after he missed as if to say, "you told me what was coming and I just missed it".

It would have been a great play, instead it was just good

If you mean the Adams play in the final possession, I agree with your comment on Adams flattening his out cut instead of working back to the LOS. Rodgers has been accustomed to his receivers knowing that and doing it over the years, particularly with Nelson and Jennings. That may have also been a contributing factor in the Goodwin almost-interception, though the ball looked to be thrown behind Allison regardless.

When you say that Gunter's play needs to be made contradicts the tone of the rest of your post. It's needed for what exactly? To win the game? Then by implication it is his fault in your mind, isn't it? Despite acknowledging the subsequent missed opportunities?

As for the look on Gunter's face, it was pretty flat. I have the replay.

Now, if you want to argue that he should have jumped earlier, that he should have WR ball skills and extended for the ball instead alligator arming it for the safe body catch, then you'd be getting into a realm of conjecture that does not synch with reasonable expectations, certainly less reasonable than "needing" better offensive performance on three plays in the last possession.

In the final analysis, Gunter's try was on a contested ball. While one would expect a certain percentage of contested plays to be made, you can't expect that play to be made in any one particular case.

 

[El Guapo]

I always look through a different lens. Gunter is the only one who got himself close to a position to make an INT. The rest of the guys couldn't, so they deserve more of the blame.

I referenced this in another thread, but I watched the Capers post-game press conference. He was questioned repeatedly about the game-winning TD. If I remember correctly, he said that both of the safeties were correctly on opposite sides of the field. Dix had responsibility to cover the tight end on the far side. Goodson had the far WR. On the near side they had Julio, Sanu, and the RB coming out. The Packers essentially ran a zone on the near side due to the bunch formation. Hyde had the under and took the back. Gunter had the outside with Julio, with Burnett over the top of that. This left Sanu on Martinez, who looked like he might have been looking at the RB for a moment and probably could have turned his hips faster to run with Sanu. Ideally, Hyde would have run with Sanu and Martinez would have driven forward on the RB. Based on their pre-snap alignment though, I don't think that the result would have changed. Hyde would have been chasing Sanu and the center of the field would have been wide open.

You can break it down all that you want, but the OC did a good job of setting up matchups and Matt Ryan did what top QBs should do - he found the best matchup and attacked. You can't have safety help over everybody. It doesn't work that way.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I referenced this in another thread, but I watched the Capers post-game press conference. He was questioned repeatedly about the game-winning TD. If I remember correctly, he said that both of the safeties were correctly on opposite sides of the field. Dix had responsibility to cover the tight end on the far side. Goodson had the far WR. On the near side they had Julio, Sanu, and the RB coming out. The Packers essentially ran a zone on the near side due to the bunch formation. Hyde had the under and took the back. Gunter had the outside with Julio, with Burnett over the top of that. This left Sanu on Martinez, who looked like he might have been looking at the RB for a moment and probably could have turned his hips faster to run with Sanu. Ideally, Hyde would have run with Sanu and Martinez would have driven forward on the RB. Based on their pre-snap alignment though, I don't think that the result would have changed. Hyde would have been chasing Sanu and the center of the field would have been wide open.

I guess you're talking about the play call leaving Ryan on Sanu as well as Burnett covering the tight end on the far side as Clinton-Dix provided Gunter with help over the top against Julio. Martinez seems to have messed up on the play though as he unnecessarily provided double coverage on Hardy.

 

[HardRightEdge]

I always look through a different lens. Gunter is the only one who got himself close to a position to make an INT. The rest of the guys couldn't, so they deserve more of the blame.

I referenced this in another thread, but I watched the Capers post-game press conference. He was questioned repeatedly about the game-winning TD. If I remember correctly, he said that both of the safeties were correctly on opposite sides of the field. Dix had responsibility to cover the tight end on the far side. Goodson had the far WR. On the near side they had Julio, Sanu, and the RB coming out. The Packers essentially ran a zone on the near side due to the bunch formation. Hyde had the under and took the back. Gunter had the outside with Julio, with Burnett over the top of that. This left Sanu on Martinez, who looked like he might have been looking at the RB for a moment and probably could have turned his hips faster to run with Sanu. Ideally, Hyde would have run with Sanu and Martinez would have driven forward on the RB. Based on their pre-snap alignment though, I don't think that the result would have changed. Hyde would have been chasing Sanu and the center of the field would have been wide open.

You can break it down all that you want, but the OC did a good job of setting up matchups and Matt Ryan did what top QBs should do - he found the best matchup and attacked. You can't have safety help over everybody. It doesn't work that way.

You've got Dix and Burnett backward. It looks like you have Ryan and Martinez backward as well.

The 3-stack zone you describe on the right side of the D is what appears to be the case as I observed earlier.

If Capers actually said that the design was not to have a safety in the middle, then we can blame him.

The key remains: Had Martinez stayed with the slot TE, Burnett would not have needed to follow him to the corner (late I might add) leaving the middle open. Burnett lined up near the hash, not over the outside WR and was in position to react to a middle throw.

Actually, Ryan could have gone to Senu or the TE. But I'm sure when he saw no safety moving to the middle he took it.

 

[Mondio]

If you mean the Adams play in the final possession, I agree with your comment on Adams flattening his out cut instead of working back to the LOS. Rodgers has been accustomed to his receivers knowing that and doing it over the years, particularly with Nelson and Jennings. That may have also been a contributing factor in the Goodwin almost-interception, though the ball looked to be thrown behind Allison regardless.

When you say that Gunter's play needs to be made contradicts the tone of the rest of your post. It's needed for what exactly? To win the game? Then by implication it is his fault in your mind, isn't it? Despite acknowledging the subsequent missed opportunities?

As for the look on Gunter's face, it was pretty flat. I have the replay.

Now, if you want to argue that he should have jumped earlier, that he should have WR ball skills and extended for the ball instead alligator arming it for the safe body catch, then you'd be getting into a realm of conjecture that does not synch with reasonable expectations, certainly less reasonable than "needing" better offensive performance on three plays in the last possession.

In the final analysis, Gunter's try was on a contested ball. While one would expect a certain percentage of contested plays to be made, you can't expect that play to be made in any one particular case.

I say he "needs" to make that play to beat the better teams in the same way I say Rodgers needs to not throw interceptions to beat good teams, or we can't fumble the ball. Or we need to control the clock, or we need to get sacks, or we need to cause fumbles, etc, etc to beat the good teams.

Obviously we can win without all sorts of things happening. Rodgers can throw 2 picks and we can win. We can fumble 3 times and win. We can win a super bowl with a terrible special teams unit, but having guys make a play in a ball when they're there to make it to seal a game would go a long ways towards beating the better teams in the league that aren't prone to making mistakes. Sitting back there and waiting for someone to throw it to you gives us interception totals like we have

 

[PFanCan]

By the way, Ryan had an even better target to his right. I think it was the TE who had a step on the safety (Burnett?) running towards the sideline just inside the goal line. Ryan could have tossed the ball towards the pylon for an even easier score, IMO.