Conservative 2nd Half Play Calling

[Dirty Sanchez]

Im not going to complain about the offense but the D playing that zone crap is another story.

The defensive scheme (I like to call it plan "beige") almost cost us the game. Why do we start to give them everything underneath and the short passes? Both offense and defense looked excellent at the start of the game, we got the score almost out of reach and them Capers send them into what looked like a prevent defense. Oh well, I'll take the win!
DS

 

[Deleted member 6794]

The defensive scheme (I like to call it plan "beige") almost cost us the game. Why do we start to give them everything underneath and the short passes? Both offense and defense looked excellent at the start of the game, we got the score almost out of reach and them Capers send them into what looked like a prevent defense. Oh well, I'll take the win!
DS

The Packers for sure didn't play a prevent defense in the second half. The problem wasn't Capers scheme but the players in the secondary consistently being beaten by the Lions receivers and tight ends.

 

[bigbubbatd]

The Packers for sure didn't play a prevent defense as the cornerbacks were mostly assigned to cover receivers one-on-one without any help over the top. The problem wasn't Capers scheme but the players in the secondary consistently being beaten by the Lions receivers and tight ends.

It sure seemed like they were in a zone a few times especially in the middle of the field. The Packers looked confused as to where they were receiving help, who had what area, etc. If we were playing many on the TE's that is embarrassing bc no one was near them

 

[MichiganSportsTalk]

That game physically hurt me to watch. I'm glad the Lions finally realized they were playing a football game, but I'm horrified that it took until the end of the 2nd quarter. The offense wasn't terrible. Overall pretty good I would say. But that Lions defense. My god. It's a pile of hot garbage perched on top of dumpster fire mountain.

I can definitely see why you guys are frustrated with the play calling. They could easily have put up another 14-21 points at least.

Although I won't argue the legitimacy of the call because it's how the rule is written, that kickoff in which the player is out of bounds touching the ball baffled me. Specifically, why is that a thing? What are they trying to prevent or protect by having such an odd rule like that? Genuinely asking, in case anyone knows.

The officiating could have been worse, but I'm glad it didn't turn into another Titans game. Pretty sure guys got flagged for not saying "bless you" after someone sneezed....

 

[Half Empty]

Well first I'd point out it was a 21 point halftime lead and NOT a 28 point one all because the defense decided to play aggressively, like so many have clamored for, instead of playing a off 2 deep high zone in that situation.

And then I'd go on to remind him that we didn't end up punting for the first time untill late in the game and it was because of a dropped ball and not the play calling. Same with the 2nd, and only other, punt of the game so complaining about the offensive play calling is non sensical and absurd when the plays called would've moved the chains had it not been for dropped balls.

And then if they still choose to complain I just walk away because all they're arguing torwards is their own personal bias instead of actually looking at anything that happened in the game

Certainly, 21, not 28 at the half. I had that 28 point lead so ingrained with a minute and a half left that I still can't get used to the real numbers. Call it a 28 point lead almost at halftime.

After that, I don't know where the play-calling references came from, as far as my post went. All I asked for was someone to make a 28 point lead turning into a 7 point win sound good, and the fact that the Pack nearly didn't punt actually makes it seems even worse.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

It sure seemed like they were in a zone a few times especially in the middle of the field. The Packers looked confused as to where they were receiving help, who had what area, etc. If we were playing many on the TE's that is embarrassing bc no one was near them

Tight ends consistently being open in the middle of the field was extremely disappointing, no doubt about it.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Although I won't argue the legitimacy of the call because it's how the rule is written, that kickoff in which the player is out of bounds touching the ball baffled me. Specifically, why is that a thing? What are they trying to prevent or protect by having such an odd rule like that? Genuinely asking, in case anyone knows.

Very heads up and smart play by Montgomery.

The NFL's rule regarding that play is the same as on a fumble: If any part of a player's body is out of bounds when he makes contact with the football, the ball is considered out of bounds as well.

We saw Randall Cobb do it back in 2012 against Tennessee. Often times us fans (and announcers) scratch our heads wondering why players don't know certain rules but in this case, it is Packer players being very well schooled on the rules.

 

[MichiganSportsTalk]

Very heads up and smart play by Montgomery.

The NFL's rule regarding that play is the same as on a fumble: If any part of a player's body is out of bounds when he makes contact with the football, the ball is considered out of bounds as well.

We saw Randall Cobb do it back in 2012 against Tennessee. Often times us fans (and announcers) scratch our heads wondering why players don't know certain rules but in this case, its players on the Packers being very well schooled on the rules.

In my opinion, at least on kickoffs, they need to modify that rule so as not to make it a penalty against the kicking team, and simply make it a dead ball.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

In my opinion, at least on kickoffs, they need to modify that rule so as not to make it a penalty against the kicking team, and simply make it a dead ball.

Generally I agree with the rule that teams aren't allowed to kick the ball out of bounds on a kickoff but I have to admit the play yesterday was kind of odd and wouldn't mind having the rule changed in that area.

 

[Mondio]

I don't think they played prevent at all, it was tough to watch, but it seemed half the team was an UDRFA back there at times. and not just in their level of play but there were a lot of young guys out there a lot yesterday. and they didn't "help" any of them. They put them out there and said do it. Some of it was same old same old. 2 great defensive plays, or at least good and then give up 3rd and 15 or whatever, I do wish we could take care of that. But we got what we got and they won. Lots of young guys got a lot to time to learn a few things. Experience and learning opportunities in a win is never a bad thing, even if it is frustrating to watch as a fan.

 

[7thFloorRA]

33 and 23 seemed to have a communication problem. They have both been around. There were communication issues in the secondary calls and responsibilities for freaking ever after Collins was gone and finally Burnett learned how to do it and its been good for a few years. Dom might have to stick to something simpler or just some more man coverages if the field general is out. That was more than a soft zone out there at times....guys were not covered.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Generally I agrew with the rule that teams aren't allowed to kick the ball out of bounds on a kickoff but I have to admit the play yesterday was kind of odd and wouldn't mind having the rule changed in that area.

Come on, that was an entertaining moment as well as a beneficial one to the Packers LOL. The play by play announcers were ripping on Montgomery for making not 1 mistake but 2. Until they too realized he was smarter then them LOL.

But I will agree, these are the odd interpretations of certain rules that make you wonder if the rule makers thought it out fully. But remove that part of the rule and a well placed onsides kick could be recovered by the kicking team by a player that was standing out of bounds.

If I could change one rule that seems to really go unnoticed is the way they handle the game clock after an illegal procedure penalty on the offense. I have seen this happen countless times. A team with a lead, towards the end of the game, clock running and the offense is called for illegal procedure with say 3 seconds left on the play clock. The game clock is temporarily stopped while the 5 yards is walked off but then restarted with the offense getting another 25 seconds on the play clock. The rule just rewarded them the ability to run another 22 seconds off the game clock because of a penalty called on them! I believe this changes with under 5 minutes in the game and a team can only take two consecutive delay of game penalties on a down. Third time triggers an unsportsmanlike penalty, which stops the game clock, but come on.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Come on, that was an entertaining moment as well as a beneficial one to the Packers LOL. The play by play announcers were ripping on Montgomery for making not 1 mistake but 2. Until they too realized he was smarter then them LOL.

If I could change one rule that seems to really go unnoticed is the way they handle the game clock after an illegal procedure penalty on the offense. I have seen this happen countless times. A team with a lead, towards the end of the game, clock running and the offense is called for illegal procedure with say 3 seconds left on the play clock. The clock is temporarily stopped while the 5 yards is walked off but then restarted with the offense getting another 25 seconds on the play clock. The rule just rewarded them the ability to run another 22 seconds off the game clock because of a penalty called on them! I believe this changes with under 5 minutes in the game and a team can only take two consecutive delay of game penalties on a down. Third time triggers an unsportsmanlike penalty, which stops the game clock, but come on.

I agree that it was a smart play by Montgomery and it was hilarious that the announcers didn't know about the rule.

Generally I would like the league doing a better job of managing the clock. I've seen it on numerous occasions that the refs forgot about resetting the clock when it would have been necessary.

 

[Poppa San]

Generally I agree with the rule that teams aren't allowed to kick the ball out of bounds on a kickoff but I have to admit the play yesterday was kind of odd and wouldn't mind having the rule changed in that area.

Changed to what? Player out of bounds, touching a live ball, makes the ball out of bounds. No judgement necessary. The OoB rule I'd like to see changed is player cannot come back inbounds and be the first to touch the ball. After re-establishing, they should be eligible.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Changed to what? Player out of bounds, touching a live ball, makes the ball out of bounds. No judgement necessary.

I would like the kicking team to only be penalized if the ball actually touches the ground out of bounds on a kickoff.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Generally I would like the league doing a better job of managing the clock. I've seen it on numerous occasions that the refs forgot about resetting the clock when it would have been necessary.

Can't agree more with this statement. If I as a fan who is sitting at home watching on TV can see where the clock is not being handled correctly, something isn't right. I believe the clock is managed by someone up in the booth along with the side judge, but far too often it seems like those two are sleeping on the clock duties and we all know how valuable even a few seconds at the end of a game can be.

My other pet peeve is the spotting of the ball. Again, real easy to have someone up in the booth doing this job with the aid of all sorts of monitors. Doesn't have to be after every play, but if between the time the play is whistled dead and the offense lines up to snap the ball, if an obvious mistake is seen in spotting the ball, get it right.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

The OoB rule I'd like to see changed is player cannot come back inbounds and be the first to touch the ball. After re-establishing, they should be eligible.

I could be wrong here, but didn't they make that rule to prevent a player from intentionally running out of bounds on their own sideline, kind of getting lost amongst the bench players and then coming back out? Hard for the defense to keep track of an eligible receiver in that situation.

 

[Poppa San]

I could be wrong here, but didn't they make that rule to prevent a player from intentionally running out of bounds on their own sideline, kind of getting lost amongst the bench players and then coming back out? Hard for the defense to keep track of an eligible receiver in that situation.

Probably. I know that is why it is there but maybe make it two feet to be OoB. Stepping on the endline on a crossing route in the endzone should be OK. Or if you are pushed out you are OK. As long as both feet are inbounds, like in basketball.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Probably. I know that is why it is there but maybe make it two feet to be OoB. Stepping on the endline on a crossing route in the endzone should be OK. Or if you are pushed out you are OK. As long as both feet are inbounds, like in basketball.

Definitely comes across as nit picky when its just a foot, but I'm guessing if it isn't all or nothing it then becomes too open to interpretation. I definitely agree with you on if a player gets pushed out of bounds and then comes back in, the rule shouldn't apply. but there again, how do you interpret "pushed"? If 2 guys are tangled up and temporarily go out of bounds and back in, who pushed who?

 

[Sky King]

I don't think they played prevent at all, it was tough to watch, but it seemed half the team was an UDRFA back there at times. and not just in their level of play but there were a lot of young guys out there a lot yesterday. and they didn't "help" any of them. They put them out there and said do it. Some of it was same old same old. 2 great defensive plays, or at least good and then give up 3rd and 15 or whatever, I do wish we could take care of that. But we got what we got and they won. Lots of young guys got a lot to time to learn a few things. Experience and learning opportunities in a win is never a bad thing, even if it is frustrating to watch as a fan.

Better to go through growing pains now rather than later (playoffs).

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Better to go through growing pains now rather than later (playoffs).

True, but the pass defense has to significantly improve over the course of the season for me to feel confortable about the unit entering the playoffs.

 

[Vince Lombardi]

Tight ends consistently being open in the middle of the field was extremely disappointing, no doubt about it.

Its every week with the TE's.

 

[Robert Mason]

There were a lot of injuries on the D side....Matthews, Shields, Burnett, Guion and Dante Jones. Surprisingly the run D was very good. The passing zone D was poor with some blown covers. On the plus side some of the younger players got some valuable first time playing experience. The Packers second half offense except for the last drive just seemed like they were just trying to bleed the clock. It was like watching the Lions offense practicing with third string defenders.

 

[4Ever4Favre]

I don't think they played prevent at all, it was tough to watch, but it seemed half the team was an UDRFA back there at times. and not just in their level of play but there were a lot of young guys out there a lot yesterday. and they didn't "help" any of them. They put them out there and said do it. Some of it was same old same old. 2 great defensive plays, or at least good and then give up 3rd and 15 or whatever, I do wish we could take care of that. But we got what we got and they won. Lots of young guys got a lot to time to learn a few things. Experience and learning opportunities in a win is never a bad thing, even if it is frustrating to watch as a fan.

They were playing a zone to prevent a big play and to make Detroit kill clock. They sat in zone and gave up chunks of yards. The problem is they weren't aggressive, like nobody wanted to be that guy who gave up a quick score. They let Detroit take up to 10-15 yards. They also got no pressure with the front 4.

This secondary group is going to be very good. Randall, Rollins, Gunter, Hawkins, Dix. All very young and raw. It is very exciting to think about this group in the coming years.

We also dropped several INT's that allowed the game to be that close.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Its every week with the TE's.

Well, overall the secondary has struggled this season. Hopefully they will be able to improve over the bye week.