Defense in Decline?

[Half Empty]

I see a defense that is on the upswing. young players are starting to emerge, we have one of the deepest secondary's in the NFL. Our one big issue is stopping the run and that starts in the middle. I think losing Raji was a huge setback. It has only been the last 3 seasons that TT has been focusing on the D. It's a draft and develop philosophy, you have to have patience while you develop. This D is on the cusp of being a dominant D. When it happens it is going to be for a long run. We could take a shortcut and be at the bottom for a couple of years and draft high. Personally, I like having a ticket to the dance every year.

The hardest wood is in the slowest growing trees. Hey that was pretty good.

Not trying to argue on the draft focus because there are multiple ways to evaluate that, but from the most basic standpoint, in the three years prior to the three years you reference, they selected 13 on offense and 12 on D. Obviously not a focus on D, but certainly not a focus on O.

Regarding draft position - I'm always been a proponent of the viewpoint that you grant everyone drafting above you a free blue chip prospect, and after that, you're drafting 1st.

 

[NOMOFO]

We led the league in opponents passer rating before the Saints game but dropped to 7th after it at 82.1.

I've been of the opinion that Capers is capable of beating sub-par QBs by confusing them while better QBs have no problem with Caper's led defenses.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I've been of the opinion that Capers is capable of beating sub-par QBs by confusing them while better QBs have no problem with Caper's led defenses.

Not sure it´s all Capers fault but you´re right our defense has been pretty good stopping sub-par QBs while not being able to slow down the good ones.

 

[NOMOFO]

Not sure it´s all Capers fault but you´re right our defense has been pretty good stopping sub-par QBs while not being able to slow down the good ones.

It's just the gross disparity in QB ratings that makes me think it's scheme.

 

[GoPGo]

Currently nine teams in the league have more wins than the Packers.

Need to work on your counting. There are 8 teams with more wins and two of those have played more games.

 

[rondon57]

We led the league in opponents passer rating before the Saints game but dropped to 7th after it at 82.1.

The Saint's were the second best team GB played so far this year and have the best QB they have played against so far.

 

[rondon57]

It's just the gross disparity in QB ratings that makes me think it's scheme.

Think of what that stat would look like if they played in the West with Wilson,Kaepernick,Palmer

 

[El Guapo]

The Saint's were the second best team GB played so far this year and have the best QB they have played against so far.

Teams at the bottom of the heap say that about every opponent. The goal is to be the king of the hill with all of the other teams having reasons for why they lost to you.

 

[OldSchool101]

I like your optimism but I don´t see the defense being on the cusp of being a dominant D. The secondary is deep but both ILBs need to be replaced and they´ll need at least another two DL being able to stop the run.

Thank you...
We have an opportunity to get top 33% of the league by playoffs, IMO that will be what it takes to see a Championship game (within reason). If we go in ranked 10th,12th ,14th range ...in points allowed. We could spell upset

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Need to work on your counting. There are 8 teams with more wins and two of those have played more games.

That's a funny post coming from the guy claiming the Packers are tied for second in the NFL in total wins as of now. First of all the Bengals have more wins than the Packers with 5.5 (making it nine teams with more wins as the Packers) and in addition there are three teams sitting at 6-3. It seems like you need work on your counting.

 

[Carl]

That's a funny post coming from the guy claiming the Packers are tied for second in the NFL in total wins as of now. First of all the Bengals have more wins than the Packers with 5.5 (making it nine teams with more wins as the Packers) and in addition there are three teams sitting at 6-3. It seems like you need work on your counting.

Bengals have 5.5 wins? Haha. Does it say that the standings?

Yeah, a tie is in between a win and loss in the standings, but it does not add a half a win to the win column.

Just like the Packers had 8 wins last year not 8.5 and nobody's career record has a .5 in it. As far as number of wins, the Packers and Bengals are the same.

 

[PackerDNA]

Teams at the bottom of the heap say that about every opponent. The goal is to be the king of the hill with all of the other teams having reasons for why they lost to you.

Well said, and thank you. We're always a top contender- until we play top contenders. Than the reason we lost is because we played a very good team. Wanna be the best? Beat the best.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Bengals have 5.5 wins? Haha. Does it say that the standings?

Yeah, a tie is in between a win and loss in the standings, but it does not add a half a win to the win column.

Just like the Packers had 8 wins last year not 8.5 and nobody's career record has a .5 in it. As far as number of wins, the Packers and Bengals are the same.

The Bengals win percentage is at .688 as of now, which equals 5.5 wins out of eight games and is a better record than a 5-3 team (or a 6-3 team for that matter).

While the league officialy grades it as a tie they calculate the winning percentage with 0.5 wins.

 

[Carl]

The Bengals win percentage is at .688 as of now, which equals 5.5 wins out of eight games and is a better record than a 5-3 team (or a 6-3 team for that matter).

While the league officialy grades it as a tie they calculate the winning percentage with 0.5 wins.

Then we can they have a better winning percentage, but they still have the same amount of wins.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Then we can they have a better winning percentage, but they still have the same amount of wins.

Whatever, if you want to be nitpicking about it, fine. The only thing that matters though is winning percentage as the ranking within a division and for the wild card spots is decided by it.

 

[ExpatPacker]

With the addition of Clinton-Dix, our secondary is probably one of the better ones in the league. Our OLB core with CMIII, Peppers, Perry and Neal is also clearly a plus. Perry and Neal have both come a fair ways and are now looking like solid contributors rather than busts.

Our ILB is dismal, maybe the worst in the league. Our DL is very sub-par with the loss of Raji, Worthy a bust, and Datone Jones injury-prone and not at all looking like the 1st round pick we were hoping for yet.

The two pretty much cancel each other out, leaving a defense that relies heavily on pressuring the QB, which they do ok, and INTs. One of the reasons why good teams tend to make mince meat out of this defense is that good teams tend to take better care of the ball. You don't pick off Drew Brees very often, and other teams like SF and Seattle have been able to exploit Packer weaknesses with their strong running game and mobile QBs.

In 2011 the Packer defense also relied on turnovers, but Eli Manning and the Giants came in and didn't. Relying on turnovers in the playoffs usually results in a loss, which I'm afraid may happen again this year assuming we get that far.

 

[PikeBadger]

Currently nine teams in the league have more wins than the Packers.

I read GPG post to mean that we were 2nd in league in Wins since 2011 which I really have no idea if that is actually true or not. I would guess that we are in the top 2 or 3 in nfl wins since Thompson/McCarthy took over.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I read GPG post to mean that we were 2nd in league in Wins since 2011 which I really have no idea if that is actually true or not. I would guess that we are in the top 2 or 3 in nfl wins since Thompson/McCarthy took over.

I don´t think that´s the case as all of the other stats he mentioned are from this season as well.

In case you´re wondering we´re 4th in winning percentage since 2011, 3rd since McCarthy took over and 5th since Thompson was named GM.

 

[GoPGo]

I agree with the first part of this, but if the playoffs started today, we'd be on the outside looking in.

But they don't. And the Packer have always been a better team in November and December than they are in September and October.

 

[adambr2]

But they don't. And the Packer have always been a better team in November and December than they are in September and October.

The point is that they are tied for the 10th best record in the NFL right now, so saying they are tied for the 2nd most wins in the NFL right now is a misleading representation of their performance so far this year. Not to mention that it's false anyway.

 

[red4tribe]

Not sure it´s all Capers fault but you´re right our defense has been pretty good stopping sub-par QBs while not being able to slow down the good ones.

To emphasize that point, I added together the performances of Favre, Wilson, Warner, Roethlisberger, Brees, Eli Manning and Kapernick including the playoffs against the Packers since 2009. This comes out to 18 games. I did not include the 2010 season since the defense was dominant then. I think it can roughly be agreed that those are the best QB's we have faced more than once.

387 Completions
594 Attempts
65.1% Completion percentage
4983 Yards
47 Touchdowns
6 Interceptions

In these 18 games, we have never had more than one interception in any game. All together, this adds up to a Passer Rating of 113.4. That's terrible.

In other words, on average in these games(I'm not counting the one game where Warner played for like one quarter at the end of the '09 season) is the following:

22.7 Completions
34.9 Attempts
293 Yards
2.7 Td's
.3 Int's

Basically, we have played a full season against these quarterbacks and their numbers are similar to Rodgers's in his 2011 record setting MVP season. It's unacceptable.

 

[Sanguine camper]

G

To emphasize that point, I added together the performances of Favre, Wilson, Warner, Roethlisberger, Brees, Eli Manning and Kapernick including the playoffs against the Packers since 2009. This comes out to 18 games. I did not include the 2010 season since the defense was dominant then. I think it can roughly be agreed that those are the best QB's we have faced more than once.

387 Completions
594 Attempts
65.1% Completion percentage
4983 Yards
47 Touchdowns
6 Interceptions

In these 18 games, we have never had more than one interception in any game. All together, this adds up to a Passer Rating of 113.4. That's terrible.

In other words, on average in these games(I'm not counting the one game where Warner played for like one quarter at the end of the '09 season) is the following:

22.7 Completions
34.9 Attempts
293 Yards
2.7 Td's
.3 Int's

Basically, we have played a full season against these quarterbacks and their numbers are similar to Rodgers's in his 2011 record setting MVP season. It's unacceptable.

gtrat post. Your research into the stats confirms what we have been seeing with our eyes. The Packers defense gets destroyed against good qb's. I would add the not only do interceptions disappear against the good qb's but sacks do as well. The Packets are a bad team with a great quarterback. That makes them better than average but they certainly are no threat to go deep in the playoffs.

 

[GoPGo]

The point is that they are tied for the 10th best record in the NFL right now, so saying they are tied for the 2nd most wins in the NFL right now is a misleading representation of their performance so far this year. Not to mention that it's false anyway.

Yes, I was still stuck in last week for some reason. Still we are always strongest in November and December, so I see absolutely no reason to worry. Unfortunately, not worrying is generally frowned upon on this particular forum for some reason.

 

[adambr2]

To emphasize that point, I added together the performances of Favre, Wilson, Warner, Roethlisberger, Brees, Eli Manning and Kapernick including the playoffs against the Packers since 2009. This comes out to 18 games. I did not include the 2010 season since the defense was dominant then. I think it can roughly be agreed that those are the best QB's we have faced more than once.

387 Completions
594 Attempts
65.1% Completion percentage
4983 Yards
47 Touchdowns
6 Interceptions

In these 18 games, we have never had more than one interception in any game. All together, this adds up to a Passer Rating of 113.4. That's terrible.

In other words, on average in these games(I'm not counting the one game where Warner played for like one quarter at the end of the '09 season) is the following:

22.7 Completions
34.9 Attempts
293 Yards
2.7 Td's
.3 Int's

Basically, we have played a full season against these quarterbacks and their numbers are similar to Rodgers's in his 2011 record setting MVP season. It's unacceptable.

So you took the 09-14 seasons, and

- Arbitrarily took out the entire 2010 season (removing a 4 INT game from Eli, a 3 INT game from Favre, and a 1 INT game from Favre where he completed well under 50% of his passes)
- Arbitrarily took out a quarter of Warner
- Arbitrarily called Eli Manning, Roethlisberger, and Kaepernick the best QBs we have faced, but not Ryan, Stafford, Flacco, Romo, Cutler, etc.

Your reasoning for omitting the 2010 was that we had a dominant defense then. So essentially your conclusion was that in years that our defense was bad, elite QB's did very well against us? I don't really understand what that proves. I think we would have all assumed this was pretty much true.

This seems to be a case of statistics being able to say whatever a person wants them to say.

 

[red4tribe]

So you took the 09-14 seasons, and

- Arbitrarily took out the entire 2010 season (removing a 4 INT game from Eli, a 3 INT game from Favre, and a 1 INT game from Favre where he completed well under 50% of his passes)
- Arbitrarily took out a quarter of Warner
- Arbitrarily called Eli Manning, Roethlisberger, and Kaepernick the best QBs we have faced, but not Ryan, Stafford, Flacco, Romo, Cutler, etc.

Your reasoning for omitting the 2010 was that we had a dominant defense then. So essentially your conclusion was that in years that our defense was bad, elite QB's did very well against us? I don't really understand what that proves. I think we would have all assumed this was pretty much true.

This seems to be a case of statistics being able to say whatever a person wants them to say.

Right, with the exception of one season, the defense has not had the ability to stop elite quarterbacks. Exactly. And if you want to go back in and add 4 for 6 Warner for 31 yards to the stats, be my guest. The point is to emphasize how badly the defense has been those five seasons in stopping elite quarterbacks, as I stated in my post.

And gee, I don't know, maybe I listed those specific QB's is because they are the best QB's we've faced? Ryan, Romo, Cutler and Stafford have combined for three playoff wins. You could make an argument for Flacco but he has had one good postseason in an otherwise up and down career(statistically). By nature, doing something like this is based on opinion, no one is going to exactly agree on a list of QB's.

The QB's I listed have eight Super Bowl rings, thirteen Super Bowl appearances and 54 playoff wins. I think it's a fair list. Arbitrarily, of course.