Fire Capers

[gbgary]

capers is a genius...today.

 

[rmontro]

Looks like after all the free agent signings I may have been wrong about TT.

Were you wrong about TT? Or was TT wrong, and he has changed his approach to reflect that?

capers is a genius.

We've talked so much about how Capers and Thompson is such a mismatch, with Ted refusing to supply veterans to run Dom's complicated schemes. It's nice to see a season where they may actually be working together well.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

While I love how the defense looked yesterday, I am not ready to declare it fixed or great just yet. That wasn't a very good OL we faced yesterday, nor is Seattle a juggernaut on offense (mainly due to their OL). I remember people getting all excited early last year when our DL led the league in rush defense, forgetting that we had only faced 2nd string RB's and weak run offenses.

Next week, the game against Matt Ryan and the Falcons will say a lot more to me about this defense.

 

[swhitset]

While I love how the defense looked yesterday, I am not ready to declare it fixed or great just yet. That wasn't a very good OL we faced yesterday, nor is Seattle a juggernaut on offense (mainly due to their OL). I remember people getting all excited early last year when our DL led the league in rush defense, forgetting that we had only faced 2nd string RB's and weak run offenses.

Next week, the game against Matt Ryan and the Falcons will say a lot more to me about this defense.

Totally agree with your post... but Greenbayslacker will be fuming when he sees that you called his son Adrian Pedersen a second string running back lol ( which I believe is exactly where he resides on the Saint's depth chart this year btw).

 

[Dblbogey]

capers is a genius...today.

Extend his contract. Name a street after him. We can always rename the street if the defense falls apart.

 

[gopkrs]

I was glad to see that he did not use a three man rush. I don't think he tried it once. Too many big plays result from a 3 man rush.

 

[PackAttack12]

The biggest question I have going forward: Can the Packers defense get pressure with 4 and drop 7 like they did quite a bit against the Seahawks? Because if we have to routinely send extra guys to get pressure, that exposes the back end even more. How will it hold up?

Still lots of questions to be answered.

 

[gbgary]

Extend his contract. Name a street after him. We can always rename the street if the defense falls apart.

nothing too soon or permanent. i'm guessing by midnight next sunday caper's head will be back on it's familiar chopping block as the atl o is a far cry from sea's.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

While I love how the defense looked yesterday, I am not ready to declare it fixed or great just yet. That wasn't a very good OL we faced yesterday, nor is Seattle a juggernaut on offense (mainly due to their OL). I remember people getting all excited early last year when our DL led the league in rush defense, forgetting that we had only faced 2nd string RB's and weak run offenses.

That's especially true as the Packers defense has had Seattle's numbers over the last two seasons as well allowing only 27 points while winning both games at home.

I was glad to see that he did not use a three man rush. I don't think he tried it once. Too many big plays result from a 3 man rush.

The Packers allowed less yards per play rushing two or three players compared to when sending four to pressure the quarterback last season.

 

[gopkrs]

Don't care about your stats. The big plays are what kills you.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Don't care about your stats. The big plays are what kills you.

Of course, why care about facts when there's your subjective perception to trust on???

 

[gopkrs]

big plays are almost by definition subjective. There are lies. There are damned lies. And there are statistics.
There is no statistics god. And unless you know how to read the stats (which takes some subjectivity) you are succumbing to the false god.
The big play given up (e.g., the 4th down seattle play in the playoffs) more than makes up for the piddly plays that all add up to better stats.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

The big play given up (e.g., the 4th down seattle play in the playoffs) more than makes up for the piddly plays that all add up to better stats.

FWIW the fourth down play you're referring to was a fake field goal attempt resulting in a touchdown and had absolutely nothing to do with Capers only rushing three.

 

[OldSchool101]

Regardless of where we finish the year.. Dom gets to stay an extra month solely based on Eddie Lacy rushing for a 0.6 yard average! The look on his Eddie's face was priceless

 

[gopkrs]

FWIW the fourth down play you're referring to was a fake field goal attempt resulting in a touchdown and had absolutely nothing to do with Capers only rushing three.

That is not the play I was talking about. It was about 4th and 25 and Wilson ran around the backfield until someone got open deep on the right side. It was not a fake field goal. Anyway, you can keep your 3 man rush. I hope Capers has grown out of it.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

That is not the play I was talking about. It was about 4th and 25 and Wilson ran around the backfield until someone got open deep on the right side. It was not a fake field goal.

The fake field goal was the only fourth down the Seahawks attempted during the 2014 NFCCG.

 

[gopkrs]

Maybe it was 3rd down. It was a huge play.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Maybe it was 3rd down. It was a huge play.

I've already realized you don't care about facts. Maybe it wasn't a three man rush after all as well.

 

[gopkrs]

I guess we should just use a 3 man rush all the time according to your statistics. I guess maybe The Packers could just hire you and you could call all the plays sitting on the couch and looking at your computer.

 

[828Packer]

While I love how the defense looked yesterday, I am not ready to declare it fixed or great just yet. That wasn't a very good OL we faced yesterday, nor is Seattle a juggernaut on offense (mainly due to their OL). I remember people getting all excited early last year when our DL led the league in rush defense, forgetting that we had only faced 2nd string RB's and weak run offenses.

Next week, the game against Matt Ryan and the Falcons will say a lot more to me about this defense.

While I also am not ready to crown the defense yet I do think you undersold the Seattle offense a bit. This is still an offense with 6 Pro-Bowlers on that side of the ball. They are working with a piecemeal OL this season but overall they'll be fine offensively.

While I do agree with you about last year, the one key difference is that in the first 2 games of 2016, we made Blake Bortles and Sam Bradford look like Pro-Bowlers. Who can forget the 606 yards through the air between them. It was much different against RW and his corps of receivers/TE's. I do think there is a different feel so far.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

While I also am not ready to crown the defense yet I do think you undersold the Seattle offense a bit. This is still an offense with 6 Pro-Bowlers on that side of the ball. They are working with a piecemeal OL this season but overall they'll be fine offensively.

While I do agree with you about last year, the one key difference is that in the first 2 games of 2016, we made Blake Bortles and Sam Bradford look like Pro-Bowlers. Who can forget the 606 yards through the air between them. It was much different against RW and his corps of receivers/TE's. I do think there is a different feel so far.

I get what you are saying but the defense we put on the field in 2016 held the Seattle Offense to 10 points. The Homer side of me wants to think this is a much different and much better defense than last year, but is it? I will hold off my full judgement once there is more evidence to support it one way or another.

 

[828Packer]

I get what you are saying but the defense we put on the field in 2016 held the Seattle Offense to 10 points. The Homer side of me wants to think this is a much different and much better defense than last year, but is it? I will hold off my full judgement once there is more evidence to support it one way or another.

Right, but you can't judge how one team played in week 15 of last year to one that played in week 1 of this year, by simply looking at the score. There are multiple scenarios to look at. For example, last year our offense put up 38 points and was able to sustain drive after drive from the first snap, to keep the D rested. That wasn't the case on Sunday. Our offense was maligned for much of the first half, leaving the D on the field often. I'll take this year's play in this matchup, with all things factored, over last year, any day of the week and twice on Sunday's.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

One might also say that last year, the Packers were aided by 6 Seattle turnovers.

Again, I get what you are saying, but like last year when our run defense was stopping everyone and being praised, Zeke and the Cowboys OL proved those cheerleaders wrong.

Long season. I am optimistic about our Defense, but after just one game, not ready to "declare it" one way or another.

 

[828Packer]

One might also say that last year, the Packers were aided by 6 Seattle turnovers.

Yep, which is why I think the 10 points is simply fools gold, as we know watching last season unfold. They gave up a lot of yards in that game and were saved by TO's.

Sunday's defensive performance was entirely different. They gave up 130 less yards and were on the field a total of 20 less plays and that was with a 0 turnover margin. It was truly a sound defensive effort all the way around.

Again, not ready to crown them just stating my observations.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Yep, which is why It was truly a sound defensive effort all the way around.

not if you were listening to Troy Aikman and Joe Buck