Fire Capers

[Sunshinepacker]

You're talking about one game. This defense has been overall pretty terrible for the past 4 years. We have 5 guys remaining from the 2011 defense left on the roster.
I don't understand why people make excuses or try to make excuses for the poor performances his defenses have been like in years now.

And you're ignoring the first SIX games of the season when the defense was quite good. How is it surprising that a defense with the injuries the Packers have would have problems?

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Could someone point out to me the impact players that the Packers have on defense that Capers is misusing? I keep hearing that the defense is poorly coached. I don't pretend that Capers is a great coach but what great defensive players does this team have? Mike Daniels and Matthews are it and Matthews is playing out of position.

 

[DaveRoller]

And you're ignoring the first SIX games of the season when the defense was quite good. How is it surprising that a defense with the injuries the Packers have would have problems?

Serious question, do some Packer fans really view the 563 yards given up by Green Bay in game 6 to the 2-7 Chargers as the defense playing "quite good"?

 

[PackerDNA]

Could someone point out to me the impact players that the Packers have on defense that Capers is misusing? I keep hearing that the defense is poorly coached. I don't pretend that Capers is a great coach but what great defensive players does this team have? Mike Daniels and Matthews are it and Matthews is playing out of position.

Matthews is out of position due to lack of talent at ILB. While praised as a move that improved the D, it has reduced the impact of the units best player. That lack of talent at the position has basically not been addressed for 2 seasons and counting.
That is on Thompson, not Capers.

 

[azrsx05]

And you're ignoring the first SIX games of the season when the defense was quite good. How is it surprising that a defense with the injuries the Packers have would have problems?

I am not ignoring. But if we have 6 good games. Which all 6 weren't

And you're ignoring the first SIX games of the season when the defense was quite good. How is it surprising that a defense with the injuries the Packers have would have problems?

I am not ignoring those games. But the first 6 games were good. Not great. I think it had to do more of the fact that those teams were struggling. Also 6 games seems more like a fluke with a record of 4 years of abismal defense. They will have a few good games here and tgere. But overall their record shows they suck

 

[TJV]

Matthews is out of position due to lack of talent at ILB. While praised as a move that improved the D, it has reduced the impact of the units best player. That lack of talent at the position has basically not been addressed for 2 seasons and counting.That is on Thompson, not Capers.

Here's an ESPN article written during the bye week about Matthews' move inside.

In the age of the NFL specialist, Matthews' move is unparalleled. Nobody with five Pro Bowls under his belt just changes positions like swapping a hairstyle and gets ... better. Matthews' 13 sacks in his past 14 games through Week 7 was third most in the NFL during that stretch, behind the Texans' J.J. Watt (18) and the Chiefs' Justin Houston (14).

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/1...ws-redefined-all-pro-career-moving-linebacker

Of course I'd rather have another all pro at ILB, but Clay has had an impact from the ILB spot - particularly with the quick throws which are becoming more popular in the league. He can get to the QB quicker inside. BTW, McGinn mentioned he was playing on a sore leg against Carolina.

BTW2, I know it was mentioned how often Capers blitzed against the Panthers - the highest percentage of his time in Green Bay. I also read the Panthers frequently kept two extra blockers in for protection, sending out only three into the pass pattern. I know some fans like to complain about only sending three rushers but that wasn't the game to make that point: Three or six, they didn't get there and only touched Newton twice blitzing over 60% of the time. [J/K]Maybe should've constantly rushed four and kept seven back in coverage to double each of the three receivers with a spy on Newton.[/J/K]

 

[PackerDNA]

Here's an ESPN article written during the bye week about Matthews' move inside.
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/1...ws-redefined-all-pro-career-moving-linebacker

Of course I'd rather have another all pro at ILB, but Clay has had an impact from the ILB spot - particularly with the quick throws which are becoming more popular in the league. He can get to the QB quicker inside. BTW, McGinn mentioned he was playing on a sore leg against Carolina.

BTW2, I know it was mentioned how often Capers blitzed against the Panthers - the highest percentage of his time in Green Bay. I also read the Panthers frequently kept two extra blockers in for protection, sending out only three into the pass pattern. I know some fans like to complain about only sending three rushers but that wasn't the game to make that point: Three or six, they didn't get there and only touched Newton twice blitzing over 60% of the time. [J/K]Maybe should've constantly rushed four and kept seven back in coverage to double each of the three receivers with a spy on Newton.[/J/K]

He's out of his natural position where he could have the biggest impact in what he does best. Too many time inside I see him floating around in no position to make a play, much less impact. True TJV, he still makes an impact- he's a great player- but the biggest point to me is that when you move someone from their natural position due to weakness at another, that's not a good thing. Getting a quality ILB would make the team stronger at 2 positions.

 

[TJV]

True TJV, he still makes an impact- he's a great player- but the biggest point to me is that when you move someone from their natural position due to weakness at another, that's not a good thing. Getting a quality ILB would make the team stronger at 2 positions.

That's what I thought when they first moved him, but because QBs generally seem to be getting the ball out much more quickly I see the value of Clay rushing the gaps either side of the OC and crossing with another LB. I think it's easier (not easy, easier) for opponents to push him beyond the QB when he rushes from the outside and of course he's better able to go sideline to sideline from inside. Early in his career there was a lot of talk from fans about moving him around more so offenses wouldn't know where he lined up. That happened to some extent but nothing like what's happening now. Even so, of course I'd like a quality ILB to play next to him or alone in the middle when Clay moves outside. I hope Ryan steadily improves to the point where we don't miss Barrington. I don't have much evidence to base that on, so it's just a hope at this point.

 

[ExpatPacker]

That's what I thought when they first moved him, but because QBs generally seem to be getting the ball out much more quickly I see the value of Clay rushing the gaps either side of the OC and crossing with another LB. I think it's easier (not easy, easier) for opponents to push him beyond the QB when he rushes from the outside and of course he's better able to go sideline to sideline from inside. Early in his career there was a lot of talk from fans about moving him around more so offenses wouldn't know where he lined up. That happened to some extent but nothing like what's happening now. Even so, of course I'd like a quality ILB to play next to him or alone in the middle when Clay moves outside. I hope Ryan steadily improves to the point where we don't miss Barrington. I don't have much evidence to base that on, so it's just a hope at this point.

Also, my understanding is that Clay is not *just* playing ILB. He's being moved around a bit, which actually makes it harder for opposing offenses to keep track of him.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

And you're ignoring the first SIX games of the season when the defense was quite good. How is it surprising that a defense with the injuries the Packers have would have problems?

The Packers defense wasn't good against the Chargers. There's no denying the injuries at cornerback over the last two games were a tough blow for the defense and while I understand the secondary struggling against the Broncos receiving corps because of it even back-up players should be able to do a better job of covering Cotchery, Brown and Funchess.

Even so, of course I'd like a quality ILB to play next to him or alone in the middle when Clay moves outside. I hope Ryan steadily improves to the point where we don't miss Barrington. I don't have much evidence to base that on, so it's just a hope at this point.

I also like the Packers moving Matthews around. The biggest issue is not having quality back-ups once he moves outside. Maybe Ryan is an upgrade over Palmer but there's no doubt the position lacks talent and that's solely on Thompson.

 

[ExpatPacker]

That's what I thought when they first moved him, but because QBs generally seem to be getting the ball out much more quickly I see the value of Clay rushing the gaps either side of the OC and crossing with another LB. I think it's easier (not easy, easier) for opponents to push him beyond the QB when he rushes from the outside and of course he's better able to go sideline to sideline from inside. Early in his career there was a lot of talk from fans about moving him around more so offenses wouldn't know where he lined up. That happened to some extent but nothing like what's happening now. Even so, of course I'd like a quality ILB to play next to him or alone in the middle when Clay moves outside. I hope Ryan steadily improves to the point where we don't miss Barrington. I don't have much evidence to base that on, so it's just a hope at this point.

It's way too early, I know, I know, but looking ahead to the 2016 draft, the top rated ILB is Jaylon Smith of ND. Also listed as OLB, so apparently he can play both positions. He looks to be the real deal, which probably means he'll be long gone by the time the Packers are on the board.

 

[PackerDNA]

I'm looking forw

It's way too early, I know, I know, but looking ahead to the 2016 draft, the top rated ILB is Jaylon Smith of ND. Also listed as OLB, so apparently he can play both positions. He looks to be the real deal, which probably means he'll be long gone by the time the Packers are on the board.

I'm wondering if TT will have an epiphany and realize he can't fix it all in the draft, gets off his **** and becomes more involved in free agency and possible trades.

..................Nah.

 

[JBlood]

Packers rank dead last in defensive consistency with a schedule ranked 29th in difficulty at the midpoint of the season. Getting the corners back won't hurt, but I think this is a middle of the pack (no pun intended) defense at best. If the offense doesn't come around (and with 3 of the o linemen on the injury list it's a concern) we're in trouble.

 

[JBlood]

Serious question, do some Packer fans really view the 563 yards given up by Green Bay in game 6 to the 2-7 Chargers as the defense playing "quite good"?

Yes. Even the debacle in Denver there are people who think the D played ok since Denver only scored 10 in the 2nd half, by which time the game was over. Sooner or later we will need a front 7 capable of controlling the LOS consistently, so that MM can sit on a lead in the 4th quarter, as he is prone to do.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Serious question, do some Packer fans really view the 563 yards given up by Green Bay in game 6 to the 2-7 Chargers as the defense playing "quite good"?

The defense was on the field for about 90 plays. For being on the field that much, it's not that bad. It's not great, but it's not bad.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

The defense was on the field for about 90 plays. For being on the field that much, it's not that bad. It's not great, but it's not bad.

Well, the primary reason for them being on the field for that many plays was their inability to get off it.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

The Packers defense wasn't good against the Chargers. There's no denying the injuries at cornerback over the last two games were a tough blow for the defense and while I understand the secondary struggling against the Broncos receiving corps because of it even back-up players should be able to do a better job of covering Cotchery, Brown and Funchess.

Why should rookie and backup corners necessarily be better than rookie and backup wide receivers? Especially when rules favor the offense.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Why should rookie and backup corners necessarily be better than rookie and backup wide receivers? Especially when rules favor the offense.

IMO if you get constantly beat by that receiving corps there's no place for you in this league.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Well, the primary reason for them being on the field for that many plays was their inability to get off it.

Ok. Packers have up 20 points. That's not bad. More often than not, if you force an offense to go on 12+ play drives, that offense will screw up at some point. Didn't happen in this game but that's an anomaly.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

IMO if you get constantly beat by that receiving corps there's no place for you in this league.

Then packers should give up on Randall and Clinton-Dix? Seems a little precipitous.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Ok. Packers have up 20 points. That's not bad. More often than not, if you force an offense to go on 12+ play drives, that offense will screw up at some point. Didn't happen in this game but that's an anomaly.

This season 83.7% of the drives with 12 or more plays result in the offense scoring.

Then packers should give up on Randall and Clinton-Dix? Seems a little precipitous.

I was actually thinking about Goodson, Clinton-Dix and Randall have shown they're capable of playing way better.

 

[PackerDNA]

TJV made a great point before about QB's getting the ball out fast. Read something a few days back that focused on this and used Brady and Rivers as examples. In the games cited, they were getting the ball out in an avg of something like 2.1 seconds on most of their throws, under 2 on some of those. Tough to beat the guy across from you, close the distance and get pressure like that.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

TJV made a great point before about QB's getting the ball out fast. Read something a few days back that focused on this and used Brady and Rivers as examples. In the games cited, they were getting the ball out in an avg of something like 2.1 seconds on most of their throws, under 2 on some of those. Tough to beat the guy across from you, close the distance and get pressure like that.

In those cases it is a must for the defense to prevent yards after catch which the Packers haven't been able to.

 

[Half Empty]

TJV made a great point before about QB's getting the ball out fast. Read something a few days back that focused on this and used Brady and Rivers as examples. In the games cited, they were getting the ball out in an avg of something like 2.1 seconds on most of their throws, under 2 on some of those. Tough to beat the guy across from you, close the distance and get pressure like that.

That's pretty much my own definition of what coaches are for, much the same as (on the offensive side) take what they'll give you. If you're going up against Brady or Rivers, accept the quick release as a given and figure out a way to prevent that asset from beating you. If you can't do it, I'll be glad to take the job, the millions that go with it, and accomplish pretty much what we've seen. If it can't be done because you just don't have comparable talent on your side, then we've got another argument - TT and or expectations.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I don't mean to over simplify things, but in the last 2 games, look at sacks, hurries and hits on the QB (for and against) and you pretty much have the answers to our losses. Until we get an O line and a D line that can do what they are suppose to do, AR can't be AR and our DB's will continually get beat by an unpressured QB.