For those that say packers never made adjustments

longtimefan

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
25,356
Reaction score
4,086
Location
Milwaukee
We have all seen these comments, rarely with any proof to back it up.

So--now is your chance. is there any proof..Offense formations---Defense as well?

Might be hard to do, but replays should be a great help
 

nlferts

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 23, 2014
Messages
27
Reaction score
5
I mean, based on what I saw, it looked as though the Packers were trying to make adjustments, it's just that they were obviously not effective.

I know it's hard to believe sometimes, but Mike McCarthy, Dom Capers, and company are NFL coaches for a reason. I'm sure they were not thinking the entire time, "Adjustments? Nah. Eventually what we are doing will work".

Might be wrong, but it just looked more like we were being out-schemed on defense and exposed on offense. I don't think it was an issue of adjustments.
 

JacobInFlorida

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 8, 2011
Messages
139
Reaction score
13
Location
Denver, CO
I think they were very, very limited on defense by the injuries to shields and rollins.

On offense I didn't see much adjustment. Rodgers referenced some stuff they wanted to try but never got the chance to.
 

Shawnsta3

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 19, 2011
Messages
1,273
Reaction score
137
Location
Manawa & Shawano, WI
I think they were very, very limited on defense by the injuries to shields and rollins.

On offense I didn't see much adjustment. Rodgers referenced some stuff they wanted to try but never got the chance to.
The play of Casey Hayward and Micah Hyde was most limiting of all. Though they didn't bother to limit the amount of catches they were giving up:confused:
 

melvin dangerr

In it to Win it All
Joined
Sep 9, 2012
Messages
3,650
Reaction score
949
Location
ST Croix VI
We have all seen these comments, rarely with any proof to back it up.

So--now is your chance. is there any proof..Offense formations---Defense as well?

Might be hard to do, but replays should be a great help
Ok what adjustments did you see that were made that caused Denver to lose the Game? was it offense A-rod did not post 78yds passing, (14-22) or was it Manning passing down the middle through out the game 159yds play action passing,or was it 6of 9 throws of 15yds or more by manning, and a sad stat is Packers offense has not averaged over 20pts in the last month, the defense, there not stat I can think of that would be worth post, well maybe one the packers did hit manning 2xs w/o a sack..
 

gopkrs

Cheesehead
Joined
May 12, 2014
Messages
5,334
Reaction score
1,267
The only adjustment I can think of off the top of my head is that Hayward should have been moved from the corner position. By just about anybody. He was terrible. Of course Thomas is an excellent receiver but still ... it was a horrible matchup. I saw Goodson make one play...I don't know if he was on the field much. Maybe Hayward should have been blitzing since he was a no show in the secondary. Just a horrible game. I hope we are not that bad.
 

easyk83

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 20, 2013
Messages
2,783
Reaction score
280
I mean, based on what I saw, it looked as though the Packers were trying to make adjustments, it's just that they were obviously not effective.

I know it's hard to believe sometimes, but Mike McCarthy, Dom Capers, and company are NFL coaches for a reason. I'm sure they were not thinking the entire time, "Adjustments? Nah. Eventually what we are doing will work".

Might be wrong, but it just looked more like we were being out-schemed on defense and exposed on offense. I don't think it was an issue of adjustments.

Adjustments still require execution. Without Sam Shields we didn't have anyone who could match up against Demarius Thomas. Which forced us to shade safety help to the sideline which in turn opened up the middle of the field. Without a healthy Nick Perry we couldn't edge rush effectively with Matthews inside, with Matthews playing the edge our ILBs were too weak against the short passing game and dump offs.

Improvement no. 1: Get Sam Shields back, he's a lynch pin of our defense right now. Him being healthy and available keeps Hayward inside, where he's actually decent. Randall is promising but he still needs help over the top to simplify things for him. If the safeties have to shade both sidelines the center of the field opens up wide. This exposes our ILB depth big time.

Improvement no. 2: Keep Perry on the bench until his strength returns. I think his production from the outside can be partially replaced by playing Datone Jones outside more, he's looked like a load playing outside of the guard at times. Let's see what he can do as a 5 tech elephant end. He looks natural playing in space for a big man and he looks surprisingly good when asked to zone drop.
 

armand34

Cheesehead
Joined
May 24, 2010
Messages
2,056
Reaction score
273
Location
The Beach, NJ
The ONLY thing I would change (If I was the DC) was put Shields on Thomas and Randel on Sanders...I don't understand why the rookie was on one of the best WR's in the league...perhaps it was just the way the scheme was drawn up...but, that seemed like a pretty big hole IMO.

Man Coverage?

What the hell happened to the Zone coverage in the middle? Man Coverage was pretty leaky as well...Guys OPEN making plays in the middle half, I've never even heard their names.
 

easyk83

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 20, 2013
Messages
2,783
Reaction score
280
Offense, this is like begging for an addict to admit he has a problem. But MM and Co. need to acknowledge the limitations of the spread iso passing game, who cares about beating the scrubs and solid teams when you always flop against top flight secondaries. Offensively they need to scheme more to get guys open instead of playing sandlot football.
 

easyk83

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 20, 2013
Messages
2,783
Reaction score
280
The ONLY thing I would change (If I was the DC) was put Shields on Thomas and Randel on Sanders...I don't understand why the rookie was on one of the best WR's in the league...perhaps it was just the way the scheme was drawn up...but, that seemed like a pretty big hole IMO.

Man Coverage?

What the hell happened to the Zone coverage in the middle? Man Coverage was pretty leaky as well...Guys OPEN making plays in the middle half, I've never even heard their names.


Because Shields was hurt in the first quarter. We tried putting Hayward on Thomas and it was a disaster. So we tried Randall on him and while he struggled mightily he atleast gave our defense a fighting chance.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
The ONLY thing I would change (If I was the DC) was put Shields on Thomas and Randel on Sanders...I don't understand why the rookie was on one of the best WR's in the league...perhaps it was just the way the scheme was drawn up...but, that seemed like a pretty big hole IMO.

Shields left the game in the first quarter with a shoulder injury and didn´t return.
 

armand34

Cheesehead
Joined
May 24, 2010
Messages
2,056
Reaction score
273
Location
The Beach, NJ
Guys, I'm aware Shields left the game in the First QTR, I did watch the game...lol, prior to that Shields was never covering D. Thomas.

I get he left and Rollins left w/ injuries. I get that we were slim on DB's.

What I don't get is, how come our 10 million $ CB was not starting the game against D. Thomas

That's all.
 

easyk83

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 20, 2013
Messages
2,783
Reaction score
280
Guys, I'm aware Shields left the game in the First QTR, I did watch the game...lol, prior to that Shields was never covering D. Thomas.

I get he left and Rollins left w/ injuries. I get that we were slim on DB's.

What I don't get is, how come our 10 million $ CB was not starting the game against D. Thomas

That's all.

Alignment reasons. They usually shade a safety over the top of Randall and keep another over the seam while leaving Shields alone. They probably feel that he's at his best over there.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
Guys, I'm aware Shields left the game in the First QTR, I did watch the game...lol, prior to that Shields was never covering D. Thomas.

The Packers didn´t move their outside corners around. Shields was responsible for Thomas as soon as he lined up on the left side of their offense.
 

armand34

Cheesehead
Joined
May 24, 2010
Messages
2,056
Reaction score
273
Location
The Beach, NJ
i get it, perhaps i'm alone on feeling our top corner should be covering one of the best wide receivers in the league. I feel that makes sense.
 

easyk83

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 20, 2013
Messages
2,783
Reaction score
280
i get it, perhaps i'm alone on feeling our top corner should be covering one of the best wide receivers in the league. I feel that makes sense.

Well you have to consider scheme and where your top corner is more effective. Is Shields markedly less effective on the defensive left than on the defensive right? Is Randall less effective on the defensive right? It's possible that by switching you might degrade both corner positions. Is Shields better on the defensive left than Randall playing that position with help over the top?
 

PackerFanLV

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 8, 2009
Messages
945
Reaction score
61
Location
las vegas
I know an adjustment that mm didn't make when he let the Denver Broncos run the clock out before the half instead of calling a time out giving Aaron Rodgers a chance to get the ball back. I was like WTH MM call time out.
 

armand34

Cheesehead
Joined
May 24, 2010
Messages
2,056
Reaction score
273
Location
The Beach, NJ
another thing that bothers me is...our DLINE was pretty much full strength in this matchup...Peyton never got dirty...I think Clay gave him one hit, but I didn't see the DLINE get much penetration, or open up gaps for the LB's. This game was the perfect measuring stick. They are not 19 points better, but they are definitely better than us.
 

7thFloorRA

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 19, 2011
Messages
2,573
Reaction score
331
Location
Grafton, WI
I truly hope Gunter is active next week. He seemed to be a very good cover corner. I really don't care if he doesn't know all 5,000 pages of Dom's exotic playbook. Here is page 1 of his new playbook... cover #whomever... end of playbook.

Now back to this adjustment thing. I believe yesterday MM said it was not a scheme issue. He was very happy with the scheme because they had 50 offensive plays. That sounds ridiculous to me but he was happy with the scheme and not the execution. I really don't know how you are going to execute a ton better than they did Sunday night given his scheme. 12 looked bad but because he had no one to throw to. Are the wr's suddenly going to get open as if they weren't trying the other night. That seems an awful lot like scheme. We've seen this before (KC during the undefeated season) where a team does its homework and creates the blueprint for shutting down the passing game. They went back to work and eventually adjusted.
 

PackerFanLV

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 8, 2009
Messages
945
Reaction score
61
Location
las vegas
another thing that bothers me is...our DLINE was pretty much full strength in this matchup...Peyton never got dirty...I think Clay gave him one hit, but I didn't see the DLINE get much penetration, or open up gaps for the LB's. This game was the perfect measuring stick. They are not 19 points better, but they are definitely better than us.
Bj raji got push all game. Peyton got rid of the ball to fast. This what happens when db's give free release on man coverage. Mica Hyde got killed so much on the crossing route it was easy money for peyton
 

Half Empty

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 29, 2014
Messages
4,467
Reaction score
599
Bj raji got push all game. Peyton got rid of the ball to fast. This what happens when db's give free release on man coverage. Mica Hyde got killed so much on the crossing route it was easy money for peyton

I understand it's OK for the Pack to try that, too. :)
 
OP
OP
longtimefan

longtimefan

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
25,356
Reaction score
4,086
Location
Milwaukee
Ok what adjustments did you see that were made that caused Denver to lose the Game? was it offense A-rod did not post 78yds passing, (14-22) or was it Manning passing down the middle through out the game 159yds play action passing,or was it 6of 9 throws of 15yds or more by manning, and a sad stat is Packers offense has not averaged over 20pts in the last month, the defense, there not stat I can think of that would be worth post, well maybe one the packers did hit manning 2xs w/o a sack..

My point was posters say they never made adjustments...

I am not claiming that, so I would like people who are claiming that, to prove no adjustments were made
 

Packerlover

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 8, 2014
Messages
669
Reaction score
338
Location
Pacific Ocean
The adjustments I wanted to see after half time to protect Rodgers were 2 tight ends for added protection and Lacy and Kuhn in the back field and to help the running game maybe an offensive linemen in front of lacy with 2 tight ends and run the damn ball!!
 

Packerlover

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 8, 2014
Messages
669
Reaction score
338
Location
Pacific Ocean
My point was posters say they never made adjustments...

I am not claiming that, so I would like people who are claiming that, to prove no adjustments were made
No adjustments were made because the Broncos did the same damn thing on offense and defense they did in the first half and I don't believe we don't have the talent to stop them.
 

Members online

Latest posts

Top