Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Mike Daniels could propel the Packers defense
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="DoddPower" data-source="post: 449065" data-attributes="member: 809"><p></p><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman'"><span style="font-size: 12px">Well, I've certainly addressed this point several times since. I didn't necessary mean that I would rather much less interceptions, or that a team couldn't have a ton of interceptions <u>and</u> other forms of defensive stops. As I've said several times now, I'm speaking to a cumulative effect. Play better on the majority of the snaps when not getting interceptions, i.e, more 3rd down stops, more sacks, more three and outs, all of which go along with better tackling, communication, etc., and the end result would be more total defensive stops and less opportunities for the opposing offense to score. A lot of interceptions are great, but solid all around defense will not only lead to more stops, but plenty of interceptions as well, such as the 49'er's defense last season. Sure, the Packer's got a lot of interceptions, but they weren't very good otherwise. Clearly not the worst as some have tried to say I've implied, but definitely not very good. I want my team to be more than "not the worst," or even average.</span></span></p><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman'"><span style="font-size: 12px">I referenced some statistics, many including yards admittedly, but some things simply don't show up in the statistics. The Giants playoff game is a perfect example. Offense is struggling and the Defense was needed to finally pick up some of the slack. Before the end of the half, they allow a horrible draw play putting them in position to attempt a hailmary. SOMEHOW, the hailmary was completed. That's two back to back horrible defenses plays in the biggest game of the season. A fundamentally sound championship defense cannot allow things like that to happen, even with an offense like the Packer's. Those two plays epitomized the Packer's defensive season, to me. Or perhaps the end of the Chiefs game when the Packer's defense needed to get a stop on obvious running situations but gave up embarrassing first downs negating any chance for the offense to take the field to attempt to win the game. Those outside runs to Walden's side were embarrassing. Once again, a time when we truly needed the defense to step up and they did not. Or maybe even the Charger's game when Vincent Jackson absolutely ABUSED the defense for 3 TD's and several big plays. Things like this are what I was referring to what I made statements such as "I know what I saw and it was a bad defense." Statistics don't always provide the full picture. The defense had some MAJOR flaws that seemed to be exposed at the worst of times. I suppose I would say the defense wasn't very "clutch" last season.</span></span></p><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman'"><span style="font-size: 12px">I agree that yards allowed isn't the most important factor to consider when rating a defense, but they can't be completely ignored, either. I'll set an arbitrary rating (weight) of 70% to points allowed and 30% to yards. (19 * .70) + (32 * .30) = ~ 23. So, using my arbitrary weighted calculation (which could easily be modified as one sees fit) shows that that Packer's were the 23rd best defense. That's similar to the 21st ranking that Burke calculated. I look forward to reading through his article as time allows to gain a different perspective. But still, a defensive ranking anywhere in the 20's just isn't good to me in any way. The fact that there are teams even worse doesn't reassure me at all either.</span></span></p><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman'"><span style="font-size: 12px">I also agree that the defense isn't that far away from being good again. Hopefully that hasn't been the perception of my posts. I love the moves that have been made and fully expect players that regressed to return to form. However, I've been discussing last seasons performance. For whatever reason, several players did not play to their expectations last season and the story has now been written. It's great to talk about the future, but the past can't be overlooked. I've stated before that a significantly improved pass rush will change the entire dynamic of this defense. Most others say the same thing. I expect the off season moves to do just that, unless some of the players such as Perry and Worthy flop. I don't think they will. It's just unfortunate that the defense couldn't have been any better in a season in which we could have won the Super Bowl again.</span></span></p><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: 'times new roman'"><span style="font-size: 12px">Re: players sitting out such as Mathews, Williams, Woodson, etc. I'm certainly not saying you're incorrect, but I don't remember this happening much. I know Mathew's was out a few times due to injuries and brief substitutions, but for the most part, I remember those guys player the entire game. Did I miss an article or a reference to the contrary? My memory isn't the greatest, but I just don't recall our key defensive players sitting out nearly as much as you suggested. It seemed just like normal substitutions and "breathers" to me.</span></span></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="DoddPower, post: 449065, member: 809"] [FONT=times new roman][SIZE=3][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=times new roman][SIZE=3]Well, I've certainly addressed this point several times since. I didn't necessary mean that I would rather much less interceptions, or that a team couldn't have a ton of interceptions [U]and[/U] other forms of defensive stops. As I've said several times now, I'm speaking to a cumulative effect. Play better on the majority of the snaps when not getting interceptions, i.e, more 3rd down stops, more sacks, more three and outs, all of which go along with better tackling, communication, etc., and the end result would be more total defensive stops and less opportunities for the opposing offense to score. A lot of interceptions are great, but solid all around defense will not only lead to more stops, but plenty of interceptions as well, such as the 49'er's defense last season. Sure, the Packer's got a lot of interceptions, but they weren't very good otherwise. Clearly not the worst as some have tried to say I've implied, but definitely not very good. I want my team to be more than "not the worst," or even average.[/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=times new roman][SIZE=3]I referenced some statistics, many including yards admittedly, but some things simply don't show up in the statistics. The Giants playoff game is a perfect example. Offense is struggling and the Defense was needed to finally pick up some of the slack. Before the end of the half, they allow a horrible draw play putting them in position to attempt a hailmary. SOMEHOW, the hailmary was completed. That's two back to back horrible defenses plays in the biggest game of the season. A fundamentally sound championship defense cannot allow things like that to happen, even with an offense like the Packer's. Those two plays epitomized the Packer's defensive season, to me. Or perhaps the end of the Chiefs game when the Packer's defense needed to get a stop on obvious running situations but gave up embarrassing first downs negating any chance for the offense to take the field to attempt to win the game. Those outside runs to Walden's side were embarrassing. Once again, a time when we truly needed the defense to step up and they did not. Or maybe even the Charger's game when Vincent Jackson absolutely ABUSED the defense for 3 TD's and several big plays. Things like this are what I was referring to what I made statements such as "I know what I saw and it was a bad defense." Statistics don't always provide the full picture. The defense had some MAJOR flaws that seemed to be exposed at the worst of times. I suppose I would say the defense wasn't very "clutch" last season.[/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=times new roman][SIZE=3]I agree that yards allowed isn't the most important factor to consider when rating a defense, but they can't be completely ignored, either. I'll set an arbitrary rating (weight) of 70% to points allowed and 30% to yards. (19 * .70) + (32 * .30) = ~ 23. So, using my arbitrary weighted calculation (which could easily be modified as one sees fit) shows that that Packer's were the 23rd best defense. That's similar to the 21st ranking that Burke calculated. I look forward to reading through his article as time allows to gain a different perspective. But still, a defensive ranking anywhere in the 20's just isn't good to me in any way. The fact that there are teams even worse doesn't reassure me at all either.[/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=times new roman][SIZE=3]I also agree that the defense isn't that far away from being good again. Hopefully that hasn't been the perception of my posts. I love the moves that have been made and fully expect players that regressed to return to form. However, I've been discussing last seasons performance. For whatever reason, several players did not play to their expectations last season and the story has now been written. It's great to talk about the future, but the past can't be overlooked. I've stated before that a significantly improved pass rush will change the entire dynamic of this defense. Most others say the same thing. I expect the off season moves to do just that, unless some of the players such as Perry and Worthy flop. I don't think they will. It's just unfortunate that the defense couldn't have been any better in a season in which we could have won the Super Bowl again.[/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=times new roman][SIZE=3]Re: players sitting out such as Mathews, Williams, Woodson, etc. I'm certainly not saying you're incorrect, but I don't remember this happening much. I know Mathew's was out a few times due to injuries and brief substitutions, but for the most part, I remember those guys player the entire game. Did I miss an article or a reference to the contrary? My memory isn't the greatest, but I just don't recall our key defensive players sitting out nearly as much as you suggested. It seemed just like normal substitutions and "breathers" to me.[/SIZE][/FONT] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Members online
gopkrs
Latest posts
Most hated teams outside of the division
Latest: Thirteen Below
2 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
2024 Round 7, pick 245: Michael Pratt, QB
Latest: gopkrs
11 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
2024 Round 7, pick 255 (compensatory): Kalen King, CB
Latest: Dantés
38 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
2024 Round 6, pick 202: Travis Glover, OT
Latest: Dantés
45 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
The 11th Annual Amish Draft Contest 2024
Latest: Thirteen Below
45 minutes ago
Draft Talk
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Mike Daniels could propel the Packers defense
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top