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
NFC North 2025
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="Voyageur" data-source="post: 1075592" data-attributes="member: 17953"><p>Wooden did look good. It was easy to overlook him the way Parsons played.</p><p></p><p>The Packers are stellar against the longer passing games but weak against the short routes because we use a lot of nickel back and a 4-man rush. That leaves only two linebackers and they're not able to cover the entire field from sideline to sideline and need to lean towards outside containment to stop the pitches and outside runs. That means that we're fair game under 10 yards from tackle to tackle. Since the Packers are also #2 in hurries, it's an indicator that teams realize that they need to get rid of the ball sooner and know the only routes they can use effectively are the short routes.</p><p></p><p>To verify this fact consider we only have 2 INTs and are giving up the least amount of yards per pass attempt in the league indicating the routes are shorter and safer. We're also #2 in defending against passes over 20 yards and have only one thrown over 40 yards against us. This is accredited to the nickel back coverage.</p><p></p><p>We won't have as many sacks as a lot of teams because opposing QBs are getting rid of the ball sooner, and the shorter routes are often the primary routes against us as opposed to be the check down routes. Add in the fact that we are 11th in sacks and you get the picture that the teams we play know that playing the longer game against us is suicide and plan accordingly.</p><p></p><p>It also is a good indicator as to why so many opposition QBs look like they're having great games. They aren't being saddled with finding ways to hang onto the ball to get those long completions. You don't need to be a HOF QB to play the short game. I think that was evidenced by how well Flacco played against us with Cincinnati after only getting a couple of days of work preparing for the game. Our porous middle offered the Bengals the opportunity to play the short game that an experienced QB can handle even if he's not that good.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Voyageur, post: 1075592, member: 17953"] Wooden did look good. It was easy to overlook him the way Parsons played. The Packers are stellar against the longer passing games but weak against the short routes because we use a lot of nickel back and a 4-man rush. That leaves only two linebackers and they're not able to cover the entire field from sideline to sideline and need to lean towards outside containment to stop the pitches and outside runs. That means that we're fair game under 10 yards from tackle to tackle. Since the Packers are also #2 in hurries, it's an indicator that teams realize that they need to get rid of the ball sooner and know the only routes they can use effectively are the short routes. To verify this fact consider we only have 2 INTs and are giving up the least amount of yards per pass attempt in the league indicating the routes are shorter and safer. We're also #2 in defending against passes over 20 yards and have only one thrown over 40 yards against us. This is accredited to the nickel back coverage. We won't have as many sacks as a lot of teams because opposing QBs are getting rid of the ball sooner, and the shorter routes are often the primary routes against us as opposed to be the check down routes. Add in the fact that we are 11th in sacks and you get the picture that the teams we play know that playing the longer game against us is suicide and plan accordingly. It also is a good indicator as to why so many opposition QBs look like they're having great games. They aren't being saddled with finding ways to hang onto the ball to get those long completions. You don't need to be a HOF QB to play the short game. I think that was evidenced by how well Flacco played against us with Cincinnati after only getting a couple of days of work preparing for the game. Our porous middle offered the Bengals the opportunity to play the short game that an experienced QB can handle even if he's not that good. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Members online
Heyjoe4
tynimiller
monte smith
Latest posts
H
Prior to Training Camp - Predicting the 53 Man Roster
Latest: Heyjoe4
2 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
H
Christian Watson signs a 4 year 110m extension
Latest: Heyjoe4
10 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
2026 Roster Thread - Semi-Live
Latest: tynimiller
19 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
H
Josh Jacobs facing charges…
Latest: Heyjoe4
39 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
H
Cam Achord new ST coach - Fire him
Latest: Heyjoe4
41 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
NFC North 2025
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
