OFFICIAL DEFENSIVE ISSUES THREAD

TJV

Lifelong Packers Fanatic
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
5,389
Reaction score
954
That my fellow Packers fans was basically a shutout by the D! The only points surrendered were the result of the fumble by Cobb. The Vikings certainly don't field a great offense; even so that was much MUCH more like it. The Packers brought a more aggressive attitude from the first play and they did tackle better.

Capers and the coaching staff said it was a two way street. If they wanted a certain type of scheming, they had to step up and make plays and communicate.
I know Raji has talked about not playing the "jet" technique (get after the QB instead of controlling gaps and occupying blockers) as much as last year and Matthews alluded to the fact he's not been pinning his ears back and rushing as much either. I interpret the two-way street comment by Capers as meaning he'll call more aggressive schemes if the players - particularly the DBs - get more assignment sure and "communicate" better. BTW, I think sometimes when they talk about miscommunication it just means someone missed their assignment.
 
OP
OP
Southpaw

Southpaw

Endorphin Junkie
Joined
Sep 8, 2011
Messages
1,164
Reaction score
244
Location
PA
So is everyone still an idiot because they didn't agree with your ******* reasoning on why they would be an idiot...d looked solid what do you have to say...

hindsight is 20/20. How about we do it on a consistent basis now.

You're just going to completely ignore the fact that for the prior 8 weeks we've had a defense resembling swiss cheese. Then suddenly after one week, those days are completely behind us after beating a 2-7 team?

We looked good, now let's do it every week
 

Raptorman

Vikings fan since 1966.
Joined
Sep 1, 2006
Messages
3,168
Reaction score
438
Location
Vero Beach, FL
hindsight is 20/20. How about we do it on a consistent basis now.

You're just going to completely ignore the fact that for the prior 8 weeks we've had a defense resembling swiss cheese. Then suddenly after one week, those days are completely behind us after beating a 2-7 team?

We looked good, now let's do it every week
You are barking up the wrong tree. Everyone know the Packer D is back. After all, they held a rookie QB starting his 3rd game to 190 yards. How did they do it? They blitzed the kid on 74.4% of all his drop backs. Let's see them do that against Manning or Palmer and see what happens. If they win doing that against the Giants and Raiders, then you can call them good. MN receiving corp is not the best either. But that's a moot point. The Packers D is BACK?
 

PackersRS

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 22, 2008
Messages
8,450
Reaction score
969
Location
Porto Alegre, Brazil
Enough with the swearing. I edited the posts, and this one serves as a warning to everyone that has seen this thread. Repeated offenses can lead to a 10 day ban.
 

PackersRS

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 22, 2008
Messages
8,450
Reaction score
969
Location
Porto Alegre, Brazil
You are barking up the wrong tree. Everyone know the Packer D is back. After all, they held a rookie QB starting his 3rd game to 190 yards. How did they do it? They blitzed the kid on 74.4% of all his drop backs. Let's see them do that against Manning or Palmer and see what happens. If they win doing that against the Giants and Raiders, then you can call them good. MN receiving corp is not the best either. But that's a moot point. The Packers D is BACK?
Yep, completely disregard that they lead the league in Ints and Turnovers, and that they're fresh off a championship where the D was dominant, with basically the same roster and coaching staff... And that they're 13th in PPG.

Were they playing as well as last night, or as well as last year? Absolutely not. But people were painting it as an awful defense, and that was ludicrous.
 

Raptorman

Vikings fan since 1966.
Joined
Sep 1, 2006
Messages
3,168
Reaction score
438
Location
Vero Beach, FL
Yep, completely disregard that they lead the league in Ints and Turnovers, and that they're fresh off a championship where the D was dominant, with basically the same roster and coaching staff... And that they're 11th in PPG.

Were they playing as well as last night, or as well as last year? Absolutely not. But people were painting it as an awful defense, and that was ludicrous.
Not ignoring the fact that 6 of those Ints were against rookie QB's that had exactly 5 games of NFL experience behind them when they played the Packers. Or that another 3 came against Denver trying to pass themselves back into the game after being behind by 18 and 25 points. 9 interceptions against teams that have a combined record of 10-26. Yup, I'm impressed. Like I said, if they do against the teams in the next 7 games then you can say they have something.

Points per game. Green Bay is 13th. Teams above them. San Fran, 1st 15.3, Jacksonville, 6th 18.4, Miami and Washington 8th 19.8. Detroit, 20.4, 12th, Packers 20.7 13th, Chicago, 20.8 14th.
 

PackersRS

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 22, 2008
Messages
8,450
Reaction score
969
Location
Porto Alegre, Brazil
Not ignoring the fact that 6 of those Ints were against rookie QB's that had exactly 5 games of NFL experience behind them when they played the Packers. Or that another 3 came against Denver trying to pass themselves back into the game after being behind by 18 and 25 points. 9 interceptions against teams that have a combined record of 10-26. Yup, I'm impressed. Like I said, if they do against the teams in the next 7 games then you can say they have something.

Points per game. Green Bay is 13th. Teams above them. San Fran, 1st 15.3, Jacksonville, 6th 18.4, Miami and Washington 8th 19.8. Detroit, 20.4, 12th, Packers 20.7 13th, Chicago, 20.8 14th.
I can do the same regarding yard, that all teams have to play catch up so the passing yardage gets schewed. You were right that they're 13th in PPG (still very good). They're also 7th in opposite QB rating.

You can make up any excuse that you want but the fact is they lead the league in turnovers and they've been in the TOP 2 in interceptions every year since Capers took over.

But they've probably played a lot of rookies...
 

Croak

Vincit qui patitur
Moderator
Joined
Aug 15, 2010
Messages
6,478
Reaction score
1,154
Location
New Cumberland, PA
Combined records is a deceptive stat. Let's say team a plays 5 loser teams who have lost to losers and wins 4 of them. Now vice versa, lets say team b plays 5 loser teams who happened to play very good opponents and wins 4. Is team a better than team b? They both played teams with losing records. One set, though lost to loser of losers. One set lost to losers of winners. "Combined record" becomes a domino line of what ifs.
 

longtimefan

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
25,356
Reaction score
4,086
Location
Milwaukee
Not ignoring the fact that 6 of those Ints were against rookie QB's that had exactly 5 games of NFL experience behind them when they played the Packers. Or that another 3 came against Denver trying to pass themselves back into the game after being behind by 18 and 25 points. 9 interceptions against teams that have a combined record of 10-26. Yup, I'm impressed. Like I said, if they do against the teams in the next 7 games then you can say they have something.

Points per game. Green Bay is 13th. Teams above them. San Fran, 1st 15.3, Jacksonville, 6th 18.4, Miami and Washington 8th 19.8. Detroit, 20.4, 12th, Packers 20.7 13th, Chicago, 20.8 14th.

Cant fault them for who they have played...
 

Raptorman

Vikings fan since 1966.
Joined
Sep 1, 2006
Messages
3,168
Reaction score
438
Location
Vero Beach, FL
I can do the same regarding yard, that all teams have to play catch up so the passing yardage gets schewed. You were right that they're 13th in PPG (still very good). They're also 7th in opposite QB rating.

You can make up any excuse that you want but the fact is they lead the league in turnovers and they've been in the TOP 2 in interceptions every year since Capers took over.

But they've probably played a lot of rookies...

They do well in interceptions, no doubt about it. But two years ago Packer fans were complaining about how Allen had so many sacks against the Packers it skewed the numbers. We can go round and round on the this all we want. I just wouldn't go saying the Packers defense is up to the standards it was at the end of last year when they made their Super Bowl run. Far from it. And if they don't do something soon, it's going to hurt them. San Fran has a fairly easy schedule over the last 7 games while the Packers appear to have a tougher one. If the Packer want HFA, they can't keep on depending on Rodgers to do it for them every game. For some reason that's hard for Packer fans to accept. I just don't see them going far in the playoffs unless the D starts doing a littler better overall. Turnovers are great. As long as you score off them. Look at the MN-NO championship game. MN had 5 turnovers to the Saints 1, yet it still had to go to overtime for the Saints to win. Out of those 5 turnovers the Saints got 7 points. So yeah, turnovers are great, if you do something with them.
 

longtimefan

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
25,356
Reaction score
4,086
Location
Milwaukee
I'll keep that in mind when we start talking about the Niners.

Why?? You are dismissing their interceptions because of who they played..In my eyes, if your playing rookies, you should dominate them..and they are..

I for one am not going to dismiss a teams record if they played bad teams...
 

PackersRS

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 22, 2008
Messages
8,450
Reaction score
969
Location
Porto Alegre, Brazil
They do well in interceptions, no doubt about it. But two years ago Packer fans were complaining about how Allen had so many sacks against the Packers it skewed the numbers. We can go round and round on the this all we want. I just wouldn't go saying the Packers defense is up to the standards it was at the end of last year when they made their Super Bowl run. Far from it. And if they don't do something soon, it's going to hurt them. San Fran has a fairly easy schedule over the last 7 games while the Packers appear to have a tougher one. If the Packer want HFA, they can't keep on depending on Rodgers to do it for them every game. For some reason that's hard for Packer fans to accept. I just don't see them going far in the playoffs unless the D starts doing a littler better overall. Turnovers are great. As long as you score off them. Look at the MN-NO championship game. MN had 5 turnovers to the Saints 1, yet it still had to go to overtime for the Saints to win. Out of those 5 turnovers the Saints got 7 points. So yeah, turnovers are great, if you do something with them.
Save for the Saints game, the opposing QB has never had a QB rating of 100 or better. Heck, even in that SD game Phillip Rivers had a QB rating of 85.9. So, in today's NFL, where the rules are schewed towards the passing game, a D renders the QB below 100 rating in all but one game, is top 15 in PPG and top 10 in QB rating and #1 in turnovers and it's a struggling defense? You can argue it's not a dominant D, because of the yardage they give and because of their performance on 3rd downs, and it is certainly not performing as well as last year, no doubt. But that's at least a very good D, certainly not a liability as it's painted.

And turnovers are key, with this offense that scores a lot of points and rarely gives turnovers themselves. It's the way the Packers are built.

If they can shore up the miscomunications, which they did last game, the D isn't a problem.
 

longtimefan

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
25,356
Reaction score
4,086
Location
Milwaukee
They do well in interceptions, no doubt about it.

But isnt part of a defensive job, is to to get interceptions?

It is kind like saying..If it wasnt for a St Louis's home runs they wouldnt have won the WS...

hey are doing what they do best
 

Raptorman

Vikings fan since 1966.
Joined
Sep 1, 2006
Messages
3,168
Reaction score
438
Location
Vero Beach, FL
Save for the Saints game, the opposing QB has never had a QB rating of 100 or better. Heck, even in that SD game Phillip Rivers had a QB rating of 85.9. So, in today's NFL, where the rules are schewed towards the passing game, a D renders the QB below 100 rating in all but one game, is top 15 in PPG and top 10 in QB rating and #1 in turnovers and it's a struggling defense? You can argue it's not a dominant D, because of the yardage they give and because of their performance on 3rd downs, and it is certainly not performing as well as last year, no doubt. But that's at least a very good D, certainly not a liability as it's painted.

And turnovers are key, with this offense that scores a lot of points and rarely gives turnovers themselves. It's the way the Packers are built.

If they can shore up the miscomunications, which they did last game, the D isn't a problem.

It's the turnovers that can skew the QB rating as well. For Rivers, each interception was about 10 points roughly on the individual QB rating. So, yes, in the Packers defensive world, interceptions are the key. Without them the Packers D is in the bottom third of defense's. As long as they keep getting the interception they will be fine. As to the team QB rating, each int is worth about 1.25 points on the rating system for the Packer right now. For illustrative purpose only, if the Packer had only 8 interceptions this year the team QB rating would be about 86 or so. Around 23rd in the league. So they are living by the interceptions at this point. Can they keep it up? Good question. History has shown they will. If they don't expect some losses.
 

PackersRS

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 22, 2008
Messages
8,450
Reaction score
969
Location
Porto Alegre, Brazil
It's the turnovers that can skew the QB rating as well. For Rivers, each interception was about 10 points roughly on the individual QB rating. So, yes, in the Packers defensive world, interceptions are the key. Without them the Packers D is in the bottom third of defense's. As long as they keep getting the interception they will be fine. As to the team QB rating, each int is worth about 1.25 points on the rating system for the Packer right now. For illustrative purpose only, if the Packer had only 8 interceptions this year the team QB rating would be about 86 or so. Around 23rd in the league. So they are living by the interceptions at this point. Can they keep it up? Good question. History has shown they will. If they don't expect some losses.
Yeah, they affect the QB rating so much because they're that important, and they don't even take into account defensive TDs, were the Packers also lead the league with 3.

And, like you said, historically you can expect them to keep on coming, because of the talent we have in the secondary, and because of the way the defensive scheme is build on (the ultimate goal for Dom Capers is to stop the run and make the other team one-dimentional, and then to bring perceived pressure and to force QBs to throw into coverage (another reason why Matthews was moved from the blind side to the left, where he's accounted for by the QB). It's not that way for other teams, for the Bears the key thing is to not give up big plays and to be able to generate pressure and sacks with a 4 man front, the Jets prefer to play close coverage and force sacks...).

This Packers D will never be great at tackling, it'll never be great at shutting down opponents, it's not how they operate. Don't get me wrong, they have to do a much better job on 3rd downs and particularly on communication. But they'll always be aggressive, going for the pick and for the fumble, and that leads to some big plays given.
 

Members online

No members online now.

Latest posts

Top