Our 2014 D-Fence has improved

[Carl]

come crunch time "if" we make the play offs, this current defense aint stopping ANY play off caliber team, not a single damn one.

Like the Lions offense? Good chance they'll make it.

 

[Forget Favre]

Sure, you can keep on laughing at my post or keep on being doubtful. That is your choice and we alone are responsible for our thoughts and feelings. It is what it is and I don't see any right or wrong with this issue because I'm just the casual fan and like being that way.
Even though the Vikes is pretty much a cakewalk even before the game, I don't think any team should be underestimated at any time. Both were 2-2 going into this and both entered with big wins.
Fortunately our D did not let them get away with anything and that is two consecutive INTs by two of the most popular ones of the stars on defense. I bet that Julius Peppers never in his life thought that he would ever get to do a Lambeau Leap!
I still think our defense is getting better. I know that some would discount this game but these guys are the pros and if they were really getting paid for what they are worth then there shouldn't have been a beat down such as this.
If we get a chance against Bridgewater, I'm confident that our D-Fence will turn him into a Teddy Bear.
We are on a roll and enjoy the new ride!

 

[GoPGo]

They have allowed only 30 points in the last 10.5 quarters and held explosive Lions and Bears offenses to 13.5 ppg on the road.

Let's make that 40 points in the last 14.5 quarters.

 

[ExpatPacker]

I disagree ThxJack. I think every team has it's moron reporters but if I just compare Chicago's to ours, there's no comparison. I guess it depends on what you are looking at.

I often listen to and read Chicago sports, for one reason because I find their fans amusing. The Bears don't have nearly as many guys reporting on them with little or no real football experience. I love, for instance, listening to McCarren break down a game or play and talk about things from a perspective that he can communicate having played in the NFL. My idea of he## on earth is listening to certain other - I'll not name them all because I know that doesn't go over well here...Packer beat writers.

My other pet-peeve is the total lack of analytical approach to certain things and McGinn is A #1 when it comes to that. A guy like McGinn is in a position to set the record straight with certain stats and player topics, yet he's usually the first to mis-portray something. Guys like McGinn are supposed to look into things at a deeper level than the average fan really wants to. He doesn't and in fact he usually spews the same crap I hear around the water cooler after game days.

I really can't agree with your assessment of McGinn. Listen to his podcast of 9/26 where he does play-by-play analysis of the 6 "drops" by Packer receivers and debunks the view that it was all on the receivers. When you speak of an "analytical approach", meaning the use of certain criteria applied objectively ( I presume), I can't say that I see a single sports analyst out there on Fox, ESPN, CBS or whatnot who would fit the bill. McGinn can and does get quite specific about things. All you need do is take a look at his weekly "Rating the Packers vs X" and he is far more analytical than most, and what he looks for makes sense.

 

[JBlood]

Great play by the defense last night. I was amazed how the front was pressuring Ponder. Very encouraging, but I'll have to see it week in and week out before I'm a believer. I'm happy to admit I was wrong about the defense this week.

 

[AmishMafia]

I put the blame squarely on TT. Poor player selections on defense have been a wreck outside of Matthews. Watch the 4--Count them 4 1st round draft choices the last two years starting on the Vikings tonight. Please don't say they had more holes to fill on their roster compared to ours. We are where we are because the player personnel decisions on the defensive side of the football via the draft have been a mess.

Did you see how Jordy Nelson (not a 1st rd pick) made their 1st round safety (Harrison Smith) look completely stupid on that TD play?

Your comments are not fair. Don't you think that a less talented team that gets an early selection has a better chance of getting a starter? It would seem to be fairly obvious to me. Getting 2 extra first round picks would certainly help - but they had to trade away one of their best offensive players to do that. How did their offense look last night? Should we trade Jordy and Cobb? Tough to get 2 #1 picks.

Let me ask you this, would you rather the Packers lost 42-10 and had 4 starting first round picks? Or win 42-10 and have 2 starting first round picks? (Dix and Datone Jones - not sure Dix started but he did play a lot and looks very good)

 

[AmishMafia]

As far as last night goes, I think the biggest difference was Guion. I am hoping he keeps it up and it wasn't just motivation from playing against his former team. I expected Minny to gain 200 yards running last night, I was very impressed that we shut it down. I hope they keep it up.

 

[JBlood]

One troubling thing about the defense: Morgan Burnett is our leading tackler, and as a group last night the defensive backs combined for 41 of 73 tackles (solo + asst). Linebackers only 16. If you look at the top 40 tacklers in the NFL today 12 are d backs, and the rest are linebackers.

 

[Forderick]

While the defence did play really well last night, lets not forget Ponder is terrible. I think we see a different score with Bridgewater or even cassell in the game.

There were some 3rd down plays were they still can't get a stop but overall from what i was able to watch the defence played well. Yes they did a good job against the run but again there is no reason to believe Ponder was going to beat you, he looked awful , granted the pass rush seems to be the best its been a long time, so that helped.

I still believe they will need turnovers to be good and I hate when a defence relies on turnovers as the means to stop a team. Turnovers are great but should never be relied upon to stop any team.

While I still have my doubts about the defence it is good to see them make some stops. I just think when they go against a physical offence they won't compete( see the Seattle game). just my opinion.

 

[Carl]

I put the blame squarely on TT. Poor player selections on defense have been a wreck outside of Matthews. Watch the 4--Count them 4 1st round draft choices the last two years starting on the Vikings tonight. Please don't say they had more holes to fill on their roster compared to ours. We are where we are because the player personnel decisions on the defensive side of the football via the draft have been a mess.

Just starting for the Vikings means a successful pick? By that reasoning, Perry and Datone are successful picks, along with the rest of the starters who were drafted.

 

[7thFloorRA]

One troubling thing about the defense: Morgan Burnett is our leading tackler, and as a group last night the defensive backs combined for 41 of 73 tackles (solo + asst). Linebackers only 16. If you look at the top 40 tacklers in the NFL today 12 are d backs, and the rest are linebackers.

A lot of those tackles were made close to the line of scrimmage last night by the defensive backs. That stat is bad when they are making all the plays 20 yards down field. I think it is kind of misleading when they are making tackles almost in the box.

 

[TJV]

I believe pressure on the QB has improved this year (so far) vs. last year and I hope the run defense will continue to improve as the season continues. But IMO we should be careful about drawing too many conclusions about the run D based upon last night because they didn't present an effective passing threat. Am I confident the D can do it's part for the team to go deep in the playoffs right now? No. But they have a chance to continually improve as the season goes on.

BTW, I wonder if there's any way they could hypnotize Guion so he believes he's playing the Vikings every game?

 

[GoPGo]

I think what we're seeing so far is a combination of factors translating to a defense that is improving steadily as the season goes on. Our defense has been very good in the scoring column since half time of the Jets game... the best in the NFL, actually. First, major injuries to key players haven't disrupted the unit as of yet. Then you have Peppers becoming more instinctive in a role that is entirely different from anything else he has done. Then you have our plug and play depth at CB complete with veteran experience throughout. And finally the hole at safety has been filled quite admirably by C-D. If this unit continues to stay relatively healthy I only see them getting better and better as the season wears on. Granted, we need some improvement against the run, but I think that will come in due time.

 

[easyk83]

One troubling thing about the defense: Morgan Burnett is our leading tackler, and as a group last night the defensive backs combined for 41 of 73 tackles (solo + asst). Linebackers only 16. If you look at the top 40 tacklers in the NFL today 12 are d backs, and the rest are linebackers.

Depends on context, I noticed a lot of short routes to their receivers which required the safeties to come up and attack ball carriers. I noticed that Morgan Burnett played a very physical aggressive game, probably the most aggressive I've ever seen from him in terms of attacking ball carriers.

 

[Einstein McFly]

I really can't agree with your assessment of McGinn. Listen to his podcast of 9/26 where he does play-by-play analysis of the 6 "drops" by Packer receivers and debunks the view that it was all on the receivers. When you speak of an "analytical approach", meaning the use of certain criteria applied objectively ( I presume), I can't say that I see a single sports analyst out there on Fox, ESPN, CBS or whatnot who would fit the bill. McGinn can and does get quite specific about things. All you need do is take a look at his weekly "Rating the Packers vs X" and he is far more analytical than most, and what he looks for makes sense.

Quoted for truth.

 

[easyk83]

While the defence did play really well last night, lets not forget Ponder is terrible. I think we see a different score with Bridgewater or even cassell in the game.

There were some 3rd down plays were they still can't get a stop but overall from what i was able to watch the defence played well. Yes they did a good job against the run but again there is no reason to believe Ponder was going to beat you, he looked awful , granted the pass rush seems to be the best its been a long time, so that helped.

I still believe they will need turnovers to be good and I hate when a defence relies on turnovers as the means to stop a team. Turnovers are great but should never be relied upon to stop any team.

While I still have my doubts about the defence it is good to see them make some stops. I just think when they go against a physical offence they won't compete( see the Seattle game). just my opinion.

While this is true the basic strategy Capers has followed has been focused on the pass. He's content to let teams gash us on the ground while taking away or limiting the passing game. The results might be ugly at times but so far it's worked. Bend but don't break can be hard to watch but it works. FWIW, in 2010 our celebrated defense was 31 in the league in yards/RA with 4.7, only Buffalo was worse. But we were number 2 in the league for points per game, 2 in the league for sacks and I believe we were number 1 for opposing quarterback passer rating. Be able to pass the ball and stop the pass, that's how championships are won in the modern NFL.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

While this is true the basic strategy Capers has followed has been focused on the pass. He's content to let teams gash us on the ground while taking away or limiting the passing game. The results might be ugly at times but so far it's worked. Bend but don't break can be hard to watch but it works. FWIW, in 2010 our celebrated defense was 31 in the league in yards/RA with 4.7, only Buffalo was worse. But we were number 2 in the league for points per game, 2 in the league for sacks and I believe we were number 1 for opposing quarterback passer rating. Be able to pass the ball and stop the pass, that's how championships are won in the modern NFL.

Good observation, hope this defense will turn out to be as good as the 2010 edition.

 

[easyk83]

Another thought, many forum members on here speculated that the improved play of Dix/Hyde would make Morgan Burnett a better player. So far this has been the case. For the first time since the 2010 season we're seeing safeties aggressively filling up by the line of scrimmage on outside runs and crossing routes where they used to play more back in coverage. Our improved and more physical safety play should pay dividends when we face option type plays and Jet sweeps down the line.

 

[adambr2]

I'm a bit concerned about Clay Matthews really no longer looking like a star player.

He used to be the man on defense, no one else was close. Now performance-wise, he's more or less, just another guy.

I wasn't concerned about this after a week or 2, but now we're about 1/3rd of the way into the season with him more or less being a non-factor.

His sacks are way down and PFF grades him out negatively so far for the season. Is it having anything to do with the way he's being used this season?

 

[GoPGo]

I'm a bit concerned about Clay Matthews really no longer looking like a star player.

He used to be the man on defense, no one else was close. Now performance-wise, he's more or less, just another guy.

I wasn't concerned about this after a week or 2, but now we're about 1/3rd of the way into the season with him more or less being a non-factor.

His sacks are way down and PFF grades him out negatively so far for the season. Is it having anything to do with the way he's being used this season?

Sacks aren't the only, or even the best measure of a pass rush. Sacks are great, but consistent pressure and forcing the QB to make bad decisions is what matters most. He, Peppers and most of the DL have been doing a pretty good job of that. And PFF grades are of no concern to me unless someone can give me a good reason why they should.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Sacks aren't the only, or even the best measure of a pass rush. Sacks are great, but consistent pressure and forcing the QB to make bad decisions is what matters most. He, Peppers and most of the DL have been doing a pretty good job of that. And PFF grades are of no concern to me unless someone can give me a good reason why they should.

While Matthews hasn't produced a lot of sacks he leads the team in pressures.

 

[mradtke66]

And PFF grades are of no concern to me unless someone can give me a good reason why they should.

I like the grades because they seem to give a more accurate overall measure of how good a player is at execution and following instructions. I like the approach of "outcome doesn't matter, assignment does" and "a single amazing play doesn't offset 50 below average plays" and the inverse "one bonehead play doesn't ruin 50 really good plays."

 

[OCBP]

Did you see how Jordy Nelson (not a 1st rd pick) made their 1st round safety (Harrison Smith) look completely stupid on that TD play?

Your comments are not fair. Don't you think that a less talented team that gets an early selection has a better chance of getting a starter? It would seem to be fairly obvious to me. Getting 2 extra first round picks would certainly help - but they had to trade away one of their best offensive players to do that. How did their offense look last night? Should we trade Jordy and Cobb? Tough to get 2 #1 picks.

Let me ask you this, would you rather the Packers lost 42-10 and had 4 starting first round picks? Or win 42-10 and have 2 starting first round picks? (Dix and Datone Jones - not sure Dix started but he did play a lot and looks very good)

No. I would prefer that our 1st and 2nd draft choices have an impact. Dix will be a very good player. I have stated such.

Jones--Certainly, the jury is still out. For sure on being an impact player. Response?

 

[OCBP]

Just starting for the Vikings means a successful pick? By that reasoning, Perry and Datone are successful picks, along with the rest of the starters who were drafted.

No sure what that means? Both Perry and Jones are rotated not necessarily starters. By the way, did either start last year? Now the injury rationalization comes--Right?

 

[OCBP]

I'm a bit concerned about Clay Matthews really no longer looking like a star player.

He used to be the man on defense, no one else was close. Now performance-wise, he's more or less, just another guy.

I wasn't concerned about this after a week or 2, but now we're about 1/3rd of the way into the season with him more or less being a non-factor.

His sacks are way down and PFF grades him out negatively so far for the season. Is it having anything to do with the way he's being used this season?

Matthews is a stud. Bigger issues than Clay.