1. Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!

    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers. You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Sign Up or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!
    Dismiss Notice

Packers Defense in 2006

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by Fizz, May 1, 2006.

  1. Fizz

    Fizz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2006
    Messages:
    14
    Ratings:
    +0
    The Packers had the 7th ranked defense in the NFL in 2005.

    Now add Kendrick Allen, Charles Woodson, AJ Hawk and Abdul Hodge!

    Whooo man ! The Packer "D" will "ROCK in 2006"
     
  2. GakkofNorway

    GakkofNorway Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,249
    Ratings:
    +0
    who is Kendrick Allen?
     
  3. DePack

    DePack Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    3,904
    Ratings:
    +1
    Kendrick Allen? He'll never see the field. Maybe you mean Pickett!
     
  4. P@ck66

    P@ck66 Banned Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    2,207
    Ratings:
    +0
    What is this "ranked 7th defense stuff"...?

    I find it hard to believe that the Packers defense was ranked 7th last year....!
     
  5. Fizz

    Fizz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2006
    Messages:
    14
    Ratings:
    +0
    You're not paying attention gakk...
     
  6. Packman5

    Packman5 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2006
    Messages:
    89
    Ratings:
    +0
    the packers D was 7th las year but they base it on yards allowed per game cus we were 23rd in rush D which is why it seems hard to believe we were 7th
     
  7. pyledriver80

    pyledriver80 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,391
    Ratings:
    +0
    Kendrick Allen? Abdul Hodge? I mean I like Hodge but I doubt he even starts
     
  8. musccy

    musccy Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    1,854
    Ratings:
    +1
  9. musccy

    musccy Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    1,854
    Ratings:
    +1
    Hodge, Hawk, Pickett, Marquand, and Woodson are all additions that will very likely start, or at least significantly contribute...and all are at least on par with, if not upgrades from last year at the respective position. There is reason to be excited about this defense!
     
  10. TOPackerFan

    TOPackerFan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2004
    Messages:
    2,084
    Ratings:
    +0
    The #7 ranking was quite inflated last year. The real number I'd like to see get better is the scoring defense. If we had the #7 defense in terms of giving up points, I'd be ecstatic.
     
  11. tonytokes

    tonytokes Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2006
    Messages:
    82
    Ratings:
    +0
    Exactly. To me -- and everyone else for that matter -- this statistic is a direct reflection on how porous our defense really was. When you're playing clock management , running time off for the last half of the game and trying to hold onto a lead, it's pretty hard to put up a lot of yards.

    That said, the optimist in me really sees things changing a lot this year. Yes, a lot of young player mistakes are inevitable, but just more intensity, more FOOTBALL and more tackling on the defensive side of the ball is coming. The past four-five years have been depressing to watch. Forget about results for a second, the Packers' D played as a direct reflection of their leader (which is what leadership is all about): timid and calculated with zero intensity. That, my friends, is the antithesis of NFL defense. :arrow:
     
  12. Packnic

    Packnic Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Messages:
    2,454
    Ratings:
    +6
    great call the number 7 ranking was an average of the number 1 ranked pass defense and the number 23 rush defense ... but like tony said its just a reflection of how pourus it was.... we could potentially add charles woodson and drop from 1st pass defense. weird

    we will be better this year...
     
  13. DePack

    DePack Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    3,904
    Ratings:
    +1
    We were #1 against the pass also because we were behind most of the time. Teams were running on us.
     
  14. Fizz

    Fizz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2006
    Messages:
    14
    Ratings:
    +0
    Are you serious or delerious?
     
  15. DePack

    DePack Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    3,904
    Ratings:
    +1
    Great...we got another tough guy aboard. My day just keeps getting better :roll:
     
  16. tonytokes

    tonytokes Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2006
    Messages:
    82
    Ratings:
    +0
    He's serious.

    It's true. Our pass defense was so good (statistically) because teams weren't passing against us in the second half. Time management, it's pretty obvious and been noted by people with more "expertise" than DePack and some noob (me) on a Packer forum. :lol:

    If we had leads in games that number would have been horrendous yet we obviously would have won more games.

    Yards, ehh... is tough to use as a direct correlation to effectiveness of a defense. So many factors come into play. As someone said about, scoring is the real indicator (also skewed by the Packer's inability to run up the scoreboard leading teams to not have to push as much, obviously).
     
  17. tonytokes

    tonytokes Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2006
    Messages:
    82
    Ratings:
    +0
    I got your back, bro. :p
     
  18. DePack

    DePack Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    3,904
    Ratings:
    +1
    Thanks Tony or should we call you tokes? I like that better :wink:
     
  19. Fizz

    Fizz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2006
    Messages:
    14
    Ratings:
    +0

    Tony, how about giving us a breakdown on the top 10 defenses and how they fared statistically with the lead and when they were behind in 2005.
     
  20. tromadz

    tromadz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Ratings:
    +3
    Our defense was great last year, except in takeaways. we didnt force nearly enough turnovers.

    THat should change this year.
     
  21. tonytokes

    tonytokes Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2006
    Messages:
    82
    Ratings:
    +0
    I could, I suppose, but the crux is that it comes down to this: When do quarterbacks throw for over 400 yards and five touchdowns?

    When they're killing a team or when it's a high-scoring shootout?

    There's an unwritten in the league that says you slow it down (unless you're Martz) when you're up big. The teams with average defenses typically put up more offensive production from a yardage standpoint. Teams with average offenses (Bears, etc) yield less yardage because of the opposing teams lack of need to run up the score. The Steelers defense is good but it's made great because of the way their offense controls the ball and never really gets up by a ton of points, just wins games the good ol' fashion way.

    You only have to win by 1... not 30. :p
     
  22. tonytokes

    tonytokes Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2006
    Messages:
    82
    Ratings:
    +0
    *cough*... tokes... *ahem* works :lol: 8)
     
  23. Zero2Cool

    Zero2Cool I own a website

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2004
    Messages:
    11,903
    Ratings:
    +8
    *cough*... tokes... *ahem* works :lol: 8)[/quote:1h5kd0q9]

    np tony...


    We weren't behind that bad, geez.
     
  24. tonytokes

    tonytokes Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2006
    Messages:
    82
    Ratings:
    +0
    *cough*... tokes... *ahem* works :lol: 8)[/quote:2eehgff3]

    np tony...


    We weren't behind that bad, geez.[/quote:2eehgff3]

    for sure and maybe i exaggerated a bit but i think the point is still the same. conceptually, it definitely makes sense.
     
  25. warhawk

    warhawk Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2005
    Messages:
    1,922
    Ratings:
    +38
    If, in fact, our goal is to get back into the playoffs and in SB contention again our defense needed much upgrading and IMO they got it.

    No playoff team has the 26th ranked rushing defense. It doesn't happen. You have to be able to shut down the run so you KNOW they are going to pass.

    Playoff teams prey on their opponents weakness'. They are GOOD enough to be ABLE to prey on their opponents weakness'.

    Playoff teams have depth. Our starting defense was marginal in many spots let alone depth.

    For example, what would have happened if Al Harris got hurt last year. I tell you what, moving Trom's boy over to #1, and God knows who to #2, would NOT HAVE BEEN PRETTY.

    We went from a OC's dream to a nighmare.

    From a team soft against the run and holes in the secondary if a pass completion was needed for a first to a:

    never stop working line, athletic and quick LB's, two hellacious cover corners, and db's that will tatoo your a$$.

    I doubt this year we will be watching Mr. Favre over on the sidelines with his arms folded while the other team moves the chains just enough for a first or far enough for those last second freaking field goals.

    This group is bonafide.
     

Share This Page