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!
  2. Announcement is LIVE: Read the Forum Post

Seattle defense fast approaching

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by Heatherthepackgirl, Jan 7, 2008.

  1. Pack93z

    Pack93z You retired too? .... Not me. I'm in my prime

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2005
    Messages:
    4,855
    Ratings:
    +22
    And we are the ones underestimating.. yep that is the ticket. :roll:
     
  2. Zombieslayer

    Zombieslayer Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2006
    Messages:
    4,338
    Ratings:
    +0
    I'm guessing the reason for blitzing heavily is experimental. We learned that to beat Dallas, you have to blitz. MM is probably also thinking the same thing with the Pats.

    So it's a good thing to work on blitz timings and work out the kinks in advance.
     
  3. Obi1

    Obi1 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2005
    Messages:
    1,110
    Ratings:
    +0
    YES I AM disappointed! I think we should fire TT and MM and hire MT and TM.

    No seriously, YOU were NOT looked at as crazy, nuts, or unrealistic. They thought I was.

    I could have predicted a 13-3 and gotten the same kind of reaction but why stop there? Thus, the 16-0.

    But, I am now predicting a Packer win over Seattle and a Cowboys loss.

    So, lets PLAY ON!
     
  4. Zombieslayer

    Zombieslayer Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2006
    Messages:
    4,338
    Ratings:
    +0
    I'm predicting Packers beat Seattle by double digits.

    I also predict that your #1 student goes over to the Dark Side. I know you really believe in the kid, but there's something about him I just don't like. I'd keep a closer eye on him if I were you.
     
  5. Obi1

    Obi1 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2005
    Messages:
    1,110
    Ratings:
    +0


    Wasn't this a story that was told... Long ago, in a galaxy far far away?

    I believe you! On both acccounts!
     
  6. all about da packers

    all about da packers Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    7,033
    Ratings:
    +0
    Al Harris is the "other" guy.

    "He sounds a lot like our #2 in Kelly Jennings"... I somehow doubt that Kelly Jennings is even in Harris' league. :)

    I'm sure Harris is up to the task of covering Branch. :thumbsup:



    This is where our young CBs will be tested. Jarret Bush has great ability, and has gone up against some very talented WRs (Calvin Johnson, for example). Bush has risen to the challenge on those occasions, but then he has also made mistakes covering other WRs that have been costly. Generally though, I'd say Bush's play has been more good than bad.

    Then there is also CB Tramon Williams, a young free agent we signed this off-season that has deceptive speed. He can run, and has been solid in coverage when used. For some reason though, he hasn't been used a whole lot until the end of the season. Even when he did see extended action, I don't think I remember Tramon Williams making a mistake in coverage all season, which says a lot about him considering how young he is.

    More importantly, the Packers have tried something new in the last regular season game. Against the Lions, the Packers made their starting FS Nick Collins the nickel back, replacing him with a rookie FS Aaron Rouse. Don't think this weakens the backfield, because Rouse is 6'4, and has shown a nose for the ball this season (2 INTs in two starts). Collins has great speed, if I'm not mistaken he ran the 40 in around 4.35 seconds. So it isn't as if the Packers have no one that can match-up with Burleson's speed.


    Yes, then there is James Jones, the rookie WR that was second amongst rookies in catches (47), and had almost 700 yards receiving (676 to be exact).

    Not to mention K-Rob, who came on really strong the last game of the season, and Ruvell Martin, a 6'4 WR that has been linked to having Randy Moss like abilities, minus the blazing speed (Ruvell has deceptive speed none-the-less).

    Of course then there is our TE Donald Lee, who had 48 receptions for almost 600 yards (585 to be exact). I'm sure Tatupu will have to be on his game to cover Lee well, and that will limit Tatupu's utilization as a blitzing LBer.
     
  7. Obi1

    Obi1 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2005
    Messages:
    1,110
    Ratings:
    +0
  8. Danreb

    Danreb Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2006
    Messages:
    574
    Ratings:
    +0
    If it was a 4.3, I would've noticed, and Sanders would probably have given Rouse every chance to win the starting job. I'm pretty sure he ran like a 4.6.
     
  9. HawkBeliever

    HawkBeliever Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2008
    Messages:
    22
    Ratings:
    +0
    Umm, not that it actually means anything, but your Yahoo link disagrees with you by saying that the Hawks have a better defense than the Packers.
     
  10. Zombieslayer

    Zombieslayer Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2006
    Messages:
    4,338
    Ratings:
    +0
    I don't understand why Cris Carter said this:
    Then he gave the advantage to Sea. Huh?

    Then he gave the wild card advantage to Seattle, mentioning Shaun Alexander. The thing is, I'll gladly admit Alexander was the best player in the entire NFL in '05. In '07, he's a shell of the player he once was and I don't see him making much of a difference.

    I'll concede Seattle having the better D though. Seattle's D is the reason they're in the Playoffs. However, even this I say with a big fat asterisk. Keep in mind, there are really only 2 stats that matter in the NFL - Points For and Points Against. Seattle and GB both have 291 PA.
     
  11. HawkBeliever

    HawkBeliever Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2008
    Messages:
    22
    Ratings:
    +0
    I did think the Alexander mention was kind of odd too. We have been waiting 2 years for him to get back to some semblence of his 05 form. It doesn't look like its gonna happen. Especially for an RB past the age of 30...
     
  12. Packerfan4Life

    Packerfan4Life Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2007
    Messages:
    144
    Ratings:
    +0
    He got that money and decided he didn't really need to try anymore. My 2nd least favorite player in the NFL, I love watching him self-tackle for a one yard gain.
     
  13. MarkAshton

    MarkAshton Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2008
    Messages:
    20
    Ratings:
    +0
    That last comment had me laughing.I'd expect Packers fans to be pretty educated about the game so I'm surprised to see a silly statemetn like that. So suddently the golden rule of defense wins championships is now somehow obsolete? I doubt very much that the Packers are dumb enough to underestimate the Seahawks defense but if they do they're going to be...rudely awakened.

    I watched every Seahawks game this year and I can tell you that their D is good. They played a pretty weak schedule so there's good reason to be a little skeptical. But you can only play the hand you're dealt. If they had the offense they had two years ago when they went to the Superbowl they'd be unstoppable. You are right in that the Hawks offense is potentially their achilles heal. They'll score about the Packers but will probably generally score quickly and hand the ball back to Farve. That's bad for lots of reasons but mostly because the defense will tend to wear out. We'll see. Hawks 24, Pack 17.
     
  14. Zombieslayer

    Zombieslayer Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2006
    Messages:
    4,338
    Ratings:
    +0
    Did you bother reading my post?

    Wait, don't answer. I'll answer for you. No, you didn't. Or maybe you have a bad comprehension of the English language. If English is your second language, then my apologies.

    I'll reword this to make it easier for someone who speaks English as a second language. The Seattle D is good, but the trend in 2007 is that good O beats good D.
     
  15. MarkAshton

    MarkAshton Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2008
    Messages:
    20
    Ratings:
    +0
    If this is the one game you're not worried about then you're going to be a very nervous man come Saturday. They don't continually blitz...the LB's generally fall back into coverage but because they're so fast they have a lot of flexibility to fake blitz and drop back into coverage and still stay on the man or, when they do blitz, their speed enables them to slip past blockers and smash QB's. Kearney and Peterson are both animals. I guarantee that both will at least knock Farve on his butt a few times and will likely sack him a time or two. Seattle's secondary was very...mediocre last year. They got burned for big plays many times. This year they have rarely been badly burned. The teams that do score tend to do so by throwing a lot of short to medium range passes. I haven't watched Farvre enough to see how fast he can get rid of a pass but that only works if there's a man open.

    Bottom line is that the Seahawks haven't allowed a lot of points this year. Even including their last game where most of the D rested and they gave up 44 points they tied the Pack in points allowed, tied for 6th at 18 points/game. If you throw out the last game then the points/game average for the season was 16.6. My prediction: Hawks 24, Pack 17.
     
  16. MarkAshton

    MarkAshton Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2008
    Messages:
    20
    Ratings:
    +0
    I didn't mean to offend you. But yes I did read your post. I was disagreeing with your leap of faith that in 2007 good O beats good D. When all is said and done, defense is the key to winning championships. I suppose one could argue that New England might prove that to be false but they haven't one it all yet...and have an underrated defense. ;)
     
  17. Packerfan4Life

    Packerfan4Life Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2007
    Messages:
    144
    Ratings:
    +0
    But good offense does beat good defense...look at the top 2 seeds in the AFC and NFC...NE, Dallas, Indy, GB. 1, 2, 3, and 4 respectively in PPG. A dominant offense, which these 4 teams have, translates to being on the field more, resulting in less time of possession for the opposing team, hence, fewer chances for them to score. Look at last years super bowl for even more evidence. The colts, who all year had a suspect defense but powerhouse offense, against the bears, who all year had a suspect offense but powerhouse defense. Colts win. And don't tell me it's because Rex Grossman's not a super bowl QB, because neither is Trent Dilfer or Brad Johnson, and they both have heavy hands. Good offense DOES beat good defense, because a good offense translates to a good defense more often than not. Both of these teams have good defenses, it's just that GB's offense is more balanced and explosive.
     
  18. Zombieslayer

    Zombieslayer Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2006
    Messages:
    4,338
    Ratings:
    +0
    Mark - No prob. :)

    The game of football changes so much. In the past, you would be correct. Defense won championships. But this decade has been different. Solid Os usually beat solid Ds in SBs.

    Keep in mind - the Packers and the Seahawks both allowed the same number of points. That is in all seriousness the stat that really matters when judging a D.

    The Packers on the other hand have a more balanced O. Like I said elsewhere, in '05, Shaun Alexander was the best player in the NFL. Today, he's barely a shell of what he was. You all will be forced to pass. I like Hasselback, but can he carry the entire O against a well-balanced D, a D that allowed the same number of points you guys allowed?

    We have a better O, a better ST, and about the same D. Your Coach is excellent, but our Coach got runner up for Coach of the Year.

    Sure, anything can happen. But as a betting man, I failed to find someone to bet against this week, and that's giving Seattle points too. This was the only time this year I couldn't find someone to bet.
     
  19. Zombieslayer

    Zombieslayer Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2006
    Messages:
    4,338
    Ratings:
    +0
    The thing is, you can't throw out games. I'd love to throw out that 2nd Bears game. That game will give me nightmares for years to come.

    Against Dallas, we gave up a lot of points. Our #2 sack man and our Pro Bowl CB were both out. I'd like to throw out that game.

    Against the Lions, we rested a lot of folks on both sides of the ball and still won easily.

    Our D = Your D. 291 to 291.
     
  20. DarkaneRules

    DarkaneRules Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2007
    Messages:
    536
    Ratings:
    +0
    The Seahawks also have another good RB Morris and he has had a pretty successful year so I have heard.

    After watching the Dallas game, I became more confident in our team despite the loss because I started to get how our lines stack up against others this season. The X factor is the turnovers. They hurt us in Dallas and destroyed us for the Bears. The 2nd Bears game had a lot to do with the conditions and the way it affected our players especially the young ones. However, I think our lines have to continue to come together because it is all about those match ups up front. If we want our style of offense to be successful against the Seahawks, then we cannot have Brett pressured. If we have our starters in there then I think we'll be fine.
     
  21. BCheezy

    BCheezy Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2008
    Messages:
    46
    Ratings:
    +0
    Tatupu is never a blitzing LBer. He covers and run stuffs, that is his knack. He has one sack on the season. I didn't really expect you to know that, just throwing it out there. Peterson and Kerney are the sacks.
     
  22. Obi1

    Obi1 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2005
    Messages:
    1,110
    Ratings:
    +0
    Ok I am confused... IF defense is going to win this game, Packers defense is rated slightly higher than the Seahawks and IF you throw out the Bears game, Packers scoring stats also look better. What's the point? Besides, how many of the Packers points allowed were not given up by the defense? How many points followed a big return or a turnover in their territory?

    I know, lets look at the yardage stats... THEY tell a better story of how strong each defense is... And the Packers win THAT one too!

    Gee, given the fact that Packers have a better offense and an overall better defense, AND you said DEFENSE wins championships... The Packers ought to win this one handily... RIGHT?
     
  23. BCheezy

    BCheezy Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2008
    Messages:
    46
    Ratings:
    +0
    Throw in the playoff experience factor. Also, what does the Pack D have that the Hawk D doesn't?
     
  24. Obi1

    Obi1 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2005
    Messages:
    1,110
    Ratings:
    +0
    DID you not say defense wins championships? So Packers defense is every bit as good in scoring defense and has a better yardage defense.

    Hmmm... It seems only right then that the Packers should easily defeat the Seahawks because the difference maker will be on the offense!

    So who's got the better offense?

    Again based on the regular season stats and those are the only logical comparisons that we can make, the Packers ought to win this one handily... RIGHT?

    As for your whiny argument about the playoff experience factor, The Packers were a perrenial playoff contender from 1992 on. the last 2 years were blips. Favre has a superbowl ring... does Hasselbeck? Need I REALLY go on?

    So answer the question. Since Defense wins championships and the Offense scores more points, The Packers should win this one handily... RIGHT?
     
  25. BCheezy

    BCheezy Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2008
    Messages:
    46
    Ratings:
    +0
    The Hawks D is every bit as good as the Pack's D is.. I'm not the stat nerd you are, stats don't mean everything.

    Playoff Experience. Hmm.. the 1992 Pack made the playoffs. Thats nice. Brett Favre was the only current Pack to be on that team, so other than him, thats quite irrelevent. I am talking about players on the two teams that have succeeded in the playoffs before.
     

Share This Page