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

Seattle defense fast approaching

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

  1. Obi1

    Obi1 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2005
    Messages:
    1,110
    Ratings:
    +0
    Look at the numbers... Oh, may be you haven't gotten to numbers yet in your educational steps... and are now just beginning to recognize check marks... My bad.
     
  2. all about da packers

    all about da packers Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    7,033
    Ratings:
    +0
    Danreb, I was talking about Nick Collins running the 40 yard dash somewhere around 4.35 seconds.
     
  3. MarkAshton

    MarkAshton Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2008
    Messages:
    20
    Ratings:
    +0
    Well...maybe. You say the Packers have a more balanced O but lets look at the numbers. The Seahawks most glaring weakness is their rushing game. I don't disagree with you on Alexander - he's a shadow of his former self....or, perhaps, the offensive line is a shadow of its former self. But our pathetic running game earned an average of 101.2 yard/game. Guess what the Packers earned? Oops. 99.8. Sounds like a wash. So the bottom line there is that the Seahawks biggest weakness on offense is in their running game and they're equal the Packers in terms of yard gained.

    How did the Seahawks do on rushing defense. Well, they allowed 102.8 yard/game. A little above average in the NFL and almost exactly what the Packers earned/game. What about the Pack? Gee...they allowed 102.9 yard/game. Clearly a wash. So running game wise the teams are evenly matched. As a homer :) I'll give the Hawks the edge because, while they give up some yards on the ground, they forced 9 fumbles to the Pack's measly 5.

    So let's look at the passing game. The Pack averaged about 20 yard more/game than the Seahawks so that's not totally insignificant..and makes up the entire advantage in offensive production that the Packers have over the Seahawks b/c the running games are a wash. Looking at passing defense, the Seahawks defense allowed an average of 219 yards/game compared to 210 yard/game for the Pack. So that gives the Pack a 10 yard/game advantage. About 1 first down/game. Thats pretty much offset by the 1st down by passing allowed stat where the Seahawks are actually ahead of the Packers.

    So on the basis of yards gained you have to give the edge to the Pack . On the other hand, the Seahawks allowed about 10 yard less/game than the Packers did. As a matter of fact, the Seahawks allowed 219 yard/game in passing during the season while the Packers GAINED 270 yard/game. But on the biggest stat the teams are equal: both teams scored the same number oftouchdowns passing: 30.

    So, in my rather convoluted analysis, the key to the game is going to come down to:

    1. Which passing defense holds up better. Both teams scored the same number of passing TD's and they're roughly equal in passing defense. You have the give Favre the advantage on this but there's a wildcard. The Seahawks were 4th in the NFL in sacks (45) compared to 13th for Green Bay (36). The Hawks are also 4th in the league in interceptions. So, while I'd give the Pack a slight advantage on this it's close. It all depends on whether the Seahawks can avoid allowing big plays.

    2. Can either team run the ball? The stats say it'll be a wash but I'll give the slight advantage to the Pack but it's close. Yards/game are the same but the diference is that the Packers scored more TD's running. The upside for the Seahawks...a significant portion of the Packers rushing yards came on big plays. They had 15 plays for 20+ yards and 4 of 40+ yards. If the Seahawks can keep them from breaking big runs then they'll be ok.

    Lastly, there's Seattle's achilles heel - special teams. Our kicking game is solid but our coverage has been spotty. Our punter had a tough year...but improved recently...but coveraage was still spotty. If the punter chokes and/or the coverage guys give up a lot of return yards then the Seahawks are in trouble.

    My (evolving) prediction: Seahawks 24 (their season average/game) Green Bay 21 (under their season average but above the Seahawks average points/game allowed).

    :)
     
  4. mi_keys

    mi_keys Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2007
    Messages:
    213
    Ratings:
    +0
    That's a pretty reasonable argument. The only thing I'd point out for you in terms of the run game is that Grant is one of the leading rushers in league since taking over the starting job (at one point recently he led but it's possible LT passed him up). 99.8 yards per game... after we started the first half of the season gaining about 65 yards per game. That means the second half of the season (when we gave the job to Grant) we averaged around 135 yards per game. Since the rushing attack that has averaged 135 yards per game is far more representative of the one we have now I'd have to say that suggests our running game is better than yours. Oh, and you don't play Minnesota and Chicago's defenses twice a year, they have some of the best run stoppers in the league.
     
  5. all about da packers

    all about da packers Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    7,033
    Ratings:
    +0
    Great analysis, especially about the Packers breaking long runs.

    but one important stat you forgot: opposing QB completion percentage. Opposing QBs are only completing 55.2% of their passes against the Packers D. That is 2nd in the league, behind the Steelers. Advantage: Packers. :p


    Another important stat would be 3rd-down conversions. Seahawks were 2-11 on third down conversions against the Skins, and they have to improve that stat. I think you'll agree that not converting first downs against the Packers will be more of a problem given that our O has done better than the Skins O. Certainly keeping the Packers offense on the sidelines, stopping them from finding a rhythm coming off a break will be beneficial to the Seahawks.

    Man, only 3 more days till the game!
     
  6. Toddy

    Toddy Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2007
    Messages:
    193
    Ratings:
    +10
    Since Ryan Grant has been the starter the Packers have earned an average of 120.3 yard/game.
     
  7. Obi1

    Obi1 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2005
    Messages:
    1,110
    Ratings:
    +0
    Since when were the Seahawks considered SUCCESSFUL in the playoffs?

    They lost the superbowl one time that they made it. Before you go on why don't you look up Packers playoff record? Packers have been in the playoffs 10 years since 1992.

    Besides which, Driver, Tausher, Clifton, Harris, Barnett, Franks, Lee, Davis,... All have extensive playoff experience in this century.

    Bottom line is, IF the Seahawks win, THEY will have played the game to end ALL games... Their best game ever!

    IF the Packers win, they will have won a playoff game.
     
  8. MarkAshton

    MarkAshton Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2008
    Messages:
    20
    Ratings:
    +0
    I think your point about 3rd down completion percentage is important. The Seahawks have repeatedly failed to get the 1 or 2 yard gain they need for a 1st down. Many a Seahawks fan has wrung his hands over that this year. For a good part of the season Holmgren kept trying...Alexander left...Alexander up the middle...Alexander right...and he'd get stopped for a loss. As the season progressed they largely gave up and started passing. It's hard to win without a running game. Hopefully they'll beak a few early on Saturday to gain a little confidence.
     
  9. Zombieslayer

    Zombieslayer Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2006
    Messages:
    4,338
    Ratings:
    +0
    Mark - It's always a pleasure talking to an opposing fan who actually knows what they're talking about. :)

    Our O in yards is #2 in the NFL, and if I'm not mistaken, #4 in points after NE, Colts, and Cows. It's a high scoring offense that stays on the field for more than half the game consistently.

    The rushing stats are misleading because we took half the season to figure out that Ryan Grant was head and shoulders above all our other RBs. In that time period, we started Jackson, Morency, and Wynn. All three failed to do much, and our running game was ranked last in the NFL.

    Since Grant took over, we became #2 in the NFL in rushing yards. Huge difference. But we were so far back that statistically, our running O is not that impressive still.

    Your D is slightly better than ours. We both allowed 291 points, which is the #1 stat when looking at a D. However, you guys are absolutely sick at getting INTs and Sacks. Those are 2 things that scare me. We're simply going to have to double up on your NFL sack leading DE, because Tauscher is not 100%. MM will do that, because he doesn't want to see Favre take more hits than he has to.

    You listed a few keys, but my key will be turnovers. If Favre keeps his cool and doesn't turn the ball over, I don't think you'll have a chance. But like you said, your D is sick at getting INTs and Sacks, and some of Favre's INTs have been when he's been hit and his arm was in motion. That is something that greatly worries me about playing your team. As for fumbles, I'm aware your team generates fumbles, but I'm not worried about Grant losing the ball. He's been pretty good about that this year.

    You mention your STs are your Achilles' Heel. That should probably be a serious concern for you, because we've had something like 5 or 6 TDs on STs (2 fumble recovers for TDs + 3 or 4 returns for TDs). We might be #2 in STs' TD differential in the NFL after da Bears. I'll have to look that stat up.
     
  10. all about da packers

    all about da packers Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    7,033
    Ratings:
    +0

    Well that's another thing these two teams have in common.

    Packers can't get first downs running on 3rd and short, and 4th and short to save their lives.
     
  11. MarkAshton

    MarkAshton Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2008
    Messages:
    20
    Ratings:
    +0
    I haven't watched Favre play enough over the last year or two to see how he handles pressure. I suppose I'd have to give him the benefit of the doubt. Hall of famers typically do ok with pressure. :) I scanned his stats fore the year and it looks like he had about an average year in terms of interceptions - 15 for the year and a 2.8% INT pct. He only got sacked 15 times which suggests your O line is pretty good and/or he's still nimble. Hasselbeck was only intercepted 12 times (2.1%) so he doesn't give the ball up a lot...but he does sometimes make mistakes under pressure. He threw two critical INT's last weekend in the unimportant game against Atlanta. One maybe significant stat: he was sacked 33 times this year. That's likely the result of the high number of passing attempts (562) compared to Favre (535) and our weak running game.

    It'll be pretty interesting to see if Kerney and Peterson are able to break down your O line, especially in the first half. As I menioned in another post, our defense is fast but small so they tend to wear down a bit in the second half. Our best hope is to put a lot of pressure on Favre in the first half, force a turnover or two and give the Seattle offense a lead. Despite the fact that the Seahawks tend to tire out some in the second half, they don't generally allow many points in the second half...just lots of yards.

    One other intersting stat I ran into. Green Bay picks up a LOT of penalty yards! They were second worst in the NFL (after lowly Arizona) with 1006 yards for the season. The Seahawks, on the other hand, were best in the NFL with 428 penalty yards. I wonder if that might be a factor?
     
  12. Zombieslayer

    Zombieslayer Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2006
    Messages:
    4,338
    Ratings:
    +0
    Mark - Favre handles pressure well, and is dangerous on the move. His problem still remains is if you put up an early lead, he's been known to be too aggressive and try to make something of nothing. MM has been working on Favre not to do that so much. He does it less, but he still does it.

    That's one of your strengths - exploiting takeaways. That's something I'm admittingly uncomfortable about with the Packers/Seahawks matchup. I'm confident that if we don't turn the ball over, we'll win, but if we do, it could be a serious problem for us.

    The other thing you bring up is penalties. Our DBs are over aggressive, and sometimes you can get a deep pass interference penalty on us. That won't bode well for us obviously. But just to warn you, our SS Atari Bigby has had 4 INTs in the last 4 games. He's well aware that you will take shots on him now, and has matured greatly in the 2nd half of the season.

    Hasselback is very accurate and doesn't throw many INTs. That will work in your favor, but what won't work in your favor is we have 2 very good DEs when it comes to sacks. You seem to allow a lot of sacks compared to us. Will Hasselback be comfortable with a lot of pressure? That's something you'd know much better than I would as I haven't followed your season closely.
     
  13. tromadz

    tromadz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Ratings:
    +3
    I couldn't disagree more. Favre goes in to 'make something out of nothing' when the pack is trailing, not leading.

    Can we get a stat on favre with a lead and when trailing? Stat boy? We need a stat boy.
     
  14. Zombieslayer

    Zombieslayer Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2006
    Messages:
    4,338
    Ratings:
    +0
    Trom - Mark is a Seahawks fan. That's why I said "if you are leading."
     
  15. tromadz

    tromadz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Ratings:
    +3
    You expect me to read things? Silly zombie!

    my bad...

    seahawk fans week...
     
  16. MarkAshton

    MarkAshton Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2008
    Messages:
    20
    Ratings:
    +0
    I'll be the stats boy.

    When the Pack is ahead by any amount, Favre's QB rating is 107.2 with a 70% completion pct. WOW. The numbers don't change much whether they're ahead 1-8 points of more than 8 points. When they're behind, Favre's numbers drop. His QB rating falls to 90.3 and his completion percentage falls to (a still high) 67.9%. What's interesting is that when they're behind by a lot - 9 to 16 points - his QB rating goes back up very high to 103.8 with a 71.3% completion percentage. Not shabby at all.

    It's also interesting to see how he does in the 1st half vs. 2nd half. Presumably, good QB's excel in the 2nd half when the game is on the line...leading or not. In this respect Favre is very very good. His first half QB rating is a semi respectable 87.8, a 63.9% completion perctage (wow) and 11 TD's. In the second half of games, his QB rating is 102.2, completion percentage is 69.5% and 16 TD's.

    Compare these numbers to Hasseslbeck. When the Seahawks are ahead, Hasselbeck's QB rating is 87.8 with a 60.7 completion percentage. His numbers go way up when they have a substantial lead - QB rating of 119.7 when their lead is 9-16 points. That's sort of a self-fulling stat. When the Hawks are behind, his QB rating goes up vs. when they're ahead to 92 and a 60.8 completion percentage.

    In contast to Favre, Hasselbeck's QB numbers drop in the 2nd half of games. His 1st half QB rating is 92.3 with 62.5 completion percentage and 18 TD's. In the second half, his QB rating drop to 87.1, 62.8 completion percentage and 11 TD's.

    So, Hasselbeck's actually performs better than Favre when his team is behind. Favre excels most when the Pack has a substantial lead. Also, Hasselbeck does much better in the 1st half of games.

    The implication: Seattle needs a quick start on Saturday, get a lead and then try to hold it. If they get the Pack/Favre down they'll be in ok shape. If they get behind...not good.
     
  17. favre2driver

    favre2driver Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2008
    Messages:
    186
    Ratings:
    +0
    Seattle's running game is like ours back in the beginning of the season. But Hassleback won't have the same success like Favre did because Woodson and Harris can (pretty much) take out the perimeter receivers and our linebackers and NickelCorner should limit the catches.
     
  18. Zombieslayer

    Zombieslayer Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2006
    Messages:
    4,338
    Ratings:
    +0
    Thanks for those stats.

    Favre's stats really surprised me. In '05 and '06, his stats when we were behind I assume were really, really bad. I don't have them, but that's what we (Packer fans) were inferring to.

    We can thank MM for getting Favre to trust MM's system and not force anything. Favre has improved greatly in this system.

    Hasselback's don't surprise me. I think we all know how good of a QB he is.
     
  19. BCheezy

    BCheezy Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2008
    Messages:
    46
    Ratings:
    +0
    :penflag:

    I in fact did not say that, you got me confused another Hawk fan.

    How did you manage to do that? We have completely different names, and I have a pretty unique signature. Before you get all hardcore know who you're speaking to.
     
  20. Obi1

    Obi1 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2005
    Messages:
    1,110
    Ratings:
    +0
    YOU are right you didn't. As matter of fact, i didn't have my glasses on when I wrote the post.

    Let's face it. This game will be a lot more one sided for the Packers than you think. And probably not one sided enough for me.
     
  21. vikesrule

    vikesrule Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2006
    Messages:
    1,933
    Ratings:
    +0
    Thanks ZS, a new sig for me come Saturday...... :p
     
  22. Zombieslayer

    Zombieslayer Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2006
    Messages:
    4,338
    Ratings:
    +0
    Noooooooo!
    If the Packers lose, I'm buying a Vikesrule voodoo doll. :twisted:
     

Share This Page