Studs and duds bear game

[easyk83]

Whats up with Clay Matthews it seems like he keeps coming out and staying out in games. If either that ankle or groin injury is bothering him then I wish he would just stay out for a couple of weeks. I don't think that a 75% Clay Matthews is better than the depth.

 

[Pkrjones]

Major league dud is MM. This idiot continues to pass up points when we aren't moving the ball on the ground. He said it was early in the game, so go for it. BS. You have to take the points in this league, period.

Taking the 3 pts. is exactly what MM chose to do in the playoff loss to Seattle 2 yrs. ago ~ and he LEARNED from his mistake. Early in the game after a 7-8 minute drive you go for it and NOT settle for 3. While unsuccessful (for a number of reasons, mainly lack of a go-to short yardage package utilizing an OL as lead blocker for Rip) "going for the throat" mentality is what MM has NOT been doing... kudos (IMHO) to MM for having a pair.

 

[Croak]

Stud; Me for scrambling around the house and garage like a madman 5 minutes before kickoff to find a way to hook up another TV to an Antenna because my wife announced that she was changing the channel at 9 to watch "Supernatural".

Duds: Sam and Dean Winchester.

 

[I asked LT to delete my acct]

Stud; Me for scrambling around the house and garage like a madman 5 minutes before kickoff to find a way to hook up another TV to an Antenna because my wife announced that she was changing the channel at 9 to watch "Supernatural".

Duds: Sam and Dean Winchester.

Where did you dispose of the body ???

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Gotta take what the defense is giving you. It's been pretty obvious this season that the downfield ball isn't working. Whether it's the receivers not getting separation or Rodgers missing throws is another discussion all together. If we can move the chains and control the clock throwing the underneath routes, then by all means keep throwing them.

Going forward, if we can keep having success throwing the underneath routes it's going to force the safeties to play up. That should open up some opportunities to hit the deep ball.

It's not the passing game we've gotten used to seeing from this team, but I definitely wouldn't call it a dud.

Taking what the defense gives you might work for a game or two but if the Packers are forced into this for the season they won't be a good team. Last year the Packers ranked 29th in the NFL in yards per attempt with 5.7. It's a myth that the offense has to take what the defense gives. At some point, the offense needs to be able to do what it wants.

A passing game that averages less than 6 yards per attempt is a dud, there's no room for argument on that point. An elite offense is averaging 7+ yards per attempt.

 

[Uncle Rico]

Taking what the defense gives you might work for a game or two but if the Packers are forced into this for the season they won't be a good team. Last year the Packers ranked 29th in the NFL in yards per attempt with 5.7. It's a myth that the offense has to take what the defense gives. At some point, the offense needs to be able to do what it wants.

A passing game that averages less than 6 yards per attempt is a dud, there's no room for argument on that point. An elite offense is averaging 7+ yards per attempt.

Depends on what you consider an elite offense. Personally, I'd rather have an offense that can control the clock and move the chains than one that lives and dies by the deep ball.

And not taking what the defense gives you is just plain dumb. For the first time in a year, I saw receivers getting open underneath because safeties were playing over the top. Same recipe that got Cobb all those touches before Jordy's injury.

But if you think we should look off open receivers and chuck the ball into deep coverage, well I'm glad you're not calling the offense.

 

[swhitset]

Stud; Me for scrambling around the house and garage like a madman 5 minutes before kickoff to find a way to hook up another TV to an Antenna because my wife announced that she was changing the channel at 9 to watch "Supernatural".

Duds: Sam and Dean Winchester.

hmm.. There is absolutely NO WAY my wife would even think about suggesting that she was getting anywhere near the remote during a Packer game. Frankly she gets her way in just about everything else, but she knows better than to push that advantage while the Pack is playing.

 

[MajikMan7]

Whats up with Clay Matthews it seems like he keeps coming out and staying out in games. If either that ankle or groin injury is bothering him then I wish he would just stay out for a couple of weeks. I don't think that a 75% Clay Matthews is better than the depth.

I think they're really trying to use all of the depth they have on the edge right now, which I agree with. Hopefully, come late season and playoffs were able to stay more healthy and more productive.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Can TY play slot/RB all year? That would just be fantastic.

Perhaps, but probably not except by necessity. Montgomery looks the part of the of the 3rd. down back.

One accommodation if an actual 2 down back back be identified is using Montgomery out of the slot in place of Rodgers split out in 4 wide. The template says you need that big body TE who can make the tough catch in the middle danger zone. But Rodgers is just too slow to be effective; slowish LBs seem to have little trouble covering or closing on him.

Montgomery is not ideal as a TE substitute because he just does not look like a seam runner. The college tape and early attempts to hit him downfield revealed that he has trouble tracking and catching anything over his head. His strength is on the perimeter or slashing inside/outside out of the slot. He's too much to handle for just about any LB. Not having Cook to draw some safety interest to the middle of the field is a meaningful loss; his numbers were not impressive but the chemistry was just starting to develop. Getting him back will change the landscape assuming he does not end up on IR.

If and when Cook gets back, I believe Montgomery's utility will be as that 3rd. down back, particularly if it's not long yardage where the D reflexively goes into dime. What you want is to isolate him on a LB. If you run him out there on third down as a draw threat, i.e., identified by the defense as a "running back", you keep the D in nickel and can isolate him on that LB, either releasing out of the backfield or setting or motioning to the slot.

 

[I asked LT to delete my acct]

hmm.. There is absolutely NO WAY my wife would even think about suggesting that she was getting anywhere near the remote during a Packer game. Frankly she gets her way in just about everything else, but she knows better than to push that advantage while the Pack is playing.

Pssst ! , She`s right behind you. Which hospital do you want to go to ????

 

[swhitset]

Pssst ! , She`s right behind you. Which hospital do you want to go to ????

Lol There is a reason I married her, in reality she wouldn't ever change the channel during a Packer game anyway, she gets more emotionally involved in the games than I do. On the other hand she did break one of my ribs with a head butt last year just goofing around so....

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Depends on what you consider an elite offense. Personally, I'd rather have an offense that can control the clock and move the chains than one that lives and dies by the deep ball.

And not taking what the defense gives you is just plain dumb. For the first time in a year, I saw receivers getting open underneath because safeties were playing over the top. Same recipe that got Cobb all those touches before Jordy's injury.

But if you think we should look off open receivers and chuck the ball into deep coverage, well I'm glad you're not calling the offense.

An elite offense is one that can score a lot of points. If you believe the Packers can be the first team in modern NFL history to feature a terrible passing offense and still be an elite offense then your points are valid.

If, on the other hand, you want to believe that "chucking it into deep coverage" is the only other option then I'd like to point out that many teams play coverage against the Saints, yet they seem to be able to throw the ball more effectively. There are many teams (last year there were 28) that don't feature passing offenses as anemic as the Packers. So maybe, and I know this might be a shocking thought, just maybe there are possibilities beyond "taking what the defense gives you". Because you know what the defense generally doesn't "give you"? Points.

 

[Carl]

I can't really call anybody studs in an ugly win against the Bears and a 3rd string qb. Adams made some good catches for sure. Ty showed some promise. Rodgers got his rhythm with the short passes. But, I still believe this team is sub par.

Major league dud is MM. This idiot continues to pass up points when we aren't moving the ball on the ground. He said it was early in the game, so go for it. BS. You have to take the points in this league, period. I hope this organization cleans house after this season. It's hard to watch.

The offensive scheme was completely different than normal and worked while the Packers won the game easily.

Makes no sense to call the head coach major dud for one play when almost the whole game was good

 

[easyk83]

I think they're really trying to use all of the depth they have on the edge right now, which I agree with. Hopefully, come late season and playoffs were able to stay more healthy and more productive.

Its not the extent of the rotation, it's why does Clay sit out for an entire quarter or two after taking himself out. I'm not sure he ever recovered from his injuries earlier in the city and if thats the case then Id rather sit him for a game or two and get him back to 100%.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Whats up with Clay Matthews it seems like he keeps coming out and staying out in games. If either that ankle or groin injury is bothering him then I wish he would just stay out for a couple of weeks. I don't think that a 75% Clay Matthews is better than the depth.

You often hear it said, as Favre said to Jennings, "80% of you is better than 100% of anybody else."

From a physical standpoint, that's not true. It certainly wasn't true of Polamalu in the Super Bowl, and it appears to be untrue of Matthews in the last 2 games, a guy who looks to be bothered by something.

In the NFL, the difference in physical attributes between an impact player and an ordinary one are quite small. For instance we talk about 2/10 of a second over 40 yards as a wide gulf, when in fact it's 2 blinks of the eye. If a dinged up player loses those two blinks, he's just not the same player. Nelson, for instance, is a 1 blink, maybe 1.5 shy of where he was in his long speed, where the jets come on at 15 - 20 yards. When it comes to quick twitch blinks at the OLB position, the difference between impact and ordinary is even more subtle.

But here's the thing. There are important intangibles of having a dinged impact player who is not himself physically out on the field. Assignment reliability, leadership, chemistry, setting an example. Maybe he can't go every series, but you want him out there for however much he can stand.

 

[easyk83]

You often hear it said, as Favre said to Jennings, "80% of you is better than 100% of anybody else."

From a physical standpoint, that's not true. It certainly wasn't true of Polamalu in the Super Bowl, and it appears to be untrue of Matthews in the last 2 games, a guy who looks to be bothered by something.

In the NFL, the difference in physical attributes between an impact player and an ordinary one are quite small. For instance we talk about 2/10 of a second over 40 yards as a wide gulf, when in fact it's 2 blinks of the eye. If a dinged up player loses those two blinks, he's just not the same player. Nelson, for instance, is a 1 blink, maybe 1.5 shy of where he was in his long speed, where the jets come on at 15 - 20 yards. When it comes to quick twitch blinks at the OLB position, the difference between impact and ordinary is even more subtle.

But here's the thing. There are important intangibles of having a dinged impact player who is not himself physically out on the field. Assignment reliability, leadership, chemistry, setting an example. Maybe he can't go every series, but you want him out there for however much he can stand.

I get that but A) he might be risking additional injury, B) he is very different player at full health and C) I have a good feeling about this Julius Peppers character. Something tells me he's a savvy veteran ;-).

I've got to think that Matthews instincts and ability to change plays at the line are desired out on the field, especially with Jake and Blake in the middle. He also has that history of physical play and knocking quarterbacks out of games and while I don't celebrate the fact he did break Hoyer's arm last night. That's something that keeps a coaching staff up at night.

Yet I think we have the horses in the front 7 to play without Clay and get him healthy again especially when we have plus athletes like Fackrell Peppers Perry and Jones to play the position without Matthews. I don't want to see him struggling through nagging injuries all season.

 

[Uncle Rico]

An elite offense is one that can score a lot of points. If you believe the Packers can be the first team in modern NFL history to feature a terrible passing offense and still be an elite offense then your points are valid.

If, on the other hand, you want to believe that "chucking it into deep coverage" is the only other option then I'd like to point out that many teams play coverage against the Saints, yet they seem to be able to throw the ball more effectively. There are many teams (last year there were 28) that don't feature passing offenses as anemic as the Packers. So maybe, and I know this might be a shocking thought, just maybe there are possibilities beyond "taking what the defense gives you". Because you know what the defense generally doesn't "give you"? Points.

So what would your brilliant offensive mind have called last night? Out of RBs and the deep ball isn't there. Short to mid range passes seemed to move the ball down the field.

 

[HardRightEdge]

I get that but A) he might be risking additional injury, B) he is very different player at full health and C) I have a good feeling about this Julius Peppers character. Something tells me he's a savvy veteran ;-).

I've got to think that Matthews instincts and ability to change plays at the line are desired out on the field, especially with Jake and Blake in the middle. He also has that history of physical play and knocking quarterbacks out of games and while I don't celebrate the fact he did break Hoyer's arm last night. That's something that keeps a coaching staff up at night.

Yet I think we have the horses in the front 7 to play without Clay and get him healthy again especially when we have plus athletes like Fackrell Peppers Perry and Jones to play the position without Matthews. I don't want to see him struggling through nagging injuries all season.

Besides breaking Hoyer's arm, which was unfortunate, he just missed a safety but blew up the play nonetheless.

If every player with a nagging injury sat out while waiting for him to get back to form, you would not be able to field 45 players on Sunday, and might have to go back to 2-way football.

I'm sure if there was meaningful risk of making it worse (acknowledging nothing is risk free), they wouldn't play him. As for Peppers, I know his snap count in this Bears game, but he's been at 45% over the first 5 games, plus about 8 snps per game on special teams which I presume is primarily for kick blocking attempts. If you're concerned about being at full force down the stretch, I don't think you want to play Peppers more than that. Besides, when Peppers is on the field, he's frequently used (and needed) at DT on passing downs because, quite frankly, the other D-Linemen are not especially effective pass rushers other than to push the pocket. Daniels is decent at it, but he gets a lot of attention without a partner who's any kind of threat.

 

[Mondio]

Lol There is a reason I married her, in reality she wouldn't ever change the channel during a Packer game anyway, she gets more emotionally involved in the games than I do. On the other hand she did break one of my ribs with a head butt last year just goofing around so....

Ouch, did she look up and tell you to go make some sandwiches after?

 

[Croak]

hmm.. There is absolutely NO WAY my wife would even think about suggesting that she was getting anywhere near the remote during a Packer game. Frankly she gets her way in just about everything else, but she knows better than to push that advantage while the Pack is playing.

37 years of marriage to the same person teaches you some give and take and some compromise. She was willing to illegally stream her show if I really wanted to watch the game. But it's the only show she watches all week and I felt bad for her. So I made it work.

 

[Arthur Squires]

No Adams isn't a deep threat at all. He's definitely a possession wr.

He's like James Jones with more athletic ability.

 

[Arthur Squires]

Stud; Me for scrambling around the house and garage like a madman 5 minutes before kickoff to find a way to hook up another TV to an Antenna because my wife announced that she was changing the channel at 9 to watch "Supernatural".

Duds: Sam and Dean Winchester.

Mom did the same move.. Had to run to the neighbors to watch the rest of the game. Her show was "60 DAYS IN".

 

[I asked LT to delete my acct]

Mom did the same move.. Had to run to the neighbors to watch the rest of the game. Her show was "60 DAYS IN".

Now I am more inclined to believe THAT ! I`m the boss in my house, and my wife gave me permission to say that !

 

[PFanCan]

Stud; Me for scrambling around the house and garage like a madman 5 minutes before kickoff to find a way to hook up another TV to an Antenna because my wife announced that she was changing the channel at 9 to watch "Supernatural".

Time to change out the wife.

 

[HardRightEdge]

So what would your brilliant offensive mind have called last night? Out of RBs and the deep ball isn't there. Short to mid range passes seemed to move the ball down the field.

Yeah, frankly I did not understand that guy's point other than "scoring is good, not scoring is bad".

It's uncommon for a team to be able to just line up and play their game, merely challenging the opponent to counter strength. And nobody can do it on both sides of the ball; there simply are not enough draft picks and cap space to build that kind of roster.

Everybody plays to match-ups at the individual player level and scheme level. And if they're going to give you something all day you take it all day. Now, what one opponent chooses to give you another may not. Being willing and able to grind it out with short passing beyond a series here or there is an uncommon sight in Green Bay. It's an option, not embraced in the past. They've been stuck in a run-and-short-pass-to-set-up-the-deep-ball mindset, and it worked for a lot of years, and then it didn't. This enforced-by-necessity ball control passing game for it's own sake is an expansion of the repertoire. Unless they backslide, there's an opportunity to embrace multiple approaches to fit the opponent, an offense better equipped for all seasons.

I'm still liking what I see in this team. The offensive is evolving by necessity and the defense has that "whole is greater than the sum of the parts" feel to it, especially with having to go so deep into the cornerback bench.