One other observation - regardless of opponent, the Packers start slow. I don't have any stats to support this, but Q1 just seems to drag for them. Then they explode - the last Bears game was a good example, although the Bears exploded too. And yeah, they do play to the level of their opponent. They've beaten some very good teams. I wanna believe this is a SB team, but damn, they make it hard. Injuries and Covid haven't helped, but all teams deal with that. I'm amazed at how the OL has held up, and very disappointed in the DL outside Kenny Clark.
Studs and duds browns
- Thread starter longtimefan
- Start date
Pokerbrat2000
Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
That and I honestly think they just aren't a team that plays well with a big lead. They tend to get too conservative on both sides of the ball. Hard to complain though when they are 12-3. One loss was a blowout, one loss was having Love at QB and the 3rd loss, to the Vikings, was just a super close game that we lost on the Vikings final possession and penalties killed us. I had to rewatch the Vikings highlights, damn that game was close, but we lost an interception on a penalty and an interception on a reversed review.
We definitely need to contain Jefferson better!
You must be logged in to see this image or video!
gopkrs
Cheesehead
- Joined
- May 12, 2014
- Messages
- 5,385
- Reaction score
- 1,281
It does not help to kick off and then the other team marches down the field. Usually slowly.
Exactly, with the Browns being the last example. I think that drive was over 8 minutes. So that tires the defense immediately, and unless the O can match it, doesn't give the D must rest. They may want to rethink taking the ball when they win the toss.
I recall earlier in the year it was the opposite. I think the Packers dominated TOP against the Rams, and the Rams' D was exhausted in Q4. Even the best Ds are gonna wear out if you keep em guessing and keep em on the field. That's sort of disappeared in the last month. The Packers should be peaking and they have two games to straighten that out. I'm looking and expecting a big improvement by the D on Sunday night. We'll see.
Half Empty
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2014
- Messages
- 4,476
- Reaction score
- 604
Gosh, hadn't thought about that.
Pokerbrat2000
Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
I think teams are all in on the knowledge that if they keep Aaron Rodgers off the field, they stand a better chance of winning. I am probably wrong, but it seems like our defense is out there a lot more in the last 4 or so games, than when they were playing much better.
That's not an illusion Poker. Mid-season, the Packers ruled TOP. That was due to a great offensive game plan, and a D that was very stingy with first downs. In the last few games it's the opposite. Look at Cleveland's opening drive of 8 plus minutes. That wears out the D early and sets the stage for a bad Q4, and that's what we got.
These are the same players, for the most part, who have been out there all year. The D dominated the Rams, so the Ravens and Browns should have been easy. They weren't.
I don't know what it takes. Maybe a lot of heart-to-heart discussions with coaches and players, and among the players themselves. They're better than this, and they'll have to be to beat teams like the Cowboys. So get it together guys, starting with the hated Queens.
D
Deleted member 6794
Guest
The Packers led by at least 12 points at some point in all of their last four games.
The Packers secure the #1 seed on Sunday with a win and a Cowboys loss to the Cardinals no matter how the Bucs end up playing.
The Bucs could end up with the #1 seed if the Packers lose both of their games amongst some other things that need to happen.
The Eagles are 5-1 over their last six games with a loss to the Giants in week 12. As a side note, they have the second worst strength of victory in the league behind the Falcons.
That's a good observation as the Packers only rank 26th in the league in points scored as well as 25th in points allowed in the first quarter.
I'm fine with the Packers deferring to the second half. The defense needs to get off the field to start the game more often though.
The Packers actually rank fifth in time of possession over the last five games as well.
Thanks for all the stats. Wow I'm amazed they're still so high in TOP the last 5 games. If they could just figure out how to play the first quarter like the other three things would be fine!
Pokerbrat2000
Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Yes, the Packers scoring in the 1st Q. is pretty pathetic this year, they rank 26th in the NFL averaging 2.7 points in the 1st Q. Dallas leads the NFL with an 8 point average in the 1st .
Packers make up for it in the 2nd Q, with a NFL best of 9.9 points.
3rd Q: 6.5 (8th)
4th Q: 6.1 (19th)
Overall, the Packers are 13th in the NFL for Points per game with 25.5 PPG. Dallas is #1 with 30.5 PPG.
The Cowboys defense also leads the league with 1 fumble recovery for a TD and 5 pick 6's. Packers only have 2 pick 6's.
Last edited:
Thanks Poker. Had a hunch they woke up in Q2. In the playoffs this is something that needs to be corrected. It's just not good to play from behind. It messes with the game plan. Well, we're all about to find out.
Pokerbrat2000
Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Yes, nice to start the game by scoring, but I would give that up, for a defense that doesn't allow a lot of scoring in the 1st and 4th Quarters. The Packers defense is 14th in the league in points per game given up (21.6 PPG).
By Quarter here are where the Packers defense is in points per game.
1st: 5.1 ppg (25th)
2nd: 7.2 (17th)
3rd: 2.3 (1st)
4th: 7 (18th)
Thanks Poker. Strange that they go from 1st in D in Q3 to 18th in Q4. And yeah, I hope MLF and Barry find out where they misplaced the D. I think the NFC comes down to the Packers and Cowboys. The Cowboys have a formidable D. The Packers don't have to match it, but the O has to play without error, and the D has to make at least two, ideally three crucial stops during the game.
Pokerbrat2000
Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Maybe Captain will know, but sure seems like the Packers kickoff a lot to start the game and receive to start the 2nd half. That can influence those average point totals quite a bit, if it is the case. I am just going off of my gut, not my Borg mentality.
Same here. Just my gut but especially in the last few games, seems like they're deferring to start the game. They should still be able to start the game with a scoring drive. It just seems like the opponent starts with a long scoring drive, followed by a Packer 3 and out, or maybe one first down. Again I'm working from memory here, but it seems to have been that way all year. Your stats back it up.
At 12-3 I'm not complaining. I'd just like to not have to reach for the anxiety meds so early in the game. (Kidding, but you know what I mean. The Packers have a way of fraying their fans' nerves.....)
I think the Packers have scored on maybe their first 3 drives of the game all season.
D
Deleted member 6794
Guest
There are only six teams in the league which have scored more than two touchdowns on a takeaway.
The Cowboys defense thrives on takeaways, leading the league with a total of 33. The Packers offense is exceptional at taking care of the ball, having turned it over only eight times this year (best in the league).
While it seems the Packers defer to the second half in nearly every game they have only received the ball in seven out of 15 games to start the third quarter.
The Bills and Chiefs have received the second half kickoff 12 times this year.
The Packers have scored only four times (2 TD, 2 FG) on their first drive of a game this season and only once (FG) in their last eight games. That ranks tied for 25th in points scored in the league.
Sanguine camper
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2014
- Messages
- 1,927
- Reaction score
- 578
I think one of the main reasons the Packers offense sucks in the first quarter is the injury avalanche. They play with a different offense nearly every week and it takes a while to get into rhythm.
gopkrs
Cheesehead
- Joined
- May 12, 2014
- Messages
- 5,385
- Reaction score
- 1,281
That hasn't been what's happening most of the year though. I think the odds are better for us to start out eating the clock with a long drive to begin the game. The other way around is getting the D tired right from the start. And then the O comes out stale. And the D comes right back in. And it may seem like it's double dipping but really, it is the same number of getting the ball. How many points we have scored on that first drive is not as important as how much time we have lost and how well the opponents have done. I don't expect a change but would like to see one.
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2013
- Messages
- 6,408
- Reaction score
- 1,777
I think it's been poor play calling. Especially recently. Over the last month I think both LaFleur and Barry have been getting worked by opposing coaches. The whole business, of most of this season, the Packers not coming out looking sharp falls on the entire coaching staff imo.
Wow - so the Packers are the best at protecting the ball and the Cowboys are the best at taking it away. I sure hope the game is played in GB. Against the Cowboys, I can definitely see a home field advantage. Part of it of course is the fans. A bigger part is the condition of the field. You can run on slippery surfaces, sort of, but it takes practice.
OldSchool101
Pack
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2014
- Messages
- 14,323
- Reaction score
- 5,706
I know you’re just scared of them because of the past and that’s understandable. However each year brings challenges and it’s probably more who’s healthy on any given day. That’s no disrespect to the Bucs they are as good as anyone any given day. There’s no question if we make a few adjustments and get a few players back healthy we have the staff and personnel to beat them, especially at Lambeau.
For me anyway KC is a bigger obstacle this season. Maybe even Dallas in the NFC
Last edited:
Agreed. I'm more interested in the Dallas/AZ game this week to see how Dallas fares against what I thought was a good team. The Cards find themselves in a deep slump. They need a statement win against a strong team. We'll see.
As for the Bucs, or anyone else, I like GB's chances this year more than last year. Except for recently, the D is improved. Dillon has come into his own. Douglas and Campbell have done terrific jobs filling positions of need.
And yeah, KC has their foot on the gas now. I'm hoping for a SB rematch with the Pack and Chiefs.
OldSchool101
Pack
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2014
- Messages
- 14,323
- Reaction score
- 5,706
I know you say that but the Packers are the #1 team in the NFL in takeaways with a +16 differential for the entire 2021 season.
Are you suggesting our D got lucky just the Cleveland game? I’m having a hard time believing that a D can get lucky over a 15 game stretch. Maybe that’s just our MO.. to bend but also pressure opponents into mistakes?
Last edited:
It's tough when another team plays well enough to win (and I think the Browns came really on Sunday) and then they lose. For me, winning and losing is absolute. The winning team is the untested winner, the losing team the opposite.
It's fun to consider "what ifs" - like what if Douglas doesn't make that pick? But that's probably the main reason the Packers won, command of turnovers. And sacks. It could just as easily be argued that by Q3, Cleveland should have known that Chubb was hot, Mayfield was not. Leave the ball in Chubb's hands. If they make this one change, the Packers get one, maybe two less pics and the Browns win.
That's not what happened. Bill Bellichek, arguably a great choice, would have exploited GB's horrible run defense and pounded the ball on the ground. Stefanski didn't;t make that simple, in-game adjustment.
So the Packers deserved to win, the Browns did not. And in a year, no one will remember anyway.
