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

Studs and duds: C-Chicken Game

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by Forget Favre, Sep 5, 2014.

  1. Forget Favre

    Forget Favre Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2009
    Messages:
    8,163
    Ratings:
    +2,799
    Here's my nominations:

    Studs:
    No one.

    Duds:
    Everyone

    Carry on with your picks.
     
  2. Zartan

    Zartan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2013
    Messages:
    468
    Ratings:
    +293
    Studs

    John KUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUHHHHHHHHHHHHHNNNNNNNNNN

    Mason Crosby

    Randell Cobb

    and thats about it


    Duds. Everyone else.
     
  3. Myndflyte

    Myndflyte Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2014
    Messages:
    27
    Ratings:
    +21
    Duds: Brad Jones. Maybe he shouldn't start so close to the line if he is just going to get beat and hold the guy. He extended two different Seattle drives with his stupid holding.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
  4. Oshkoshpackfan

    Oshkoshpackfan YUT !!!

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2012
    Messages:
    3,286
    Ratings:
    +1,456
    Cobb is the only one stud worthy.

    Duds: Play calling, Lacy's run game, Our run defense, Our tackling (c'mon ha-ha, damn!!!) and BRAD FREAKIN JONES.....damn I hate that guy.
     
  5. Jordyruns

    Jordyruns Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    436
    Ratings:
    +175
    Matthews looked really good, he was all over the place.
     
  6. PFanCan

    PFanCan That's MISTER Cheesehead, to you.

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2009
    Messages:
    1,880
    Ratings:
    +1,232
    Studs
    Seattle entire team: They are pretty damned good.

    Seattle Offensive play calling: Man, did they have some cool plays, or what? I love how they use Harvin to the maximum- Jet sweep... too cool. McCarthy's play calling looks boring compared to what Seattle does.

    Corey Linsley: Rookie center in his first game vs. All Pro NT on national TV? No problem. Congrats to him on a job well done.

    Eddie Lacey: Stats didn't add up to anything special and he was concussed again, but he ran with passion and found some space when there simply wasn't any space.

    James Starks: His cut-back run was the Packer highlight of the night. For this, I give him a stud designation. (it's slim pickings right now...)

    Duds
    Packers defense:
    • Still haven't learned how to tackle. It doesn't matter if they are in the backfield all night, but cannot tackle.
    • Also, dropped a couple INTs that could have helped big time.
    • Couldn't get off the field, often due to dumb penalties on 3rd and longs.
    • Still haven't learned how to contain the edge
    • The read-option still confuses the heck out of the Packers (HIT the damned QB, even his he doesn't have the ball! If he acts like a runner, tackle him!)
    Packers special teams and coaching: Ok, they had the fumble recovery on the punt, but the running-into-the-kicker penalty was just un-acceptable. Also, I do not understand why we are running KOs out of the end zone into the teeth of the top quality Seattle special teams unit??? Let the league's top QB start with the ball at the 20 for god's sake... If the returner tries to run it out from 8 yards deep-- he is NOT going to get to the 20. F'in idiotic!

    Brian Bulaga: Sorry for calling him a dud when an injury is out of his control. But, the bottom line is that the team cannot count on him. Making the assumption that he will be in the game is simply not a good assumption any more. Perhaps the team needs to start game planning with him as a backup?

    Brad Jones: Ugh.

    Derek Sherrod: Ugh squared.
     
    Last edited: Sep 5, 2014
    • Agree Agree x 1
  7. Sanguine camper

    Sanguine camper Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2014
    Messages:
    385
    Ratings:
    +200
    Pack was throttled by a much better team. The Seahawks clobbered the Broncos in the Super Bowl and had no problems with the Pack. When a finesse team plays a physical team the finesse team usually takes a whipping. The Packers looked slow and soft on both sides of the ball.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  8. Sanguine camper

    Sanguine camper Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2014
    Messages:
    385
    Ratings:
    +200
    At this point picking out duds is kind of useless because the entire defense looked like a dud and the O line never opened up holes for the running game. The Packers might make the playoffs but they get physically whipped against teams like the Seahawks. Packers are just way too soft
     
  9. Pkrjones

    Pkrjones Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2014
    Messages:
    603
    Ratings:
    +325
    NationalFootballPost has an article titled "Seahawks trounce Packers", and here's a quote from it. The truth REALLY hurts, and I'm guessing the Packer film sessions will NOT be pretty.

    "Obviously, we were the more physical team today, offensively and defensively," Seahawks defensive end Michael Bennett said. "I saw supposedly some of the best players in the league not want to tackle Marshawn Lynch. Of course, nobody is going to say nothing about that, but I seen a lot of guys whiff on tackles that should have been 2-yard gains, and they're supposed to be the best." Ouch...

    One player not wanting to touch Lynch that I noticed early and often is Brad Jones... next man up, please. Can not have that "softness" as a middle linebacker, absolutely can NOT.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  10. rodell330

    rodell330 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2012
    Messages:
    3,523
    Ratings:
    +1,291
    The biggest weakness on the defense is in the middle. Both AJ Hawk and Brad Jones can't cover to save their lives and neither one makes impact plays . Teams are going to attack the middle of the defense and I wouldn't blame them. They were both The biggest DUDS and both need to be on the bench. It's time to see two young fast guys in the middle who can cover at least the tightend.
     
  11. profile_removed

    profile_removed Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2010
    Messages:
    608
    Ratings:
    +20
    I'm gonna call out the biggest duds of last night: Aaron Rodgers and Brad Jones.

    Gonna start with Jones: Out of position, Burnett had to make at least 3 plays because Jones was just standing there like Frankenstein, just horrid last night and slightly worse than usual.

    Rodgers: Now admittedly I've come around about him, and this most times he's a good player but God last night he wasn't smart enough to know that he doesn't have Brett Favre's 30 year old arm, he has his own weaker arm. I saw at LEAST 3 balls thrown off his back foot 2 on rollouts and not under duress that were thrown incomplete, that if he gets his feet set go for big gains or scores. On top of that the INT off Jordy's hands was on him. I'm not saying he was bench worthy last night, but this had to be the stupidest effort of his career.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  12. Oshkoshpackfan

    Oshkoshpackfan YUT !!!

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2012
    Messages:
    3,286
    Ratings:
    +1,456
    I have been b*tching about brad jones for 2 years now, yet there are some who just don't see or refuse to see him just STANDING around with with thumb up his butt. I am glad others are finally taking notice.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  13. easyk83

    easyk83 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2013
    Messages:
    1,523
    Ratings:
    +636
    Yes he also had half a sack taken away by the hackery of Brad Jones. However he was too aggressive on his backside pursuit at time and got caught inside on some big plays to the outside.

    I thought Nelson, Cobb, Bahktiari, Lang and Sitton played well and Linsley wasn't half bad out there. Mike Daniels had that bone headed special teams penalty. Also I thought that Nick Perry looked pretty good in limited action and that Peppers wasn't half bad either.

    Duds: Letroy Guion, Brad Jones, Derrek Sherrod, Aaron Rodgers.

    Why Aaron Rodgers? Because if you're going to take that big a chunk of the team salary you need to be better than that.

    In analyzing the game bear in mind that our Offense basically spotted them 16 points. 1 bad throw from Aaron Rodgers that was tipped upwards and picked. One terrible block by Derrek Sherrod followed by a sack fumble and safety and Seattle starting at midfield as a result. I don't think the talent is as disparate as the score might suggest.

    EDIT: One more thing, I don't know if LeTroy Guion is just really rusty but he was freaking terrible. Watching Max Unger handle him was like watching a grown man beat up on a child. Every time Unger reach blocked him Guion wound up 5 yards off the line of scrimmage, no double team necessary.
     
  14. DarkHelmet

    DarkHelmet Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2013
    Messages:
    78
    Ratings:
    +48
    Studs:
    Cobb
    Starks
    Matthews

    Made some plays:
    Tramon Williams
    Clinton-Dix (though he got embarrassed on that TD)
    Nelson (though I put 50% on the INT on him)
    Linsley (not bad for a rookie)
    A Rodgers (looked good on a couple of series and really bad on a couple)

    Duds:
    Sherrod (last night's king of the lookout block)
    B Jones (pretty much horrible in every respect)
    Capers (this should be his last season)
    McCarthy (his offensive game plan was dull and uninspired compared to what Bevell did for the Seahawks.)
    T Thompson (for not managing to find effective inside linebackers)
    Masthay (the shanked first punt was unacceptable)

    Overall grades:

    Offense: C (bearing in mind that Seattle's D is excellent)
    QB: C+ (INT 50% on him, too slow to read situations, poor decision on fourth down, didn't protect the ball on safety)
    RB: B (a C for Lacy and an A for Starks, though to be fair to Lacy the O-line gave him nothing.)
    WR: B- (Cobb looked good, Jordy did okay apart from the INT, Boykin was invisible.)
    TE: C+ (Quarless made a couple of grabs)
    O-Line: C- (didn't get the job done on the run, gave up safety, costly penalties)

    Defense: C-
    D-Line: C- (nobody made any notable plays that I saw.)
    OLB: B (Matthews played pretty well, Peppers seemed to have little impact)
    ILB: D (B Jones should not be starting, but we have no one better, apparently. Hawk is a good tackler but he is not fast enough to cover TEs nor quick enough to react to cutbacks. I think his football instincts are good, he plays with heart and doesn't make mental mistakes often, but he just isn't fast enough for the position in the league today.)
    DB: C+ (they didn't get embarrassed as much as in some games last year. Shields and Williams made a couple plays. Clinton-Dix looks like he can play at this level, though he's still raw.)

    Special teams: D
    coverage: C (got a turnover mostly through dumb luck)
    kicking: C- (Masthay's first punt was awful, Crosby did what was asked of him)
    return: D- (our guys really misjudge the "can I make it past the 20 yardline?" question.

    O game plan: C- Uninspired. Stuck with the run game too long after we were in a hole. Yes, we'd like to run the ball, but our O-Line wasn't getting it done against that defense. Took to long to get the quick slant to Nelson/inside pass to Cobb working.

    D game plan: D. But how much of it is actually failure to execute? Hard to say. If we had some inside linebackers who were quicker would the whole thing look much better?

    Bottom line: Seattle is a very good team. It was not a fluke that they thrashed Denver in the Superbowl. Russell Wilson is a very smart QB. The team is well coached (grrr -- hate Pete Carroll). They play fast, they hit hard, they play smart. We went to their stadium and basically stayed with them in the first half. We played about like a 8-7-1 team against a very good team. Not good enough, in other words, to make a deep run in post season.

    Final notes: I hate Thursday night football. Have a headache today. God intended football to be played on Sunday afternoon.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  15. PFanCan

    PFanCan That's MISTER Cheesehead, to you.

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2009
    Messages:
    1,880
    Ratings:
    +1,232
    DarkHelmet - Good summary. I agree with every word. Even the comment about how God meant football to be played on Sunday. Hallelujah!

    The part that scares me most is how McCarthy apparently spent considerable time during the pre-season specifically scheming and training for this game. But, what I saw was the same tired defense, the same failure to deal with the read-option and a scrambling QB, the same special team mentality (run it out from deep in the end zone...) and the same offensive scheme/playbook as always.

    But, the Seahawks brought some creativity to the game... that's for sure.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  16. Myndflyte

    Myndflyte Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2014
    Messages:
    27
    Ratings:
    +21
    Remember last year when McCarthy schemed the entire off season for the 49ers and we got blown up by them again? Its not schemes that will fix the defense but fundamentals such as tackling. If they get the fundamentals down, the scheme will follow with it.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  17. PFanCan

    PFanCan That's MISTER Cheesehead, to you.

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2009
    Messages:
    1,880
    Ratings:
    +1,232
    I certainly agree that tackling fundamentals are key.

    But, two plays in particular highlight what I was referring to in my previous post:

    1. Play #1: 3rd down (3rd quarter, I think). Read-option with Lynch running to Wilson's right. Perry on contain to Wilson's left. Perry completely bites on the fake hand-off and heads in towards the middle of the pack leaving Wilson free to easily scramble for the first down.

    2. Play #2: Similar play. Read-option with Lynch, however this time the ball is handed off and Wilson takes off in the opposite direction while acting like a runner. Matthews pulls up his rush just as he gets to Wilson and they barely contact each other.

    In play #1, Perry lost contain. He missed an excellent opportunity to catch Wilson in the backfield for a loss, end the series and, by the way, have an opportunity to hit the QB hard. Had he done this, next time, Wilson might not act like a runner so much...

    In play #2, Matthews missed an excellent opportunity to make Wilson pay for acting like he had the ball. If he looks like a runner, tackle him. Do you think the Seattle defenders would have pulled up on Rodgers if he was acting like a runner? No way. They would have drilled him.

    So, it's not just fundamentals of tackling. It's also playing the scheme correctly and making the hits when presented with the opportunity. That is, had Perry not fallen for the read-option trick, he would have been in a position to attempt a tackle. But, as it was, he never even made the attempt.

    One would think that, after all the read-option embarrassments the Packers have faced these last few years, the coaches AND the players would have figured how to improve a bit. But, they keep falling for the pull-the-rabbit-out-of-a-hat trick. McCarthy's emphasis on Seattle seemed to have not made a difference.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  18. Oshkoshpackfan

    Oshkoshpackfan YUT !!!

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2012
    Messages:
    3,286
    Ratings:
    +1,456
    Huh???? Matthews made pressure, yes, but FAILED to make several tackles, didn't contain, got caught in over pursuit and took terrible angles. Peppers made pressure, swatted down 2 passes I think, and showed he still has gas in the tank. What game did you watch? lol
     
  19. 98Redbird

    98Redbird Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2010
    Messages:
    806
    Ratings:
    +240
    Starting to see a few places where Capers is getting thrown under the bus again. As some have said here, last night was NOT a scheme issue. It was an EXECUTION issue. Period. Green Bay is fundamentally weak, soft, inept, whatever you want to call it. They cannot carry out what they are asked to do.

    Seattle doesn't do anything fancy on defense. They line up and rush 4 and drop 7. Their front 4 win... and 4 against 7 on the back end never ends well. They just flat out execute. Every time.

    It's the same as Lombardi's teams. Simple as can be. Everyone knew what was coming. And could not stop it. Because every single player on that team executed. Either they did, or they were on a car, bus, plane or train leaving Green Bay.

    In my honest opinion, all of this talk about Capers and McCarthy coming up with a "new hybrid defensive invention" or whatever the hell they were supposedly suppose to unveil this season on defense is worthless. How about you just teach them to be fundamentally sound. Assignment sure. And for the love of God, how to wrap up and tackle.

    These wild "schemes" are simply a cover up for (currently) inadequate and improperly coached football players.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  20. PFanCan

    PFanCan That's MISTER Cheesehead, to you.

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2009
    Messages:
    1,880
    Ratings:
    +1,232
    I am personally not throwing Capers under a bus.

    But, am curious as to whether you are or are not. Stating that the Packers are "inadequate and improperly coached..." seems to throw Capers under a bus. Or is it a different coach or subset of coaches that are the root?
     
  21. 98Redbird

    98Redbird Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2010
    Messages:
    806
    Ratings:
    +240
    Was not referring to you specifically.

    And partially I am blaming him, absolutely. Along with the rest of the Packers' coaching staff. I have no clue which coach or coaches specifically are to blame for what I saw last night, or against the Giants a few years ago, or the 49ers last year. I am not part of the organization.

    What I do know, and really, I don't see how anyone can argue this, is that the team I saw last night did not look prepared, looked out coached, and was thoroughly out performed. To me, that falls largely on the coaching staff. As a whole.

    Part of it is talent, but in all honesty, Seattle just keeps plugging guys in and they just keep rolling along with guys I've never heard of. They lost their nickle corner last night, they lost depth on their D line from last year, and they've got two new offensive linemen. They still execute. I didn't see anyone over pursue. I didn't see anyone out of position. I didn't see anyone in the backfield missing tackles (anywhere on the field for that matter). They are just a fundamentally sound football team.

    Better coached football team. Simple as that. Last nights game is really all the proof needed.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  22. PFanCan

    PFanCan That's MISTER Cheesehead, to you.

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2009
    Messages:
    1,880
    Ratings:
    +1,232
    I agree. Coaches are definitely included in the performance of the players.
     
  23. Dagger85

    Dagger85 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2011
    Messages:
    233
    Ratings:
    +207
    Studs:
    Cobb
    Linsley (thought he did a great job last night in one of the toughest stadiums)

    On the bubble:
    Matthews (Not his greatest game, but he played angry and with a purpose. He's ready to go.

    Ha Ha. He seemed to always be around the ball. I know he missed some tackles and dropped an INT, but I expect him to make some plays for us this year.
     
  24. melvin dangerr

    melvin dangerr Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2012
    Messages:
    543
    Ratings:
    +134
    STUDS: any packer fan who witness this (game?)

    DUDS: Seattle Sports news headline---Arron Rodgers afraid of Sherman
     

Share This Page