Week two: Falcons blowout studs and duds.

[OldSchool101]

First a correction is in order. We did NOT commit a foul which took away 6 points

According to the NFL record books it is a historical fact that we lost a TD due to this play. We can agree or disagree with the call all we want, but our disagreeing or agreeing does not give us that TD back. Accepting the fact does not make a person a defeatist. Surrender, even when we think we are justified, is by 20,000 leagues, the strongest and hardest thing a competitor can do. Ask Coach McCarthy about this I'm sure he will back me 100%

 

[P-E-Z]

I think a lot of you aren't paying attention. Healthy or not, refs or not, no difference. The Falcons are what football is now. They play the game at an entirely different level and speed than the Packers. If we see them again, it'll be more of the same.

They did not look so on natural grass.... not that fast in week one.

 

[PackerDNA]

They did not look so on natural grass.... not that fast in week one.

Sure they're a fraction slower on natural grass, but still fast. And still faster than us.

 

[PackAttack12]

Sure they're a fraction slower on natural grass, but still fast. And still faster than us.

I think it makes a considerable difference, enough to where I certainly hope that, if we face them in the playoffs, it's at Lambeau.

 

[PackerDNA]

I think it makes a considerable difference, enough to where I certainly hope that, if we face them in the playoffs, it's at Lambeau.

I hope we get them at home,too.
But faster and better still wins, even if they were playing on the dark side of the moon.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

I hope we get them at home,too.
But faster and better still wins, even if they were playing on the dark side of the moon.

I'm fairly sure that nobody would claim the Pats are faster than the Falcons and we know how that went. Pretty sure most would agree the Packers were faster than the Cowboys last year but they went 1-1 against each other. The key term you're using is BETTER. Faster doesn't matter, better matters. The Falcons are better. Outside of Rodgers I can't think of another position at which the Packers are demonstrably better. Falcons are better at receiver, running back, corner, linebacker and pass rusher.

 

[PackerDNA]

I'm fairly sure that nobody would claim the Pats are faster than the Falcons and we know how that went. Pretty sure most would agree the Packers were faster than the Cowboys last year but they went 1-1 against each other. The key term you're using is BETTER. Faster doesn't matter, better matters. The Falcons are better. Outside of Rodgers I can't think of another position at which the Packers are demonstrably better. Falcons are better at receiver, running back, corner, linebacker and pass rusher.

Agreed. But faster matters when the WR is beating te guy covering him by 5 yards, or your OT can't handle te speed of a pass rushing OLB. Both cases are consistently obvious when we play those guys.

 

[easyk83]

Sure they're a fraction slower on natural grass, but still fast. And still faster than us.

Whats the difference between a 4.6 and a 4.4? Classic dome teams tend to be much more effective on faster playing surfaces.

 

[PackerDNA]

Whats the difference between a 4.6 and a 4.4? Classic dome teams tend to be much more effective on faster playing surfaces.

The difference is they're WR's beating our DB's by 5 yards.

 

[mongoosev]

Ok if we take out Julio and their top tier tackles, would the Falcon's O still be a threat?

I'm fairly sure that nobody would claim the Pats are faster than the Falcons and we know how that went. Pretty sure most would agree the Packers were faster than the Cowboys last year but they went 1-1 against each other. The key term you're using is BETTER. Faster doesn't matter, better matters. The Falcons are better. Outside of Rodgers I can't think of another position at which the Packers are demonstrably better. Falcons are better at receiver, running back, corner, linebacker and pass rusher.

Aside from Julio, their O is not much better. Other than that, yes, their D is much better. At the moment.

 

[easyk83]

The difference is they're WR's beating our DB's by 5 yards.

Ok and either the Bears DBs are that much better than ours or that slick Atlanta passing attack really is a lot better on turf.

 

[lambeaulambo]

I don't think Ryan was a statue, he just can't hang in zone against receivers. It's not who he is. To Atlanta's credit, they forced us to use him with their running game, and then exploited him in coverage.

LBs in the 3-4 have to be quicker than Ryan, who belongs in a 4-3. Just my opinion.

 

[Dantés]

LBs in the 3-4 have to be quicker than Ryan, who belongs in a 4-3. Just my opinion.

I tend to think it's usually the reverse of that, but may be entirely irrelevant as we're not talking about 3-4 vs 4-3 so much as role players in sub packages.

 

[PackerDNA]

Ok and either the Bears DBs are that much better than ours or that slick Atlanta passing attack really is a lot better on turf.

You can't take the Bears game and say there's the be all and end all of how good the Falcons are. Dollars to donuts if they played 10 more times, the Falcons would win 8 or 9 of them by 2 TD's or more.
Were we as bad as the final scores against the Titans and Redskins last year?

 

[BrokenArrow]

According to the NFL record books it is a historical fact that we lost a TD due to this play.

Yes, we lost a TD on the play, but NOT due to any actual infraction committed by our players, and that is the point I was making.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Ok if we take out Julio and their top tier tackles, would the Falcon's O still be a threat?


Aside from Julio, their O is not much better. Other than that, yes, their D is much better. At the moment.

First, Julio is a pretty massive difference on his own. Second, Coleman + Freeman > Montgomery. Third....the offense isn't the big difference between the teams, the talent level on defense is the major difference on the two teams. You can point to numerous impact players on the Falcon's defense; Beasley, Trufant, Neal, Poe, Deion Jones. For the Packers I think Daniels qualifies and, when healthy, Perry.

 

[easyk83]

First, Julio is a pretty massive difference on his own. Second, Coleman + Freeman > Montgomery. Third....the offense isn't the big difference between the teams, the talent level on defense is the major difference on the two teams. You can point to numerous impact players on the Falcon's defense; Beasley, Trufant, Neal, Poe, Deion Jones. For the Packers I think Daniels qualifies and, when healthy, Perry.

A healthy Matthews certainly looked like an impact player for us that game, 1.5 sacks, two tffls and atleast 3-4 other plays that he blew up just by breaking into the backfield and rerouting the runner or forcing an off target throw. Poe isn't any better than players like Clarke Lowry or Dix at this point of his career.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

A healthy Matthews certainly looked like an impact player for us that game, 1.5 sacks, two tffls and atleast 3-4 other plays that he blew up just by breaking into the backfield and rerouting the runner or forcing an off target throw. Poe isn't any better than players like Clarke Lowry or Dix at this point of his career.

Yeah, one game samples are certainly the best indicators of performance. And sure, let's focus on Poe but I'll just ask, are you really telling me that you believe the level of defensive talent on the two teams is comparable? Because if you're not, then why are you pointing this out?

 

[easyk83]

Yeah, one game samples are certainly the best indicators of performance. And sure, let's focus on Poe but I'll just ask, are you really telling me that you believe the level of defensive talent on the two teams is comparable? Because if you're not, then why are you pointing this out?

He's been a genuine elite NFL player throughout his career whenever healthy... unfortunately he's rarely healthy. I would think that your Nick Perry qualification would apply to Matthews as well.

The defenses on both teams stink, we just managed to make them look good in the last two games with our wildly inconsistent and overrated offense.

 

[easyk83]

You can't take the Bears game and say there's the be all and end all of how good the Falcons are. Dollars to donuts if they played 10 more times, the Falcons would win 8 or 9 of them by 2 TD's or more.
Were we as bad as the final scores against the Titans and Redskins last year?

Sure I can, that game was played on the absolute crappiest playing surface in the NFL. You think it doesn't mess up the execution of those precise routes when the receivers are falling on their faces? That dome teams are better on turf compared to grass is a black letter NFL consensus.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

The difference is they're WR's beating our DB's by 5 yards.

Pretty much spot on.

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[PackerDNA]

Sure I can, that game was played on the absolute crappiest playing surface in the NFL. You think it doesn't mess up the execution of those precise routes when the receivers are falling on their faces? That dome teams are better on turf compared to grass is a black letter NFL consensus.

I think that now we're talking about 2 different things than from where we started. Sure a crappy surface will affect routes and be harder for a dome team built for speed on a fast, good surface.Although not a guarantee of a win, it's why we'd rather get the Falcons at Lambeau in January than their place.
But to the original point, you can't pick and choose regular season games to make a point of how good a team is. The old saw "they only beat the Browns by 3, we beat them by 33, ergo we should beat them by 30" is obviously flawed.
Again, Coach Mike said it best for regular season games; "it's not who you play, it's when you play them".

 

[Half Empty]

Pretty much spot on.

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

Except for "they're". Sorry, usually let those go in this day and age, but with a 'pretty much spot on' comment...

 

[I asked LT to delete my acct]

Please read the rules regarding correcting other members spelling mistakes in particular.......thank you.

 

[swhitset]

Sigh