Green Bay Packers Forum
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline wpr  
#1 Posted : Tuesday, November 12, 2013 5:58:14 AM(UTC)
JSOnline said:
A Green Bay Packer defense that averaged 26 interceptions the past four seasons has accumulated three through nine games.
Sponsor
Offline nerdmann  
#2 Posted : Tuesday, November 12, 2013 6:26:56 AM(UTC)
I honestly think this will come. It's become something of a jinx with these guys.

The INTs are there for the taking, they're just not getting them. Tramon should have had a couple this past week. I think his skills are beginning to decline. That's gonna help Ted in his decision making process this offseason, when it comes time to clear some cap space.

Also, Hayward's been out with that fucking hammy.
Offline play2win  
#3 Posted : Tuesday, November 12, 2013 6:29:29 AM(UTC)
Well, these last 7 games could be very telling in the INT department. If they turn on the fawcett and start to get picks in bunches through the remainder of the season, it would go a very long way come playoff time, should we get in. Cranking up the picks would help us to get there, help us steal some wins to get us there.

We are in a real predicament here, and the picks have to come if we are to make the playoffs. If we do get in, I would assume a big part of that would be the Packers secondary turning this around. Good luck guys! I'd love to see it.

Nerdmann, let's hope Tramon turns that around through the remainder of the season and makes Ted's choice a difficult one.

I'm not giving up on Hayward either. He had 6 INTs and 21 PDs last season. This year he has 0 INTs and 0 PDs. He started last season a bit slow too, with 0 and 1 through his first 3 games. Maybe he lights it up when he gets his wheels back under him.
thanks Post received 1 applause.
nerdmann on 11/12/2013(UTC)
Offline PackFanWithTwins  
#4 Posted : Tuesday, November 12, 2013 7:50:24 AM(UTC)
It isn't uncommon to see a DB not make a pick like Tramon did Sunday, one through his hands and the other while colliding with Burnett. It happens, as they say, if they could catch they would be WR. But what I want, is for them to be in position to make these types of plays on the ball. If they are, than they will get some INTs. I haven't seen them in position to attempt plays on the ball as often as I remember in the past.

I can live with low or even NO INTs as long as they are in position and making plays. 10 INTs don't help if they give up 20 TDs.
Offline nerdmann  
#5 Posted : Tuesday, November 12, 2013 10:07:43 AM(UTC)
play2win said: Go to Quoted Post
Well, these last 7 games could be very telling in the INT department. If they turn on the fawcett and start to get picks in bunches through the remainder of the season, it would go a very long way come playoff time, should we get in. Cranking up the picks would help us to get there, help us steal some wins to get us there.

We are in a real predicament here, and the picks have to come if we are to make the playoffs. If we do get in, I would assume a big part of that would be the Packers secondary turning this around. Good luck guys! I'd love to see it.

Nerdmann, let's hope Tramon turns that around through the remainder of the season and makes Ted's choice a difficult one.

I'm not giving up on Hayward either. He had 6 INTs and 21 PDs last season. This year he has 0 INTs and 0 PDs. He started last season a bit slow too, with 0 and 1 through his first 3 games. Maybe he lights it up when he gets his wheels back under him.


Hayward re-pulled his hammy this week. lol
Offline cheeseheads123  
#6 Posted : Tuesday, November 12, 2013 10:46:44 AM(UTC)
Ed Reed was just cut. Would he be an upgrade over Jennings?
Offline steveishere  
#7 Posted : Tuesday, November 12, 2013 10:57:02 AM(UTC)
cheeseheads123 said: Go to Quoted Post
Ed Reed was just cut. Would he be an upgrade over Jennings?


Possibly but he's not worth his contract. Reed has looked pretty bad this year (really not any better than Jennings) and someone still may claim him on waivers. If the money was right I wouldn't be opposed to giving him a shot since a new team/system may help but he's not worth much.
Offline Gaycandybacon  
#8 Posted : Tuesday, November 12, 2013 11:18:21 AM(UTC)
What has caused the turnovers the most though? WHEN WE BLITZ!

I just want Dom to bring more exotic blitzes back. The turnovers will come if we confuse the opposing quarterback.

Yes we do get beat sometimes for big plays if we blitz, but I don't see the difference in just trying to see us cover and rush 4 and still get beat.... We need to try to cause turnovers, and not wait and see if it happens.

What will help this defense:

- Put Hyde in the slot and blitz him from time to time on both sides of the field. He'll solve our tackling problem.

- Put Tramon opposite of Shields were he belongs. Sub him out with House on third downs.

- Mix up formations. Teams take advantage of our Nickel formation, don't use that every play.

- Man up with a spy. Use Clay and Datone as spys. Let's face it Clay isn't effective with one hand. But if you use him other ways than rushing the passer he can be. His hand might be gone, but his athleticism isn't.
Offline PackFanWithTwins  
#9 Posted : Tuesday, November 12, 2013 11:54:22 AM(UTC)
Gaycandybacon said: Go to Quoted Post
What has caused the turnovers the most though? WHEN WE BLITZ!

I just want Dom to bring more exotic blitzes back. The turnovers will come if we confuse the opposing quarterback.

Yes we do get beat sometimes for big plays if we blitz, but I don't see the difference in just trying to see us cover and rush 4 and still get beat.... We need to try to cause turnovers, and not wait and see if it happens.

What will help this defense:

- Put Hyde in the slot and blitz him from time to time on both sides of the field. He'll solve our tackling problem.

- Put Tramon opposite of Shields were he belongs. Sub him out with House on third downs.

- Mix up formations. Teams take advantage of our Nickel formation, don't use that every play.

- Man up with a spy. Use Clay and Datone as spys. Let's face it Clay isn't effective with one hand. But if you use him other ways than rushing the passer he can be. His hand might be gone, but his athleticism isn't.


Thing is, there are only so many options. There is really nothing done by any team that hasn't been seen a thousand times before. we can't blitz from any new position. Only can confuse the oline to get a free defender, or make them adjust giving us what should be a favorable matchup.

Tramon has actually been pretty solid in the slot. He has gotten sacks, and has been solid in run support and tackling. Keep House and Shields on the edges where they belong.

Base, nickel, dime which ever defense is determined by the offense. If they have more WR, we need more DBs on the field. Unless we want Neal covering the slot.

Clay should be kept off until he can defend himself. He needs to get that club down to a manageable size, where it can be formed to resemble the shape of a hand.
Offline texaspackerbacker  
#10 Posted : Tuesday, November 12, 2013 5:46:13 PM(UTC)
I know this ain't gonna go over too good with a lot of people, but I really think LUCK has a lot to do with it. We have had a LOT of near misses. Rather than blame the guys coming close, I prefer to think that things will get better just by that LUCK starting to even out.

The other factor, as I see it - and I suppose a lot of people ain't gonna like this either, is the Packers not taking early and large leads this year, forcing opponents to do more passing. And why is that? A large part of the reason is Packer emphasis this year on a running game and ball control. Let Aaron be Aaron - when he comes back; Use Lacy as a threat and as a change of pace; Pass approximately as much as previous seasons and generously on early downs. THAT will result in more scoring, early leads, opponents forced to play catch-up, and MORE INTERCEPTIONS by our secondary.
Offline dhazer  
#11 Posted : Tuesday, November 12, 2013 6:03:36 PM(UTC)
steveishere said: Go to Quoted Post
Possibly but he's not worth his contract. Reed has looked pretty bad this year (really not any better than Jennings) and someone still may claim him on waivers. If the money was right I wouldn't be opposed to giving him a shot since a new team/system may help but he's not worth much.


Actually if he clears waivers I would be very happy to sign him. He would be going back to the 3-4 defense like in Baltimore and his leadership is something we are lacking on that defense.

But I don't see Ted Thompson going for him
Offline DoddPower  
#12 Posted : Tuesday, November 12, 2013 6:06:57 PM(UTC)
dhazer said: Go to Quoted Post
Actually if he clears waivers I would be very happy to sign him. He would be going back to the 3-4 defense like in Baltimore and his leadership is something we are lacking on that defense.

But I don't see Ted Thompson going for him


Why would he? He sucks. He has been outplayed by a rookie.
Rss Feed 
Users browsing this topic
Guest
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Notification

Icon
Error


Recent Topics
16m / Green Bay Packers Talk / cheeseheads123

33m / Green Bay Packers Talk / DoddPower

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Smokey

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / FLORIDA PACKER88

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / gbguy20

5h / Green Bay Packers Talk / OlHoss1884

9h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

28-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / DakotaT

27-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

27-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / packerfanoutwest

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / steveishere

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / steveishere

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Smokey


Tweeter