Join Our Green Bay Packers Interactive Community!

We have been providing fans with the best source of Packers information since 2006!
Your participation is greatly anticipated!
Login or Register.
3 Pages<123>
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline Rios39  
#11 Posted : Tuesday, November 27, 2012 11:05:25 AM(UTC)
Rios39

Rank: 4th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 8/9/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 1
Applause Received: 30

the DB's are playing off so far and not pressing them off the line that short throws should be there. How is it that this defense is torched virtually every single week yet they play the packers and they look like the steel curtain?
blank
Offline RajiRoar  
#12 Posted : Tuesday, November 27, 2012 12:22:16 PM(UTC)
Laser Gunns

Rank: 3rd Round Draft Pick

United States
Joined: 9/30/2009(UTC)

Applause Given: 43
Applause Received: 256

Originally Posted by: Rios39 Go to Quoted Post
the DB's are playing off so far and not pressing them off the line that short throws should be there. How is it that this defense is torched virtually every single week yet they play the packers and they look like the steel curtain?


alot of people noted when we beat the Jags and Cards, that playing to that level will not work against good competition.

yup.

maybe we are not actually "playing down" to our opponent, but are showing how good (bad) we truley are on offense.



MintBaconDrivel

Dec, 11, 2012 - FOREVER!
Offline lolleren  
#13 Posted : Tuesday, November 27, 2012 6:38:15 PM(UTC)
lolleren

Rank: 6th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 7
Applause Received: 9

Originally Posted by: RajiRoar Go to Quoted Post
alot of people noted when we beat the Jags and Cards, that playing to that level will not work against good competition.

yup.

maybe we are not actually "playing down" to our opponent, but are showing how good (bad) we truley are on offense.



A quick glance at the stats on yards allowed and yards gained, and the points allowed and points gained, shows that we are indeed a average team.
That would match pretty well with the perception I have watching the games, we are average.
blank
Offline Rios39  
#14 Posted : Tuesday, November 27, 2012 6:47:16 PM(UTC)
Rios39

Rank: 4th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 8/9/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 1
Applause Received: 30

Originally Posted by: RajiRoar Go to Quoted Post
alot of people noted when we beat the Jags and Cards, that playing to that level will not work against good competition.

yup.

maybe we are not actually "playing down" to our opponent, but are showing how good (bad) we truley are on offense.



Yeah we have played bad against some decent defenses. Stop listening to analysts so much, the Giants have a BAD defense. Teams have been exploiting them all year long except for a 49ers team that can't play the catchup game, clearly we can't play that game either cause the only games we have been winning are the ones our D holds the other O down for most of the first half and we have control of.

If the D has a poor start our O can't get it together and picks start happening, sacks, turn overs and then it turns into 2 and 3 score leads. We had chances to come back in this Giants game AS WELL as the 49ers game but the offense kept throwing it away. Lets also be honest, our offense had no business getting a win vs the Bears or the Seahawks.

This offense is very, very bad unless it's in comfortable situations. Defense hasn't been great but they have been pretty good but I have no faith in this offense if they are being challenged. That's not a good thing.
blank
Offline Porforis  
#15 Posted : Tuesday, November 27, 2012 9:27:04 PM(UTC)
Porforis

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

United States
Joined: 8/22/2009(UTC)
Location: Milwaukee, WI

Applause Given: 169
Applause Received: 333

Originally Posted by: PackFanWithTwins Go to Quoted Post
If you look at the formation, and the contact. they are not being jammed. On the first play in question.

Nelson and the defender are in contact about 2 yards after the LOS, but Nelson starts 3 yards behind the LOS. that is 5 yards of free release before contact. Cobb is contacted about the yard to gain line, he starts 2 yards behind the LOS. Again 5 yards of free release. Finley is actually jammed pretty well coming of the Line. Jones has the biggest space and gets 7 yards of free release.

the theory though was, that coverage was such that would prevent them from running quick plays. It wasn't. The contact resulted because the patterns they were running were straight up field at the defenders. On the first play if either Nelson, Cobb or Jones, ran a slant, or any inward route instead of going upfield into contact, they quick routes would be available, until the defense adjusted, at which point, that would open up the 5-10 yard routes more.

The 2nd sack was the same. Yeah quick pressure was the cause, but again, the players were not pressed immediately, and there was easy options for quick routes if called, or audibled to.

The 2nd play you look at, 2nd & 18. Ended with Rodgers scrambling. Nelson is on an out turn route (probably a double move) which is fine itself. Driver goes straight up field and does a stop route moving towards the outside after. Finley is inside of him, and gets a pretty good release past Tuck, and quick pressure nullifies any chance with him. Jones also runs straight into his coverage. There was easy option on this play also. Driver was setup for WR screen with Nelson in position to block. Or Nelson run a slant with Driver inside to block for him. Or Jones run a slant from the bottom. Again, coverage did not prevent those routes, it was play calling and not adjusting at the LOS to formations.

Not only this game, but all our bad games, were almost the exact same. We kept running plays exactly the way the defense wanted us to, instead of running plays that make the defense come out of what they want to do.

Remember back to the days of Favre. How often did he look to Driver, or freeman or whoever when there was a 5 yard or so gap, and throw that 1 step drop slant and get 4-7 yards. With Rodgers, that look usually results in a back shoulder or deep route. I can't recall once where they switched to a slant. That could be because of what McCarthy wants them to do.

But the coverage did not dictate, it was choice. And lack of adjustment.


I absolutely agree that we should have ran more slants. However, just because you can swap in a slant for a completion out of half the plays I mentioned doesn't mean it would have turned out well. The Giants had our number and seemed to make adjustments after the TD to Nelson - why wouldn't they have adjusted again if we started throwing slants left and right? Their CBs (and on obvious passing downs, LBs) were staying close to the line and some were in zone. The great part about a slant is that if executed well, it is very hard to stop unless you know it's coming, and where it's coming. Unfortunately, Shotgun seems to be our default formation which slows the execution down. And in some of the examples you cited above, you mention that receivers are getting 5 yards of free release - If a receiver starts out on a slant 3 yards behind the LOS, that's plenty of time for a CB to react, especially in shotgun. And with the way the line was blocking, shotgun is the only reason Rodgers wasn't sacked 4 times by having his linemen pushed into him before he could take more than a step back.

In summary: We needed to mix it up. I agree absolutely that we needed to mix it up. However, you cannot simply take a bunch of plays that already happened, say "We should have thrown this" and assume that it will work for the whole game and that the Giants wouldn't have adjusted even half as nicely as they did after getting killed deep. We simply got outplayed and looked lethargic out there. There's no way we win this game with just top-notch playcalling, blocking at the line, or defense added to the game we put forward. Total team loss on this one (including coaching, minus maybe Cobb?).
UserPostedImage
Offline PackFanWithTwins  
#16 Posted : Tuesday, November 27, 2012 10:03:21 PM(UTC)
PackFanWithTwins

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

Joined: 9/26/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 13
Applause Received: 398

I think you are still missing the point of the thread. It was disproving the notion that we didn't run the slants and quick routes because the coverage prevented it, when it didn't. There was room for the routes easily. Not that on every play a slant is a guaranteed completion.

As for the rest. I would hope that if we started running slants, that the defenses would adjust, because in doing so, it opens up other routes, like the slugo and it makes passing holes bigger if they do. If Rodgers starts throwing the ball basically when he gets the ball, it also makes the defense pass rush think about blocking the quick passes instead of rushing. Which makes the Oline's life easier. Slants can also be run from every receiver position except TE.

That would be our offense dictating what the defense has to do, instead of just calling plays that fall right into what the defense wants us to do.

The world needs ditch diggers to Danny!!!
UserPostedImage
Offline Pack93z  
#17 Posted : Wednesday, November 28, 2012 10:43:48 AM(UTC)
Pack93z

Rank: Hall of Famer

PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Bronze: 2012

United States
Joined: 3/16/2007(UTC)
Location: North Central Wisconsin

Applause Given: 398
Applause Received: 1,078

Vanilla answer.. but the point Twins is trying to make... even though I disagree with the assessment of the effectiveness of their press.


Quote:
2. What has been the biggest issue in beating Cover 2 defenses this season?

CLEMENTS: I don't know if you can put your finger on one point. Obviously, a team that plays Cover 2, they're in defend mode. Hopefully what they're trying to do is get a pass rush with their front four. They have five guys underneath and two guys deep. A lot of times, the holes are there underneath, and that's where they're vulnerable. Obviously, down the middle and the side, they try to take that into account as they play those defenses and are hoping that you have to hold the ball a little longer than their rush can impact the timing of the play.
I think when there's enough will and aggression, there's no shortage of talent either.

UserPostedImage
Offline gbguy20  
#18 Posted : Wednesday, November 28, 2012 10:49:28 AM(UTC)
gbguy20

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

Joined: 8/28/2009(UTC)

Applause Given: 208
Applause Received: 285

knows where the soft spots are ~ doesn't call plays to attack them
call me Dan
thanks Post received 1 applause.
nerdmann on 11/28/2012(UTC)
Offline Pack93z  
#19 Posted : Wednesday, November 28, 2012 10:52:10 AM(UTC)
Pack93z

Rank: Hall of Famer

PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Bronze: 2012

United States
Joined: 3/16/2007(UTC)
Location: North Central Wisconsin

Applause Given: 398
Applause Received: 1,078

Originally Posted by: gbguy20 Go to Quoted Post
knows where the soft spots are ~ doesn't call plays to attack them


I think there was a wake up call for the coaching staff as well.. bring it or go home.
I think when there's enough will and aggression, there's no shortage of talent either.

UserPostedImage
Offline nerdmann  
#20 Posted : Wednesday, November 28, 2012 10:53:33 AM(UTC)
nerdmann

Rank: Most Valuable Player

Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 2,706
Applause Received: 664

Originally Posted by: gbguy20 Go to Quoted Post
knows where the soft spots are ~ doesn't call plays to attack them


...Even though we can't protect the QB against their front four, which means that getting the ball out on short patterns would be even that much MORE advisable.
“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”
Rss Feed 
Users browsing this topic
Guest
3 Pages<123>
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

Tweeter

Recent Topics
15m / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

49m / Green Bay Packers Talk / MintBaconDrivel

58m / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

10h / Green Bay Packers Talk / DoddPower

10h / Green Bay Packers Talk / DoddPower

13h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

18h / Green Bay Packers Talk / DarkaneRules

23-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / sschind

23-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / Tezzy

23-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

23-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann