Green Bay Packers Forum

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.
4 Pages<1234>
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Online wpr  
#16 Posted : Thursday, January 17, 2013 12:42:37 PM(UTC)
wpr

Rank: Hall of Famer

PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Gold: 2012PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Gold: 2013FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Bronze: 2013

United States
Joined: 8/8/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 3,232
Applause Received: 1,554

Originally Posted by: nerdmann Go to Quoted Post
MM doesn't want to drain time off the clock. He wants to score quickly, so that he can score more often.

Unfortunately this leaves us at a disadvantage when there are offensive players like Kaepernick you want to keep off the field.


I think if you polled 100 HCs from the NFL and NCAA and asked them if they preferred to score in 2-3 plays but only used up a min off the clock or have the ball for 10 minutes where you may or may not score and the score could be only a FG, 100% of the coaches would chose to score quickly.

But that is just my guess. Big Grin
UserPostedImage
Offline PackerTraxx  
#17 Posted : Thursday, January 17, 2013 2:51:46 PM(UTC)
PackerTraxx

Rank: 2nd Round Draft Pick

Joined: 8/13/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 18
Applause Received: 127

Originally Posted by: wpr Go to Quoted Post
I think if you polled 100 HCs from the NFL and NCAA and asked them if they preferred to score in 2-3 plays but only used up a min off the clock or have the ball for 10 minutes where you may or may not score and the score could be only a FG, 100% of the coaches would chose to score quickly.

But that is just my guess. Big Grin


I don't see that as a fair comparison, anybody would take a TD over a field goal, unless they can't count! The question should be "would you sooner take 2-3 plays or 10 minutes to score the same amount of points on a drive". Unless you're behind with a limited amount of time I believe 100% would opt for 10 minutes.
Why is Jerry Kramer not in the Hall of Fame?
Online wpr  
#18 Posted : Thursday, January 17, 2013 2:55:35 PM(UTC)
wpr

Rank: Hall of Famer

PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Gold: 2012PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Gold: 2013FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Bronze: 2013

United States
Joined: 8/8/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 3,232
Applause Received: 1,554

Originally Posted by: PackerTraxx Go to Quoted Post
I don't see that as a fair comparison, anybody would take a TD over a field goal, unless they can't count! The question should be "would you sooner take 2-3 plays or 10 minutes to score the same amount of points on a drive". Unless you're behind with a limited amount of time I believe 100% would opt for 10 minutes.


It is fair because there is no guarantee you can score even if you have the ball for 10 minutes. Over the years we have seen many times were GB (and other teams) had the ball for 7-8 minutes and got shut out.

So the point is to take the points no matter how quick you get them. hanging on to the ball is no magic solution at all.
UserPostedImage
Online Zero2Cool  
#19 Posted : Thursday, January 17, 2013 2:57:58 PM(UTC)
Zero2Cool

Rank: Legend

Yahoo! Fantasy Football - Gold: 2009FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Silver: 2010Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Silver: 2011ESPN NCAA March Madness - Bronze: 2010Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Bronze: 2013

United States
Joined: 10/13/2006(UTC)
Location: Green Bay, WI

Applause Given: 1,990
Applause Received: 2,283

Originally Posted by: wpr Go to Quoted Post
I think if you polled 100 HCs from the NFL and NCAA and asked them if they preferred to score in 2-3 plays but only used up a min off the clock or have the ball for 10 minutes where you may or may not score and the score could be only a FG, 100% of the coaches would chose to score quickly.

But that is just my guess. Big Grin


If my team is up by 8 points and there is 12 minutes or less to go, I'll take the 10 minute drive that may or may not yield a field goal attempt. Especially if it's the Packers defense.
"I do not think there is any thrill that can go through the human heart like that felt by the inventor as he sees some creation of the brain unfolding to success... such emotions make a man forget food, sleep, friends, love, everything." - Nikola Tesla

UserPostedImage
thanks Post received 1 applause.
macbob on 1/17/2013(UTC)
Offline PackerTraxx  
#20 Posted : Thursday, January 17, 2013 3:11:42 PM(UTC)
PackerTraxx

Rank: 2nd Round Draft Pick

Joined: 8/13/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 18
Applause Received: 127

Originally Posted by: wpr Go to Quoted Post
It is fair because there is no guarantee you can score even if you have the ball for 10 minutes. Over the years we have seen many times were GB (and other teams) had the ball for 7-8 minutes and got shut out.

So the point is to take the points no matter how quick you get them. hanging on to the ball is no magic solution at all.


I've also seen GB go 3 and out... I'll take the points not matter how long it takes.
Why is Jerry Kramer not in the Hall of Fame?
Online wpr  
#21 Posted : Thursday, January 17, 2013 3:22:28 PM(UTC)
wpr

Rank: Hall of Famer

PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Gold: 2012PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Gold: 2013FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Bronze: 2013

United States
Joined: 8/8/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 3,232
Applause Received: 1,554

Originally Posted by: PackerTraxx Go to Quoted Post
I've also seen GB go 3 and out... I'll take the points not matter how long it takes.


In my scenario the only sure points are the quick ones. It is not some evil plot by Mike McCarthy to blow away all the offensive records.

I will take the points too. long drive or quick one. There is nothing wrong with scoring quickly. There is no virtue to plodding along but there is a greater risk of not coring by getting on 4 yards an attempt.
UserPostedImage
Online QCHuskerFan  
#22 Posted : Thursday, January 17, 2013 3:50:13 PM(UTC)
QCHuskerFan

Rank: 6th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 12/30/2010(UTC)

Applause Given: 109
Applause Received: 173

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool Go to Quoted Post
Defense Rankings (of who played atleast 25% snaps) from ProFootballFocus - link to how they grade.

3 - 4 DE out of 32
  • 7th B.J. Raji
  • 13th Mike Neal
  • 32nd Jerel Worthy



3 - 4 OLB out of 34
  • 2nd Clay Matthews
  • 28th Dezman Moses
  • 34th Erik Walden



DT/NT out of 85
  • 37th Ryan Pickett



ILB out of 53
  • 10th Brad Jones
  • 20th A.J. Hawk
  • 28th D.J. Smith



CB out of 113
  • 3rd Casey Hayward
  • 12th Sam Shields
  • 40th Davon House
  • 60th Tramon Williams



S out of 88
  • 17th Morgan Burnett
  • 32nd Jerron McMillian
  • 37th Charles Woodson
  • 50th M.D. Jennings


Some real interesting things here. Packers had the worst 3-4 OLB and the worst 3-4 DE. Although what it really means is that we had the worst full time player at those positions. There were many worse players that didn't see the snaps that ours did. Packers staff has to look at last years draft and smile. Because their top pick would have been playing instead of the poorly rated 3-4 LBs and their #2 pick was good enough to log a lot of snaps, but bad enough to be poorly rated. Only way to go is up or injury...

Many are looking for big things from DJ Smith but he was rated only average and below Hawk, who many don't believe in.

Williams being the #60 CB is a big concern to me. I don't care how many big name receivers he is locked up on. He can't rank that bad and take up the salary he does.
Offline PackFanWithTwins  
#23 Posted : Thursday, January 17, 2013 6:16:18 PM(UTC)
PackFanWithTwins

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

Joined: 9/26/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 14
Applause Received: 442

Originally Posted by: QCHuskerFan Go to Quoted Post
Some real interesting things here. Packers had the worst 3-4 OLB and the worst 3-4 DE. Although what it really means is that we had the worst full time player at those positions. There were many worse players that didn't see the snaps that ours did. Packers staff has to look at last years draft and smile. Because their top pick would have been playing instead of the poorly rated 3-4 LBs and their #2 pick was good enough to log a lot of snaps, but bad enough to be poorly rated. Only way to go is up or injury...

Many are looking for big things from DJ Smith but he was rated only average and below Hawk, who many don't believe in.

Williams being the #60 CB is a big concern to me. I don't care how many big name receivers he is locked up on. He can't rank that bad and take up the salary he does.


There is seriously something wrong with this ranking system. Casey is not the 3rd best CB, neither he nor House are better than Tramon. Or McMillian better than Woodson. With rankings like that, it seriously questions any validity of that sight.
The world needs ditch diggers to Danny!!!
UserPostedImage
Offline nerdmann  
#24 Posted : Thursday, January 17, 2013 9:24:53 PM(UTC)
nerdmann

Rank: Hall of Famer

Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 2,784
Applause Received: 674

Originally Posted by: wpr Go to Quoted Post
I think if you polled 100 HCs from the NFL and NCAA and asked them if they preferred to score in 2-3 plays but only used up a min off the clock or have the ball for 10 minutes where you may or may not score and the score could be only a FG, 100% of the coaches would chose to score quickly.

But that is just my guess. Big Grin


How'd that work out?
“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.”
Offline Packers_Finland  
#25 Posted : Friday, January 18, 2013 2:38:14 AM(UTC)
Packers_Finland

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

Joined: 8/11/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 88
Applause Received: 45

Originally Posted by: PackFanWithTwins Go to Quoted Post
There is seriously something wrong with this ranking system. Casey is not the 3rd best CB, neither he nor House are better than Tramon. Or McMillian better than Woodson. With rankings like that, it seriously questions any validity of that sight.


How do you know? Do you watch every snap of every single NFL game multiple times? These guys do.

I thought Hayward was our best DB this year. He was spectacular. I'm not going to go as far as to say he's definitely better than Tramon, but he was better than him this year for sure. Hayward had more INTs, more defended passes, less TDs allowed (at zero) while playing considerably less snaps than Tramon. Tramon was %-wise targeted more often, and allowed more catches and yards per snap than Hayward. Though, one must consider that Tramon was covering the opponent's best guy more often than Hayward.

From what I've read (they have good articles too where they explain a lot of their grading and how that grade manifested itself during the games) it's a very reliable site in terms of evaluating players' performances. I don't think they know everything or have the perfect system for grading player performance but it's better than any other site I've seen.
This is a placeholder
thanks Post received 1 applause.
Zero2Cool on 1/18/2013(UTC)
Online wpr  
#26 Posted : Friday, January 18, 2013 6:40:21 AM(UTC)
wpr

Rank: Hall of Famer

PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Gold: 2012PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Gold: 2013FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Bronze: 2013

United States
Joined: 8/8/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 3,232
Applause Received: 1,554

Originally Posted by: nerdmann Go to Quoted Post
How'd that work out?


excellent. Thanks for asking.
UserPostedImage
Offline gbguy20  
#27 Posted : Friday, January 18, 2013 6:45:30 AM(UTC)
gbguy20

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

Joined: 8/28/2009(UTC)

Applause Given: 210
Applause Received: 285

Originally Posted by: PackFanWithTwins Go to Quoted Post
There is seriously something wrong with this ranking system. Casey is not the 3rd best CB, neither he nor House are better than Tramon. Or McMillian better than Woodson. With rankings like that, it seriously questions any validity of that sight.


http://www.profootballfocus.com/about/grading/

I trust their rankings much more than anything else I've come across
call me Dan
Offline PackFanWithTwins  
#28 Posted : Friday, January 18, 2013 7:20:41 AM(UTC)
PackFanWithTwins

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

Joined: 9/26/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 14
Applause Received: 442

Originally Posted by: Packers_Finland Go to Quoted Post
How do you know? Do you watch every snap of every single NFL game multiple times? These guys do.

I thought Hayward was our best DB this year. He was spectacular. I'm not going to go as far as to say he's definitely better than Tramon, but he was better than him this year for sure. Hayward had more INTs, more defended passes, less TDs allowed (at zero) while playing considerably less snaps than Tramon. Tramon was %-wise targeted more often, and allowed more catches and yards per snap than Hayward. Though, one must consider that Tramon was covering the opponent's best guy more often than Hayward.

From what I've read (they have good articles too where they explain a lot of their grading and how that grade manifested itself during the games) it's a very reliable site in terms of evaluating players' performances. I don't think they know everything or have the perfect system for grading player performance but it's better than any other site I've seen.


Do you really need to watch every single snap to see that Hayward was not the 3rd best CB in the ENTIRE NFL? He was the 3rd best CB on this team. Thus being the NB. He had his shot while Shields was down and guess what. He didn't keep the #2 spot. Sammy took it back.

These guys, write trying to justify their site, yes they have interesting articles, but they are not the bible. If they knew that much, they would not be working on a website, they would have a job for a NFL team. Hayward, had the easiest job of our CB, he is surrounded by more help. I'll take the expertise of the coached of the Packers, over some geeks trying to make their site seem valid.
The world needs ditch diggers to Danny!!!
UserPostedImage
Online Zero2Cool  
#29 Posted : Friday, January 18, 2013 7:26:33 AM(UTC)
Zero2Cool

Rank: Legend

Yahoo! Fantasy Football - Gold: 2009FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Silver: 2010Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Silver: 2011ESPN NCAA March Madness - Bronze: 2010Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Bronze: 2013

United States
Joined: 10/13/2006(UTC)
Location: Green Bay, WI

Applause Given: 1,990
Applause Received: 2,283

Originally Posted by: PackFanWithTwins Go to Quoted Post
Do you really need to watch every single snap to see that Hayward was not the 3rd best CB in the ENTIRE NFL? He was the 3rd best CB on this team.


Casey Hawyard had the third best season in the NFL, which is not saying he is the 3rd best CB in the NFL. Massive difference there, massive.
"I do not think there is any thrill that can go through the human heart like that felt by the inventor as he sees some creation of the brain unfolding to success... such emotions make a man forget food, sleep, friends, love, everything." - Nikola Tesla

UserPostedImage
Offline Pack93z  
#30 Posted : Friday, January 18, 2013 7:29:22 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: 403
Applause Received: 1,097

Originally Posted by: Packers_Finland Go to Quoted Post
How do you know? Do you watch every snap of every single NFL game multiple times? These guys do.

I thought Hayward was our best DB this year. He was spectacular. I'm not going to go as far as to say he's definitely better than Tramon, but he was better than him this year for sure. Hayward had more INTs, more defended passes, less TDs allowed (at zero) while playing considerably less snaps than Tramon. Tramon was %-wise targeted more often, and allowed more catches and yards per snap than Hayward. Though, one must consider that Tramon was covering the opponent's best guy more often than Hayward.

From what I've read (they have good articles too where they explain a lot of their grading and how that grade manifested itself during the games) it's a very reliable site in terms of evaluating players' performances. I don't think they know everything or have the perfect system for grading player performance but it's better than any other site I've seen.


Here is one thing that isn't taken into account in the rankings.. Hayward played most of the year in the slot, where you have more over help than the edge. You can gamble a bit more thus you should have more opportunities for picks... hence why they tried to always put Woodson in the slot.. allow his play making ability surface.

Not taking anything away from his game and performance this season.. just noting that PFF does a decent job overall IMO.. they don't always factor in the roles each player on each team takes.
I think when there's enough will and aggression, there's no shortage of talent either.

UserPostedImage
Rss Feed 
Users browsing this topic
Guest
4 Pages<1234>
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
1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / musccy

10h / Green Bay Packers Talk / RaiderPride

11h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

11h / Green Bay Packers Talk / porky88

14h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nyrpack

18-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / PackFanWithTwins

18-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / musccy

18-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Dulak

18-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Porforis

18-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / luigis

17-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

17-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Rockmolder

17-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / dyeah_gb

17-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Tezzy

17-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Gilligan


Tweeter