Discussion Board
Welcome Guest! You can login or register. Login or Register.

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
wpr  
#1 Posted : Saturday, September 28, 2013 5:24:59 AM(UTC)
JSOnline said:
Three games into the 2013 season, the Green Bay Packers are half the team they want to be defensively.

They have been great at limiting long runs but are among the NFL's worst at allowing pass plays of 20 or more yards.

They rank in the top 10 in fewest first downs allowed on third and 5 or more but sit tied for 29th in passing touchdowns allowed.

They have committed just two competitive penalties (non-personal foul or roughness) but have given up nine touchdown drives of 80 or more yards.

They have played the entire season without safety Morgan Burnett and cornerback Casey Hayward because of hamstring injuries, but they have not missed a start anywhere else on the unit


I hope the return of Burnett and Hayward will solve all ills but I am not so sure. his may be Capers last season if he doesn't get things turned around. He is out of chances and excuses.
nerdmann  
#2 Posted : Saturday, September 28, 2013 6:03:59 AM(UTC)
Capers is on the hot seat.

But we all know that if Kaepernick and Dalton had only run 2/3 as many plays as they did, we'd be 3-0 and the defense would be ranking much higher.

Time of Possession, Mike. Get some.
Mucky Tundra  
#3 Posted : Saturday, September 28, 2013 6:18:48 AM(UTC)
nerdmann said: Go to Quoted Post
Capers is on the hot seat.

But we all know that if Kaepernick and Dalton had only run 2/3 as many plays as they did, we'd be 3-0 and the defense would be ranking much higher.

Time of Possession, Mike. Get some.


Packers 31:51
Bengals 28:09

How much more do they need? :-k

(The San Fran game is another matter though)
nerdmann  
#4 Posted : Saturday, September 28, 2013 6:27:09 AM(UTC)
Mucky Tundra said: Go to Quoted Post
Packers 31:51
Bengals 28:09

How much more do they need? :-k

(The San Fran game is another matter though)


About another 5:00.
hardrocker950  
#5 Posted : Saturday, September 28, 2013 6:44:23 AM(UTC)
We have heard this before. I think injuries are part of the problem, but a DC's job is to make the most is of what he has to work with - and I'm not convinced he has done this.

I can't imagine our coverage getting any worse, but the way we have looked on D the past couple of years - this is his last chance to make me think he is as good as the talking heads claim. If I see another game like week 1 - I will officially be on board the "fire Capers" campaign.

EDIT - Nerdmann makes a valid point, the offense has not exactly helped out our D by extending ToP. Having our offense on the field longer gives us a better chance at winning.
gbguy20  
#6 Posted : Saturday, September 28, 2013 7:36:58 AM(UTC)
This is definitely his last year to prove his worth.

EDIT: HOW BOUT THAT FUCKING OLINE COACH
Gaycandybacon  
#7 Posted : Saturday, September 28, 2013 10:55:26 AM(UTC)
I think we would of won that game if Rodgers didn't throw one of those 2 picks. If he doesn't throw that one to Cobb we definitely win. 31 minutes is a lot. You can't blame the Coach for the other 2 Interceptions that would of kept the drive going if not thrown to extend that 31.
Laser Gunns  
#8 Posted : Saturday, September 28, 2013 12:01:26 PM(UTC)
Mucky Tundra said: Go to Quoted Post
Packers 31:51
Bengals 28:09

How much more do they need? :-k

(The San Fran game is another matter though)


With how many turnovers they coughed up. We could have done a lot better.
buckeyepackfan  
#9 Posted : Sunday, September 29, 2013 5:54:19 AM(UTC)
YEAR..........PACKERS T.O.P.......OPP. T.O.P......TURNOVER RATIO......RECORD

2008................31:37................28:56....................+7.....................6-10
2009................33:02................26:57..................+24.....................11-5
2010................32:01................28:46..................+10.....................10-6
2011................30:29................29:31..................+24.....................15-1
2012................30:26................29:33..................+07.....................11-5

Another 5 minutes in Time of possession? That would make The Bengals game 36:51, a number that isn't reached very often in The NFL.

I hate bringing facts and stats into these conversations, the only STAT that counts is W-L record.

Time of possession does not calculate into winning games, there are too many variables that goes into who has the ball for how long.

It's all about winning the turnover battle, it always has been and it always will be.

nerdmann  
#10 Posted : Sunday, September 29, 2013 6:30:53 AM(UTC)
buckeyepackfan said: Go to Quoted Post
YEAR..........PACKERS T.O.P.......OPP. T.O.P......TURNOVER RATIO......RECORD

2008................31:37................28:56....................+7.....................6-10
2009................33:02................26:57..................+24.....................11-5
2010................32:01................28:46..................+10.....................10-6
2011................30:29................29:31..................+24.....................15-1
2012................30:26................29:33..................+07.....................11-5

Another 5 minutes in Time of possession? That would make The Bengals game 36:51, a number that isn't reached very often in The NFL.

I hate bringing facts and stats into these conversations, the only STAT that counts is W-L record.

Time of possession does not calculate into winning games, there are too many variables that goes into who has the ball for how long.

It's all about winning the turnover battle, it always has been and it always will be.



We did win the turnover battle.

buckeyepackfan  
#11 Posted : Sunday, September 29, 2013 7:56:31 AM(UTC)
nerdmann said: Go to Quoted Post
We did win the turnover battle.



One of the rare occasions, break the game down and this more than most was all about turnovers, not time of possession.

Packers fumble kickoff, go down 14-0, Packers force 4 straight turnovers, pull to 14-13.

The one glaring point here is that The Packers did not take advantage of the turnovers, only getting 13 points.(or it could be said The Bengals D stepped up)

Packers go up 30-14, while controlling the ball and the clock, then comes the 2 turnovers which The Bengals scored td's after each.

So yes, this one game, The Packers won the turnover battle but lost the game, that is a rarity, but it is what the teams did after the turnovers that determined the outcome.

The Bengals capitalized on them The Packers didn't.

When the Packers were +3 in turnovers they cut the lead to 14-13 then stretched it to 30-14.


Once again, all you can focus on are 2 things, time of possession and my favorite, The Packers, as a team or individually "shitting" themselves.

Once again I have to show you that neither has a huge determination on the outcomes of games.

Time of Possession, most of the time is altered by turnovers.

Shitting yourself I HAVE NEVER HAD A CLUE how that pertains to a football game, and have never found an official stat called by that name.

In your world I am sure it exists, not in mine.
User is suspended until 5/28/2018 11:54:40 AM(UTC) DakotaT  
#12 Posted : Sunday, September 29, 2013 8:28:34 AM(UTC)
The Packers shit themselves because they handed the ball off to a 180lb running back instead of letting the quarterback dive under their 320lb LG for the first down. Everything Buckeye just said has merit, but he always gives our coaches a pass. That loss is on the person that called the fourth down deep draw for a first down.

I'm on Buckeye's ignore list so somebody will have to let him know how clueless he is.
nerdmann  
#13 Posted : Sunday, September 29, 2013 8:36:27 AM(UTC)
buckeyepackfan said: Go to Quoted Post
One of the rare occasions, break the game down and this more than most was all about turnovers, not time of possession.

Packers fumble kickoff, go down 14-0, Packers force 4 straight turnovers, pull to 14-13.

The one glaring point here is that The Packers did not take advantage of the turnovers, only getting 13 points.(or it could be said The Bengals D stepped up)

Packers go up 30-14, while controlling the ball and the clock, then comes the 2 turnovers which The Bengals scored td's after each.

So yes, this one game, The Packers won the turnover battle but lost the game, that is a rarity, but it is what the teams did after the turnovers that determined the outcome.

The Bengals capitalized on them The Packers didn't.

When the Packers were +3 in turnovers they cut the lead to 14-13 then stretched it to 30-14.


Once again, all you can focus on are 2 things, time of possession and my favorite, The Packers, as a team or individually "sh!tting" themselves.

Once again I have to show you that neither has a huge determination on the outcomes of games.

Time of Possession, most of the time is altered by turnovers.

sh!tting yourself I HAVE NEVER HAD A CLUE how that pertains to a football game, and have never found an official stat called by that name.

In your world I am sure it exists, not in mine.


Ok wait, we actually didn't win the turnover battle.

Ross's fumble, Franklin's fumble, two INTs by Aaron.

Four turnovers each way?

Anyway, no one's arguing that we shouldn't win the turnover battle.

Fact is, if time ran out, the game would have been over, and there would have been no comeback. Mike and Aaron like the no-huddle offense. We've had drives of 10 plays that burn less than 3 minutes. Fact is, even with the no-huddle, they could still run the clock down in between plays.

They don't do that, and it results in the other team getting more plays on offense and our defense getting worn down.
buckeyepackfan  
#14 Posted : Sunday, September 29, 2013 9:17:26 AM(UTC)
nerdmann said: Go to Quoted Post
Ok wait, we actually didn't win the turnover battle.

Ross's fumble, Franklin's fumble, two INTs by Aaron.

Four turnovers each way?

Anyway, no one's arguing that we shouldn't win the turnover battle.

Fact is, if time ran out, the game would have been over, and there would have been no comeback. Mike and Aaron like the no-huddle offense. We've had drives of 10 plays that burn less than 3 minutes. Fact is, even with the no-huddle, they could still run the clock down in between plays.

They don't do that, and it results in the other team getting more plays on offense and our defense getting worn down.


Did I not say, The packers did win the turnover battle this game, and it is a rarity that they would lose this game.

Packers scored 13 pts off 4 Bengal turnovers.

Bengals scored 17 pts off 3 Packer turnovers.

That's a 4 pt swing, hhmmm what was final score? oh yea 34-30.

Packers don't turn the ball over in 2nd half they win the game, the outcome has nothing to do with time of possession.

gbguy20  
#15 Posted : Sunday, September 29, 2013 9:54:36 AM(UTC)
buckeyepackfan said: Go to Quoted Post
Did I not say, The packers did win the turnover battle this game, and it is a rarity that they would lose this game.

Packers scored 13 pts off 4 Bengal turnovers.

Bengals scored 17 pts off 3 Packer turnovers.

That's a 4 pt swing, hhmmm what was final score? oh yea 34-30.

Packers don't turn the ball over in 2nd half they win the game, the outcome has nothing to do with time of possession.



you missed one
nerdmann  
#16 Posted : Sunday, September 29, 2013 10:00:27 AM(UTC)
buckeyepackfan said: Go to Quoted Post
Did I not say, The packers did win the turnover battle this game, and it is a rarity that they would lose this game.

Packers scored 13 pts off 4 Bengal turnovers.

Bengals scored 17 pts off 3 Packer turnovers.

That's a 4 pt swing, hhmmm what was final score? oh yea 34-30.

Packers don't turn the ball over in 2nd half they win the game, the outcome has nothing to do with time of possession.



If time runs out prior to Franklin's fumble, we win.
User is suspended until 5/28/2018 11:54:40 AM(UTC) DakotaT  
#17 Posted : Sunday, September 29, 2013 10:08:29 AM(UTC)
nerdmann said: Go to Quoted Post
If time runs out prior to Franklin's fumble, we win.


Quit making sense, it defeats his argument. That first down wins that football game. McCarthy called the wrong play, which is becoming a little too regular in my opinion.
buckeyepackfan  
#18 Posted : Sunday, September 29, 2013 10:11:19 AM(UTC)
nerdmann said: Go to Quoted Post
If time runs out prior to Franklin's fumble, we win.


The Bengals had the ball 10:00 of the 1st quarter.

That means the Packers controlled the clock the rest of the game.

THEY TURNED THE BALL OVER!!!!!! TWICE!!! In the 2nd half

The Packers could have chose to go for a FG, or punt, but they decided to go for it so they could run more time off the clock, but THEY TURNED THE BALL OVER!!!!!

That is why they lost.

Not because there was still time left on the clock!!!!!
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

Fan Shout
TheKanataThrilla (1h) : I guess I should have did a refresh when I walked away from the computer.
TheKanataThrilla (1h) : Peters is 25 with one year left on his contract at just over $3M
Zero2Cool (2h) : Mel Kiper sticks with Marcus Davenport to GB in 2nd mock
Zero2Cool (4h) : As for Marcus Peters, how old is he an what's his contract years left?
Zero2Cool (4h) : Packers got tired of Sitton's antics.
Zero2Cool (4h) : Sitton was released not because of play or salary, but personality. He will not be re-signed.
TheKanataThrilla (4h) : If we are planning on possibly cutting Cobb I can see the 2nd round pick. A second round pick for Peters is a pretty good deal.
Smokey (5h) : I'd offer Cobb + a 3rd round pick + a 6th round pick in 2019 for the CB Peters from KC.
TheKanataThrilla (6h) : I guess that is a highter round pick
TheKanataThrilla (6h) : Suggestion was a 2nd round pick. I would want a lower round pick. I think that is too much. A 3rd or 4th seems about right.
Smokey (6h) : Cobb and WHAT PICK ?
TheKanataThrilla (7h) : A suggestion I saw was a trade of Cobb and a Pick for Peters. I think that would be a great move.
Smokey (10h) : Sitton was drafted be GB in 2008, not a young man at this point, but still is a "bear" of a man.
Cheesey (17h) : Sitton? Maybe if the price is right.
Cheesey (17h) : I doubt the Packers would try to resign Sutton. But who knows? If the price is right?
Zero2Cool (20h) : Bears declining option on Josh Sitton. He'll be Free Agent.
Zero2Cool (20h) : Chiefs CB Marcus Peters trade rumors -- come to Packers!
Smokey (20-Feb) : Join us in Packershome and be part of the discussion today .
Zero2Cool (19-Feb) : Elizabeeth ... good bye
Zero2Cool (19-Feb) : Saturday, August 19, 2017
Zero2Cool (19-Feb) : That's dedicated spammng!
Nonstopdrivel (19-Feb) : For some reason, I had to flush my DNS cache to access this site from my laptop today.
Nonstopdrivel (19-Feb) : I prefer toads to frogs, Smokey, thank you very much.
Rockmolder (19-Feb) : My girlfriends says thanks, Rourke.
Smokey (19-Feb) : Nonstopdrivel that you most likely say to all the frogs you meet .
Nonstopdrivel (19-Feb) : Rockmolder's avatar is so fucking sexy.
gbguy20 (19-Feb) : never seen the interview before. tough to listen to. can't believe it was 7 years ago
gbguy20 (19-Feb) : just watched a nick Collins tribute on yourube. the end featured an interview with nick reflecting on his injury
buckeyepackfan (17-Feb) : Saints De'Vante Harris nothing but a POS!!!!! Look up his tweetes on Florida killings!!
Nonstopdrivel (17-Feb) : They're laying new gas line near my house. The trucks are all from a company in Madison.
Smokey (14-Feb) : 2018 Hall o Fame Game/Aug.2,2018/Ravens vs Bears
Zero2Cool (13-Feb) : Based off 2017 records, Packers have toughest schedule for 2018
Smokey (13-Feb) : Wow, tough new 2018 Packer Schedule !
Zero2Cool (12-Feb) : I don't know anything about him though. He good? Bad?
Zero2Cool (12-Feb) : Free Agent CB David Amerson ... bring him in!
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2017 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 10 @ 3:25 PM
SEAHAWKS
Sunday, Sep 17 @ 7:30 PM
at Falcons
Sunday, Sep 24 @ 3:25 PM
BENGALS
Thursday, Sep 28 @ 7:25 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Oct 8 @ 3:25 PM
at Cowboys
Sunday, Oct 15 @ 12:00 PM
at Vikings
Sunday, Oct 22 @ 12:00 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Oct 29 @ 12:00 AM
- BYE -
Monday, Nov 6 @ 7:30 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 12 @ 12:00 PM
at Bears
Sunday, Nov 19 @ 12:00 PM
RAVENS
Sunday, Nov 26 @ 7:30 PM
at Steelers
Sunday, Dec 3 @ 12:00 PM
BUCCANEERS
Sunday, Dec 10 @ 12:00 PM
at Browns
Sunday, Dec 17 @ 12:00 PM
at Panthers
Saturday, Dec 23 @ 7:30 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Dec 31 @ 12:00 PM
at Lions
Think About It
Think About It
Recent Topics
10m / Green Bay Packers Talk / TheKanataThrilla

20m / Green Bay Packers Talk / isocleas2

30m / Random Babble / Smokey

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Pack93z

2h / Random Babble / Pack93z

7h / Random Babble / Smokey

7h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Smokey

10h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Smokey

19-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Smokey

19-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

17-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Rockmolder

16-Feb / Around The NFL / Cheesey

15-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

14-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

13-Feb / Football Familiarity / Smokey

Headlines