Or because part of that 5 is DL in the Packers mind... such as Peppers and Neal who have basically been DL their whole careers and still used mostly as DL types going forwards. Same for Matthews other than not playing DL.

Originally Posted by: beast 

What was wrong with the defensive line? Detroit ended up with a lower rushing average than we did and their only good run was to the outside. They were stout against the Jets too.

Originally Posted by: steveishere 

Numbers don't lie, but will they be playing the 2-5 defence the remainder of the season due to the lack of qualified players ? Without B.J.Raji , there are no "qualified" Nose Tackles. [duh]

Originally Posted by: Smokey 

The poor play excuse line closed hours ago. This one is for reality focused guys that took off their rose colored glasses some time ago.

Originally Posted by: Smokey 

Numbers don't lie, but will they be playing the 2-5 defence the remainder of the season due to the lack of qualified players ?

Originally Posted by: Smokey 

Today I saw the Defence playing 2-5 because of lack of quality D-linemen.

Originally Posted by: Smokey 

You've brought up the D-Line play in just about every thread on this page the past 18 hours, but again, please explain how they were the cause of this loss.

I was complaining as much as anyone in the preseason about this line, specifically the NT, but I'll admit that through 3 games I was wrong. This team has had a pass rush, the hybrid LB/DEs like Peppers, Neal, and Matthews have been playing pretty well. The Lions averaged 3 yards per rush yesterday. I think they gave up 3 runs all day that were over 6 yards, only 1 over 10...what's so bad about that?

Originally Posted by: musccy 

You assuming they're running the 2-5 scheme because lack of quality D-linemen... I believe that assumption is wrong because the Packers coaches seemed to plan the faster/quicker/more attacking style of defense all offseason and going to the 4-3 scheme seems to be their plan of attack of how to get it done. And yes I said 4-3, not 2-5.

It's like the 2-4 in years past... coaches/fans call it a 2-4, but other teams players and coaches including Cutler openly called it a 4-2 instead. It's the same thing... you're calling it a 2-5 when really it's a 4-3. Peppers and Neal have been playing DL almost their whole careers... they're basically DL even if they have the OLB labels.


And if you notice when they plan on running the 4-3 more they bench their 5th DT (Pennel) which I think can be common in 4-3 and is pretty rare in 3-4 schemes.

So the problem here seems to be more you're lack of understanding it's a 4-3 and they're not playing it like you assume a 3-4 would be played (because it's not a 3-4)

Originally Posted by: beast 

I don't care what they call it. 1-6, 2-5, 3-4, 4-3, psycho, goal line, or Marybeth. Whatever it is, it ain't working so good. Yes they may not have given up a ton of yards or points but they were out there for 38 + minutes. They gave up 4.8 yards per play. That includes incomplete passes. They allowed a 3rd down conversion rate of 61%. None of that is acceptable.

Originally Posted by: wpr 

I don't care what they call it. 1-6, 2-5, 3-4, 4-3, psycho, goal line, or Marybeth. Whatever it is, it ain't working so good. Yes they may not have given up a ton of yards or points but they were out there for 38 + minutes.

Originally Posted by: wpr 

They allowed a 3rd down conversion rate of 61%.

Originally Posted by: wpr 

They gave up 4.8 yards per play. That includes incomplete passes.

Originally Posted by: wpr