General Packers News 2020

From Lambeau to Lombardi, Holmgren, McCarthy and LaFleur and from Starr to Favre, Rodgers and now Jordan Love we’re talking Super Bowl Champion Green Bay Packers football. This Packers Forum is the place to talk NFL football and everything Packers. So, pull up a keyboard, make yourself at home and let’s talk some Packers football.

Moderators: NCF, salmar80, BF004, APB, Packfntk

Locked
User avatar
Pckfn23
Reactions:
Posts: 13774
Joined: 22 Mar 2020 22:13
Location: Western Wisconsin

Post by Pckfn23 »

Packers:
Inside Runs:
106 carries for 450 yards. 4.25 yards per carry.

Outside Runs:
56 carries for 295 yards. 5.27 yards per carry.

Steelers
Inside Runs:
77 carries for 315 yards. 4.09 yards per carry.

Outside Runs:
61 carries for 245 yards. 4.02 yards per carry.

Buccaneers:
Inside Runs:
73 carries for 199 yards. 2.73 yards per carry.

Outside Runs:
64 carries for 201 yards. 3.14 yards per carry.

Saints:
72 carries for 279 yards. 3.88 yards per carry.

Outside Runs:
87 carries for 283 yards. 3.25 yards per carry.

Cowboys:
Inside Runs:
108 carries for 526 yards. 4.87 yards per carry.

Outside Runs:
122 carries for 687 yards. 5.63 yards per carry.

Texans:
Inside Runs:
113 carries for 618 yards. 5.47 yards per carry.

Outside Runs:
79 carries for 470 yards. 5.95 yards per carry.

I took out QB runs as that tends to skew it depending on if the team played a running QB or not. I looked at 3 top run defense teams and 2 bottom run defense teams. We are not a good run defense team by any stretch. I am putting some numbers to the fact that our OLBs are bad in the run game. More than a yard per carry more running to the outside than running inside. I would love to compare to more teams.
Image
Palmy - "Very few have the ability to truly excel regardless of system. For many the system is the difference between being just a guy or an NFL starter. Fact is, everyone is talented at this level."

Christo
Reactions:
Posts: 264
Joined: 23 Apr 2020 11:41

Post by Christo »

go pak go wrote:
02 Nov 2020 06:58
Christo wrote:
01 Nov 2020 22:04
go pak go wrote:
01 Nov 2020 13:27


This misses the point.

It's not just about education for current players now. It's about the fact that the players in 70s - early 2000's built this game. They built the passionate fanbases and put the game on the map. Their sacrifice is why the players have the opportunities they have today.

The thing is, for that 30 year period, the game had a LOT less revenue then they do now. I don't care about players now and "putting enough away." I care about the NFLPA not being a bunch of selfish pricks and ensure in their CBA that they make concessions from their cut of the revenue to take care of the players who used to play this game build this game.

Come to the bargaining table and even say, "Hey owners...we will pay for half and you pay for half but we need to do the right thing and take care of the players who built this game."

There are just too many players who contribute and give everything they have and are left behind and it's absolute garbage. This is a distribution issue and I just feel for the families who have beg and scrape to get by because of all the expenses on their health decades later.
OK, your right, I'm an idiot. But why just go back to the 70s. The players before then don't count?
In my simple mind, I just suggested a change to the current players, I didn't realize I had the ability to time travel and change things in the past, what a dumb ass I am.
You're not an idiot. I was a jerk who was crabby due to being in a foul mood because of the game yesterday.

I wrote it at halftime when the end result was clearly pointing to a Vikings victory at that point and it ticked me off.
No problem, yesterdays stink bomb put plenty of people in a foul mood.

User avatar
NCF
Reactions:
Posts: 8023
Joined: 17 Mar 2020 16:04
Location: Hastings, MN

Post by NCF »

49ers week just got more interesting.

Image

Read More. Post Less.

User avatar
NCF
Reactions:
Posts: 8023
Joined: 17 Mar 2020 16:04
Location: Hastings, MN

Post by NCF »

NCF wrote:
02 Nov 2020 10:15
49ers week just got more interesting.

Image

Read More. Post Less.

User avatar
Crazylegs Starks
Reactions:
Posts: 3500
Joined: 24 Mar 2020 21:50
Location: Northern WI

Post by Crazylegs Starks »

Rumor is A.J. Dillon tested positive

Edit: I guess I typed too slow :thwap:
“We didn’t lose the game; we just ran out of time.”
- Vince Lombardi

User avatar
BF004
Reactions:
Posts: 13571
Joined: 17 Mar 2020 16:05
Location: Suamico
Contact:

Post by BF004 »

I started its own thread for this.
Image

Image

User avatar
BF004
Reactions:
Posts: 13571
Joined: 17 Mar 2020 16:05
Location: Suamico
Contact:

Post by BF004 »




Borderline statistical anomaly here.

Let's cover up tighter, not be so petrified of the big play, and just get a little better play of our extremely expensive big 3 up front.

We are not 'far' away.


Adding JJ Watt wouldn't hurt. ;)
Image

Image

Christo
Reactions:
Posts: 264
Joined: 23 Apr 2020 11:41

Post by Christo »

BF004 wrote:
02 Nov 2020 11:13



Borderline statistical anomaly here.

Let's cover up tighter, not be so petrified of the big play, and just get a little better play of our extremely expensive big 3 up front.

We are not 'far' away.


Adding JJ Watt wouldn't hurt. ;)
Does adding JJ Watt change the way Pettine calls a defense?

User avatar
BF004
Reactions:
Posts: 13571
Joined: 17 Mar 2020 16:05
Location: Suamico
Contact:

Post by BF004 »

Christo wrote:
02 Nov 2020 11:29
BF004 wrote:
02 Nov 2020 11:13



Borderline statistical anomaly here.

Let's cover up tighter, not be so petrified of the big play, and just get a little better play of our extremely expensive big 3 up front.

We are not 'far' away.


Adding JJ Watt wouldn't hurt. ;)
Does adding JJ Watt change the way Pettine calls a defense?
No, but if we can start getting an acceptable pass rush with 4 with even a slight impovement on the run D, that will change the entire D.
Image

Image

User avatar
go pak go
Reactions:
Posts: 12943
Joined: 22 Mar 2020 21:30

Post by go pak go »

I don't think JJ Watt would really add anything to be honest.

If you can't get any penetration from Clark, the Smiths and Gary on the roster, adding JJ Watt won't add anything here.
Yoop wrote:
26 May 2021 11:22
could we get some moderation in here to get rid of conspiracy theory's, some in here are trying to have a adult conversation.
Image

User avatar
paco
Reactions:
Posts: 6718
Joined: 18 Mar 2020 15:29
Location: Janesville, WI

Post by paco »

BF004 wrote:
02 Nov 2020 11:31
Christo wrote:
02 Nov 2020 11:29
BF004 wrote:
02 Nov 2020 11:13



Borderline statistical anomaly here.

Let's cover up tighter, not be so petrified of the big play, and just get a little better play of our extremely expensive big 3 up front.

We are not 'far' away.


Adding JJ Watt wouldn't hurt. ;)
Does adding JJ Watt change the way Pettine calls a defense?
No, but if we can start getting an acceptable pass rush with 4 with even a slight impovement on the run D, that will change the entire D.
I'll settle for a guy that can tackle consistently.
Image
RIP JustJeff

User avatar
BF004
Reactions:
Posts: 13571
Joined: 17 Mar 2020 16:05
Location: Suamico
Contact:

Post by BF004 »







:rotf:

Not April 1st, but what the hell, could use a little levity today.
Image

Image

User avatar
NCF
Reactions:
Posts: 8023
Joined: 17 Mar 2020 16:04
Location: Hastings, MN

Post by NCF »

paco wrote:
02 Nov 2020 11:39
I'll settle for a guy that can tackle consistently.
Barnes and Martin have impressed me with their physicality. Unfortunately, they also filled the wrong gaps about 200 times yesterday.
Image

Read More. Post Less.

User avatar
Packfntk
Reactions:
Posts: 1734
Joined: 17 Mar 2020 14:09

Post by Packfntk »

Don't tease us like that. :lol:
Wisconsin Cheese Is Better Than California Cheese!

User avatar
lupedafiasco
Reactions:
Posts: 4999
Joined: 24 Mar 2020 17:17

Post by lupedafiasco »

NCF wrote:
02 Nov 2020 12:00
paco wrote:
02 Nov 2020 11:39
I'll settle for a guy that can tackle consistently.
Barnes and Martin have impressed me with their physicality. Unfortunately, they also filled the wrong gaps about 200 times yesterday.
Yup agreed. Or they were late getting there. Barnes in particular was really bad yesterday.

But blame the coaches! Shame on them for not having an undrafted rookie and a 5th round rookie ready to play with no real training camp. Blame the outside linebackers! Roar!
Cancelled by the forum elites.

User avatar
NCF
Reactions:
Posts: 8023
Joined: 17 Mar 2020 16:04
Location: Hastings, MN

Post by NCF »

No way.

Image

Read More. Post Less.

User avatar
paco
Reactions:
Posts: 6718
Joined: 18 Mar 2020 15:29
Location: Janesville, WI

Post by paco »

NCF wrote:
02 Nov 2020 12:00
paco wrote:
02 Nov 2020 11:39
I'll settle for a guy that can tackle consistently.
Barnes and Martin have impressed me with their physicality. Unfortunately, they also filled the wrong gaps about 200 times yesterday.
Yep, I think the arrow is still pointed up for those 2. But both need work. Not really surprising for an UDFA and a 5th rounder coming off an injury.
Image
RIP JustJeff

Drj820
Reactions:
Posts: 9844
Joined: 26 Mar 2020 12:34

Post by Drj820 »

Barnes and Kamal both would be ideal ILB 2s as a quality player anchors the position at ILB1 and mentors Barnes or Martin, both in there and playing with no mentor is just not a situation that high quality defenses find themselves in.
I Do Not Hate Matt Lafleur

User avatar
BF004
Reactions:
Posts: 13571
Joined: 17 Mar 2020 16:05
Location: Suamico
Contact:

Post by BF004 »

I'm actually a little excited for Kirksey to come back. All reports showed he was looking good in TC and he is the best coverage linebacker we've had in a long time.

I do like both Barnes and Martin, but I think they will also be more valuable if we limit their responsibility right now and let them focus on what they do best.
Image

Image

User avatar
Pckfn23
Reactions:
Posts: 13774
Joined: 22 Mar 2020 22:13
Location: Western Wisconsin

Post by Pckfn23 »

lupedafiasco wrote:
02 Nov 2020 12:17
NCF wrote:
02 Nov 2020 12:00
paco wrote:
02 Nov 2020 11:39
I'll settle for a guy that can tackle consistently.
Barnes and Martin have impressed me with their physicality. Unfortunately, they also filled the wrong gaps about 200 times yesterday.
Yup agreed. Or they were late getting there. Barnes in particular was really bad yesterday.

But blame the coaches! Shame on them for not having an undrafted rookie and a 5th round rookie ready to play with no real training camp. Blame the outside linebackers! Roar!
Ya, don't blame the coach who schemes an OLB man up on a TE who is split wide. MULTIPLE TIMES.

Ya, don't the OLBs who continually up field or don't set the edge or don't squeeze the B/C gap.

Martin was good yesterday. Barnes wasn't bad. The blame isn't there.
Image
Palmy - "Very few have the ability to truly excel regardless of system. For many the system is the difference between being just a guy or an NFL starter. Fact is, everyone is talented at this level."

Locked