I think the biggest thing that scares me for January/February is we can't have our offense go through its lull stretches where it gets two 3 and out drives or two turnovers in a row.
When we do, this team is in TROUBLE.
If that happens in the post season, that is likely going to be the nail that ends the 2020 Packers. I think that's what we are all nervous for and crave to see a defense that we can have some confidence in to either build up a lead to survive those lulls or be a big enough defense to not allow 14 to 21 points during those lulls of Rodgers touching the ball only 6 to 9 times.
IF our offense doesn't have those lulls....I don't see why we can't win it all.
But that is a major IF and therefore we get nervous on the second IF of our defense stepping up and keeping us in the fight.
If I recall, our STs in 2010 wasn't the best either. I know we lost to Chicago, NE and ATL during the regular season largely because our STs allowed a big PR or KR.
Re: General Packers News 2020
Posted: 14 Dec 2020 12:43
by go pak go
Honestly our defense is not that far off. It seems to me our defense is like 4 - 6 plays away during 2020 from us having a good taste in our mouth vs bad taste.
A lot of the plays are because a LB is in the wrong spot and the RB gets a huge run (Cook, Kamara and Chicago), the opponent gets a great screen that we can't cover, our defense dropping INTs that turns a turnover drive into a scoring drive for the opponent, or our defense not getting an effective rush on key 3rd and longs.
It's like seriously 6 plays all year that if we could take back, and they're simple plays that should start in the defense's favor....this is a completely different defense.
Take yesterday. We do a great job getting Detroit to 3rd and 9 on their first drive and then we get zero rush and they convert. Our defense is so bad at recovering from that. We seem to be a feast or famine defense. Either it is 3 and out or it is touchdown and we hate that as fans.
But to be the top team in the conference and still be typing things like "this unit or that unit isn't good enough to win a Super Bowl" just seems weird to me. Like, yes it could be good enough to win a Super Bowl. But, again, it probably won't, because that's how probability works.
It's a gut feeling. You cannot explain a gut feeling nor can you attempt to confirm or refute it using logic. It's just there. I just need to see some consistency from those units to feel better about them blowing our chances for a title. Blind faith isn't working for me any more.
Take yesterday. We do a great job getting Detroit to 3rd and 9 on their first drive and then we get zero rush and they convert. Our defense is so bad at recovering from that. We seem to be a feast or famine defense. Either it is 3 and out or it is touchdown and we hate that as fans.
I'd love to see that compared to other teams because it honestly feels like on both offense and defense, it's either a 3&out or a score, which seems very strange.
Take yesterday. We do a great job getting Detroit to 3rd and 9 on their first drive and then we get zero rush and they convert. Our defense is so bad at recovering from that. We seem to be a feast or famine defense. Either it is 3 and out or it is touchdown and we hate that as fans.
I'd love to see that compared to other teams because it honestly feels like on both offense and defense, it's either a 3&out or a score, which seems very strange.
Yeah. The strangest moment I had watching yesterday's game was honestly when we had to the kick the field goal in the 4th quarter.
Like we got our first downs. We were in the zone....and we didn't get a touchdown. It felt weird because it never happens.
Not a playoff team last year, and wouldn't be this year but.... If you count winning the NFC East, the WFT got huge contributions from Chase Young and Antonio Gibson
So, if I am reading this correctly, GB is among the worst teams in the league at getting to 3rd-down. Is that a correct interpretation? Our 3rd-down % is kind of on par with many teams, but we are giving up too many 1st-downs on early downs to have a chance to force teams off the field.
Has this been posted yet? If not here we go. Poor LB play. Inside and out.
Interesting video, thanks for posting. This shows how bad Kirksey has played.
Gutey losing Blake (alright I get that) and then thinking that Kirksey would be an answer, was one of the worst decision i Can imagine. If we look back on the Board at summer discussions, many of us knew Kirksey was a disaster decision even before the season started. Almost like we were prophets.
Do you or anybody else believe the Packers record would be any better if Martinez were still the middle linebacker? I personally don't.
Interesting video, thanks for posting. This shows how bad Kirksey has played.
Gutey losing Blake (alright I get that) and then thinking that Kirksey would be an answer, was one of the worst decision i Can imagine. If we look back on the Board at summer discussions, many of us knew Kirksey was a disaster decision even before the season started. Almost like we were prophets.
Do you or anybody else believe the Packers record would be any better if Martinez were still the middle linebacker? I personally don't.
Maybe.
Also maybe win a playoff game with Blake that we won’t win with kirksey.
But MY point is more that even though the answer may not have been Blake (I said I get why we didn’t resign him), my complaint is the whiff that was thinking broken kirksey was going to be an adequate answer.
I didn’t then, I don’t now, and I am surprised the coaching staff doesn’t agree with me yet. They obviously don’t seeing Kamal Martin played in 18% of the snaps Sunday.
Interesting video, thanks for posting. This shows how bad Kirksey has played.
Gutey losing Blake (alright I get that) and then thinking that Kirksey would be an answer, was one of the worst decision i Can imagine. If we look back on the Board at summer discussions, many of us knew Kirksey was a disaster decision even before the season started. Almost like we were prophets.
Do you or anybody else believe the Packers record would be any better if Martinez were still the middle linebacker? I personally don't.
I think so. Martinez is a way better run defender than Kirksey and maybe slightly better in coverage.
I think we beat the Vikings with a guy like Martinez. Maybe the Colts too. You never know but we miss him as a run defender right now. Kirksey has been really bad.
