Packers Huddle

Labrev wrote: ↑

18 Oct 2023 10:55

So you are wagging your finger at... yourself?

Yoop wrote: ↑

21 Dec 2022 14:53

to think a QB with a few good receivers can't over come below average RB's OL, and defense is to deny reality, we see exactly that happen every Sunday, and we watched it happen for us for most of the last decade or more, go watch reruns of the 2011 season

$%@# classic!

Labrev wrote: ↑

18 Oct 2023 10:55

So you are wagging your finger at... yourself?

Yoop wrote: ↑

21 Dec 2022 14:53

to think a QB with a few good receivers can't over come below average RB's OL, and defense is to deny reality, we see exactly that happen every Sunday, and we watched it happen for us for most of the last decade or more, go watch reruns of the 2011 season

better ability to run the ball is all we lacked to beat anyone in 2011, anyone, and win another owl.

whats obvious here is that you and several others will create anything to say we couldn't, and insult me in that process, please go waste someone else's time

I would think a historically bad pass defense would be put in the lacking category.

No one insulted you BTW. Not even a little.

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

18 Oct 2023 10:59

Labrev wrote: ↑

18 Oct 2023 10:55

So you are wagging your finger at... yourself?

Yoop wrote: ↑

21 Dec 2022 14:53

to think a QB with a few good receivers can't over come below average RB's OL, and defense is to deny reality, we see exactly that happen every Sunday, and we watched it happen for us for most of the last decade or more, go watch reruns of the 2011 season

$%@# classic!

what about our run ability from 2011 would you consider average, we couldn't run to even hope to move the chains, so it surely didn't meet the expectations needed to win a owl, or even average, I've often said prior that we where a one dimensional offense
even with all that the offense won us 15 games

Yoop wrote: ↑

18 Oct 2023 12:55

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

18 Oct 2023 10:59

Labrev wrote: ↑

18 Oct 2023 10:55

So you are wagging your finger at... yourself?

$%@# classic!

what about our run ability from 2011 would you consider average, we couldn't run to even hope to move the chains, so it surely didn't meet the expectations needed to win a owl, or even average, I've often said prior that we where a one dimensional offense
even with all that the offense won us 15 games

Let me highlight what you said:

"to think a QB with a few good receivers can't over come below average RB's OL, and defense is to deny reality"

No you are arguing that a QB with a few good receivers couldn't overcome a below average RB.

THAT is what is classic.

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

18 Oct 2023 13:05

Yoop wrote: ↑

18 Oct 2023 12:55

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

18 Oct 2023 10:59

$%@# classic!

what about our run ability from 2011 would you consider average, we couldn't run to even hope to move the chains, so it surely didn't meet the expectations needed to win a owl, or even average, I've often said prior that we where a one dimensional offense
even with all that the offense won us 15 games

Let me highlight what you said:

"to think a QB with a few good receivers can't over come below average RB's OL, and defense is to deny reality"

No you are arguing that a QB with a few good receivers couldn't overcome a below average RB.

THAT is what is classic.

I said that because we did exactly that many times the last decade.

so no, what is classic, is exactly what you are doing right now, for crist sakes you've been doing this for 15 years, and I expect you'll do it till one of us leaves this forum

Yoop wrote: ↑

18 Oct 2023 13:16

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

18 Oct 2023 13:05

Yoop wrote: ↑

18 Oct 2023 12:55

what about our run ability from 2011 would you consider average, we couldn't run to even hope to move the chains, so it surely didn't meet the expectations needed to win a owl, or even average, I've often said prior that we where a one dimensional offense
even with all that the offense won us 15 games

Let me highlight what you said:

"to think a QB with a few good receivers can't over come below average RB's OL, and defense is to deny reality"

No you are arguing that a QB with a few good receivers couldn't overcome a below average RB.

THAT is what is classic.

I said that because we did exactly that many times the last decade.

so no, what is classic, is exactly what you are doing right now, for crist sakes you've been doing this for 15 years, and I expect you'll do it till one of us leaves this forum

So can a QB and a few good receivers overcome a below average RB or not? You say they can and if we don't believe it we deny reality. Then in the next moment say they couldn't in 2011... So are you denying reality?

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

18 Oct 2023 13:24

Yoop wrote: ↑

18 Oct 2023 13:16

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

18 Oct 2023 13:05

Let me highlight what you said:

"to think a QB with a few good receivers can't over come below average RB's OL, and defense is to deny reality"

No you are arguing that a QB with a few good receivers couldn't overcome a below average RB.

THAT is what is classic.

I said that because we did exactly that many times the last decade.

so no, what is classic, is exactly what you are doing right now, for crist sakes you've been doing this for 15 years, and I expect you'll do it till one of us leaves this forum

So can a QB and a few good receivers overcome a below average RB or not? You say they can and if we don't believe it we deny reality. Then in the next moment say they couldn't in 2011... So are you denying reality?

of course it can, why would a school teacher act as dumb as you do, you know very well there have been times when we couldn't run for &%$@ and still won games.

we where exposed as one dimensional by the chiefs I believe that year, then the Giants used that blue print to beat us in the PO's

you ask questions you already know the answer to, basically grill people like I'am sure you do to your students, it stops or our discussion stops, your choice.

Yoop wrote: ↑

18 Oct 2023 13:32

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

18 Oct 2023 13:24

Yoop wrote: ↑

18 Oct 2023 13:16

I said that because we did exactly that many times the last decade.

so no, what is classic, is exactly what you are doing right now, for crist sakes you've been doing this for 15 years, and I expect you'll do it till one of us leaves this forum

So can a QB and a few good receivers overcome a below average RB or not? You say they can and if we don't believe it we deny reality. Then in the next moment say they couldn't in 2011... So are you denying reality?

of course it can, why would a school teacher act as dumb as you do, you know very well there have been times when we couldn't run for &%$@ and still won games.

we where exposed as one dimensional by the chiefs I believe that year, then the Giants used that blue print to beat us in the PO's

you ask questions you already know the answer to, basically grill people like I'am sure you do to your students, it stops or our discussion stops, your choice.

So per your very own statement before, you are denying reality by saying the reason we lost was the running game because a QB and a few good receivers should be able to overcome that. I am only using the statements you yourself made to draw these conclusions.

Do you not see your transactional arguing?

Yoop wrote: ↑

18 Oct 2023 13:32

our discussion stops

Good idea.

Now we can get back to discussing the Packers defense. I hope to see a lot of pressure vs Russ on Sunday and it would be cool to see a 2023 version of this pic with Rashan Gary delivering the sack on Mr Nanobubble.

BSA wrote: ↑

18 Oct 2023 14:08

Yoop wrote: ↑

18 Oct 2023 13:32

our discussion stops

Good idea.

Now we can get back to discussing the Packers defense. I hope to see a lot of pressure vs Russ on Sunday and it would be cool to see a 2023 version of this pic with Rashan Gary delivering the sack on Mr Nanobubble.

That pic would've fit great in the GDT OP...

Yoop wrote: ↑

18 Oct 2023 08:06

so you don't consider strength of schedule to be a consideration.

when I see our secondary standing in the EZ on 3rd and 7 it doesn't compute for me, we are basically saying " I give up", that situation calls for press coverage, and we see that same thing between the 20's on 3rd and long, our defense plays with very little aggression, cushion coverage is the norm.

imho both Barry and Lafleur are on a shorter leash then most think.

I definitely consider strength of schedule but the defense hasn't played bad enough for Barry to be fired during the season. Don't get me wrong, I didn't want him back in the first place but believe that we're stuck with him for the rest of the year.

go pak go wrote: ↑

18 Oct 2023 08:36

Yeah. I've posted numerous times that Packers playoff losses, when looking at points totals, can be blamed on the defense and offense about 50% of the time.

There have been years the defense allowed too many points. (11, 12, 16, 19)

There have been years the defense held their ground and the offense did not score enough. (13, 14, 15, 21)

And then there is 2020 which is about an even split of blame as the offense had its chances but the defense also allowed too many points.

Sprinkle in some STs nightmares and you have a screwed fan base.

I don't consider the Packers scoring at least 20 points in the three playoff losses from 2013-15 as a failure by the offense. First of all, they faced really good defense those years (Niners 3rd in points allowed, Seahakws 1st, Cardinals 7th). In addition teams need to be able to win some low scoring games in the playoffs as well.

On top of that you need to take a look at how those games ended. Both games in 2014 and '15 went to overtime but the offense never got the ball because the defense allowed a touchdown on the first possession. In 2013 Hyde dropped an interception on the last drive before the defense allowed the Niners to get in field goal range with time expiring.

Labrev wrote: ↑

18 Oct 2023 09:45

I would put 2011 in the O fail category, not D. Our 2011 team was built around relying on the sheer offensive firepower being too great for anyone to compete with them in a shootout.

So while yes the D gave up too many points on-paper, it was the O's job to get out to a fast and heavy lead, get the other team to abandon the run and play catch-up, then tee off on the QB and grab opportune picks.

The defense giving up 10 points after the two minute warning before halftime in a tied game hugely contributed to the team losing that game.

Yoop wrote: ↑

18 Oct 2023 13:32

we where exposed as one dimensional by the chiefs I believe that year, then the Giants used that blue print to beat us in the PO's

It's true the Packers struggled to run the ball for most of the 2011 season but that wasn't an issue against the Giants in the playoffs. They averaged 6.4 yards a carry for 147 yards on 23 attempts.

musclestang wrote: ↑

18 Oct 2023 07:16

There seems to be a lot of “just survive the down” going around in this D.

The same thing happens to every defense and the Packers offensive braintrust designs plays to do the same thing to our opponents.
Good offenses use the defenses' "rules" against them and end up with a WR matched on an OLB

MLF: Coach Matt LaFleur was asked about the play the following day. La Fleur pointed back to the three seasons he spent with Adams (2019-21) when they would move him around to try and get advantageous matchups. Naturally, it’s far less fun when you’re on the other side of them.

“Yeah, that’s happened a lot when Davante was playing for us: You put a receiver in the slot — you get ‘penny,’ or five bigs on the field, and a lot of times that ‘backer has to walk and you’re playing quarters coverage and that’s what happens,” LaFleur said.


" If they do this, then we do that" is how a defense handles all of the shifts, motions, pre-snap movement and personnel changes
Once an offense understands the D rules ( If/Then) from film study; they get to work designing plays that put the defense into a no- win situation.

Many fans see that Preston Smith/Davante Adams play as a smoking gun - but the same thing happens multiple times to every defense, every Sunday. Cat n mouse

Here's Mike Martz on the topic:

“Playing defense is all about rules,” Mike Martz says. “Once you understand their rules, then you can put them in really bad positions ... when you know the defensive rules and you don’t take advantage of them, you ought to be fired.”
.

I know it happens, and I know everyone is trying to get the matchups. But obviously some defenses are better at adjusting to that than others. Ours seems to need to "survive the down" quite often to me. More than it should with the players we have IMO.

We've not played very explosive offenses this year, in fact, we could say most of them were poor actually. I think we have the individual players on defense to be a top 5 defense, even if we're missing a few. We're not even performing at a middle of the pack level against bad teams. It tells me we're losing the cat and mouse game too often.

If a defense doesn't have a check to get a 3/4 OLB out of man on a WR, then it is poor preparation. Very poor if it happens year after year. An NFL defense can't be so rigid that it gets players into obviously awful matchups such as Campbell out wide on Bijon Robinson.

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

19 Oct 2023 15:55

If a defense doesn't have a check to get a 3/4 OLB out of man on a WR, then it is poor preparation. Very poor if it happens year after year. An NFL defense can't be so rigid that it gets players into obviously awful matchups such as Campbell out wide on Bijon Robinson.

can't play 2 high cover shell and not have lbers covering a WR at times.

A couple of weeks ago I heard Colin Cowherd refer to our defense as feisty. I think if there ever was a backhanded compliment that you could pay an NFL defense, it would be that. Feisty, in my mind, is a word that's reserved for something that might appear at times intimidating but in reality is docile. As in "oh look at the little puppy growl, how cute! He thinks he's tough, how precious." That puppy is feisty.

The sad truth is that that is the most positive description that could have been garnered by the Packers defense since 2010.

musclestang wrote: ↑

19 Oct 2023 15:17

It tells me we're losing the cat and mouse game too often.

I think that's a fair comment - and MLF hoped that moving his DC upstairs to the booth would help in that regard.

musclestang wrote: ↑

19 Oct 2023 15:17

I know it happens, and I know everyone is trying to get the matchups. But obviously some defenses are better at adjusting to that than others. Ours seems to need to "survive the down" quite often to me. More than it should with the players we have IMO.

We've not played very explosive offenses this year, in fact, we could say most of them were poor actually. I think we have the individual players on defense to be a top 5 defense, even if we're missing a few. We're not even performing at a middle of the pack level against bad teams. It tells me we're losing the cat and mouse game too often.

In my opinion fans put way too much stock into the play in which Preston ended up covering Adams instead of focusing on the big picture. I understand that it's a terrible look but unfortunately it happens from time to time. It should be put into the correct perspective as long as it doesn't occur on a regular basis.

With that being said I'm definitely not a fan of Barry and would have liked the team to move on from him this offseason. With that being said I don't expect MLF to make a change during this season.