Re: Packers @ Saints GDT - 9/12/2021 3:25 CST
Posted: 13 Sep 2021 09:27
Crosby was absolutely perfect, to bad we couldn't have given him 12 more FG attempts, dang it
The Way a Packers Forum Should Be
https://packers-huddle.com/phpBB/
You can say the exact same thing about our front 7 except substitute the ILB for Kenny Clark.lupedafiasco wrote: ↑13 Sep 2021 09:10Demario Davis is a damn good LB. Marcus Davenport is going to breakout this year. Cam Jordan is a good player. Kwon is a fast LB if kept clean. That is a good front 7. They lacked DTs but they had talent.go pak go wrote: ↑13 Sep 2021 08:31The Saints put out sh*t in their front 7 outside their ends and did just fine.lupedafiasco wrote: ↑13 Sep 2021 08:24
I will say this. I am a firm believer the personnel on defense is not up to par. You can not continue to put poor LBs on the field and expect different results against the run. You cannot keep fielding Dean Lowry as the guy to help Kenny Clark and expect different results. That is on Gutey. It is no surprise those two positions struggled yesterday. Devondre Campbell looked lame, lost, and terrible.
Yes. It could be that our Oline did in fact just suck that much to make their defense look that awesome. Probably the most viable answer honestly.Yoop wrote: ↑13 Sep 2021 08:59well our OL made them look like HOFamers, Rodgers very rarely had more then a 3 count before protection broke down and I agree with Lupe, our front 7 played for &%$@, no pressure and near zero run containment.go pak go wrote: ↑13 Sep 2021 08:31The Saints put out sh*t in their front 7 outside their ends and did just fine.lupedafiasco wrote: ↑13 Sep 2021 08:24
I will say this. I am a firm believer the personnel on defense is not up to par. You can not continue to put poor LBs on the field and expect different results against the run. You cannot keep fielding Dean Lowry as the guy to help Kenny Clark and expect different results. That is on Gutey. It is no surprise those two positions struggled yesterday. Devondre Campbell looked lame, lost, and terrible.
Everyone knows though you have to have good DTs to win the game. Been saying that for years. *honestly I have been* (just don't look at the depth chart of the Saints DTs okay)Pckfn23 wrote: ↑13 Sep 2021 09:06As you can see this game was a pessimist's... I mean, realist's dream. All "predictions" made before the season have undoubtedly come true and even some that were not made before the game have magically come true as well. There was not a single bright spot in this game. To me that only points to the coach not having his team ready to play the first game, nothing more, nothing less. All the "I told you sos" really show the true nature of that individual, not the team. Far too little of a sample size to be making such statements.
Most reports are that the O-line was "Fine" yesterday, especially in pass protection. Run blocking was a different story. Patrick got bad grades all around but Elgton was considered good and the 2 rookies did decent. Even Rodgers said protection was fine, he just sucked.go pak go wrote: ↑13 Sep 2021 09:33Yes. It could be that our Oline did in fact just suck that much to make their defense look that awesome. Probably the most viable answer honestly.
I blame Rodgers for his crappy decisions and our "upgraded WR room" for not being able to separate and get open.paco wrote: ↑13 Sep 2021 09:47Most reports are that the O-line was "Fine" yesterday, especially in pass protection. Run blocking was a different story. Patrick got bad grades all around but Elgton was considered good and the 2 rookies did decent. Even Rodgers said protection was fine, he just sucked.
Not saying I agree or not, just throwing it out there. Overall, analysts don't appear to be blaming the O-line in this one.
haaaaaa, what was that DT's name that I wanted to pick instead of you know who 3 years past draftgo pak go wrote: ↑13 Sep 2021 09:36Everyone knows though you have to have good DTs to win the game. Been saying that for years. *honestly I have been* (just don't look at the depth chart of the Saints DTs okay)Pckfn23 wrote: ↑13 Sep 2021 09:06As you can see this game was a pessimist's... I mean, realist's dream. All "predictions" made before the season have undoubtedly come true and even some that were not made before the game have magically come true as well. There was not a single bright spot in this game. To me that only points to the coach not having his team ready to play the first game, nothing more, nothing less. All the "I told you sos" really show the true nature of that individual, not the team. Far too little of a sample size to be making such statements.
I would concur with this. Newman was horrible on the 1st pick but otherwise I too thought they did "okay". Not great but not terrible.paco wrote: ↑13 Sep 2021 09:47Most reports are that the O-line was "Fine" yesterday, especially in pass protection. Run blocking was a different story. Patrick got bad grades all around but Elgton was considered good and the 2 rookies did decent. Even Rodgers said protection was fine, he just sucked.
Not saying I agree or not, just throwing it out there. Overall, analysts don't appear to be blaming the O-line in this one.
The defense looked lost and confused the whole game. I definitely noticed that.Yoop wrote: ↑13 Sep 2021 09:54
haaaaaa, what was that DT's name that I wanted to pick instead of you know who 3 years past draft
I think we can do better then we showed last night with the players we have on the roster, imo we simply where out coached, Lowery has his worts for sure, but I saw him shift pre snap right out of the run gap and not have the strength to return, Clark played well, but even he has issue like that, so imo thats coaching, same with our ILB's rarely filled the open gaps and looked slow to react with both run and pass, again that to me speaks to poor coaching, poor prep and game plan.