Packers Huddle

New DC, New defense, give it some time before you're so sure of you're opinion. It's not a finished product. We don't know what it will be. They made some really good plays and some not so good. In that first half I think they had 2 really well designed plays that got us and Brown smoking Jaire on a play but otherwise it was pretty good.

Closer to the end, yeah it look familiar in a lot of ways. Defense does get stops and offense seems to commit as many penalties as they get yards on a 3 play or less series and give it right back. Defense says, hey, here's an opportunity and the offense says, no thanks. and Jaire got screwed on that penalty to extend that last Drive. Yeah, they weren't good enough to recover from that, but it wasn't as horrible as it seems either.

I was more concerned with offense. Outside of Reed, Wilson and maybe doubs, it was pretty lackluster in terms of effort and performance.

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑

31 Aug 2024 12:15

I did not like Barry and thought it was a dog &%$@ hire from the get go. That said idk what people expect from their DC when you have a league wide worst safety position. That is more a failure in the GM than it is on the DC.

Gutenbumst corrected it this season and IMO this is the first time he has fielded a team that has no absolutely glaring weakness on it. Too many years he fielded teams with the worst WR2 and 3 units or really bad TE units or really bad ILB play or really bad S play or really bad CB2 play. I don’t think we have any massive glaring weakness right now on offense or defense. It’s all STs at K right now that has me thinking this team will fall short again.

So, in summary, our only glaring weakness is LaCoach and his revolving door backup QBs.

musclestang wrote: ↑

07 Sep 2024 08:10

New DC, New defense, give it some time before you're so sure of your opinion. It's not a finished product. We don't know what it will be.

I am not writing Halfley or his defense off by any means after just 1 game.

I actually like his stated philosophy.

But I also won’t put lipstick on a pig and pretend that last night’s defensive performance looked all that different from what we’ve seen for far too long in Green Bay.

LombardiTime wrote: ↑

07 Sep 2024 08:29

But I also won’t put lipstick on a pig and pretend that last night’s defensive performance looked all that different from what we’ve seen for far too long in Green Bay.

Bits and pieces did. The ability to defend Hurts' running was night and day from every Packers defense we have seen for the past decade +. The tackling was atrocious and that seemed like muscle memory going back to Barry's time. I think it is going to take some time to see what we really have, but I am still hopeful. That Eagles offense presents a lot of challenges.

LombardiTime wrote: ↑

07 Sep 2024 08:29

musclestang wrote: ↑

07 Sep 2024 08:10

New DC, New defense, give it some time before you're so sure of your opinion. It's not a finished product. We don't know what it will be.

I am not writing Halfley or his defense off by any means after just 1 game.

I actually like his stated philosophy.

But I also won’t put lipstick on a pig and pretend that last night’s defensive performance looked all that different from what we’ve seen for far too long in Green Bay.

Anywhere I can find a synopsis of his stated philosophy? I wasn't able to keep up with all of the Packers news this offseason.

To me, it looked like a Dom Capers turnover-generating style defense.

I say we give Hafley time. This was a good Eagles offense and the defense had us in a position to be able to win the game on the final drive.

RingoCStarrQB wrote: ↑

07 Sep 2024 08:18

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑

31 Aug 2024 12:15

I did not like Barry and thought it was a dog &%$@ hire from the get go. That said idk what people expect from their DC when you have a league wide worst safety position. That is more a failure in the GM than it is on the DC.

Gutenbumst corrected it this season and IMO this is the first time he has fielded a team that has no absolutely glaring weakness on it. Too many years he fielded teams with the worst WR2 and 3 units or really bad TE units or really bad ILB play or really bad S play or really bad CB2 play. I don’t think we have any massive glaring weakness right now on offense or defense. It’s all STs at K right now that has me thinking this team will fall short again.

So, in summary, our only glaring weakness is LaCoach and his revolving door backup QBs.

Lafleur can't do everything, and the revolving QB thingie, ehh, actually that falls on Gutekunst too, compared to the constant desire to train every OL man at every position on the line, who backs up Love seems less a issue, this is 2 straight years now with the OL starting the season like some JV squad, missed blocking assignments, holding , and simply getting handled has become our norm to start the season, it has to improve, last night was terrible and the main reason Love is hurt.

Papa John wrote: ↑

07 Sep 2024 10:02

LombardiTime wrote: ↑

07 Sep 2024 08:29

musclestang wrote: ↑

07 Sep 2024 08:10

New DC, New defense, give it some time before you're so sure of your opinion. It's not a finished product. We don't know what it will be.

I am not writing Halfley or his defense off by any means after just 1 game.

I actually like his stated philosophy.

But I also won’t put lipstick on a pig and pretend that last night’s defensive performance looked all that different from what we’ve seen for far too long in Green Bay.

Anywhere I can find a synopsis of his stated philosophy? I wasn't able to keep up with all of the Packers news this offseason.

To me, it looked like a Dom Capers turnover-generating style defense.

I say we give Hafley time. This was a good Eagles offense and the defense had us in a position to be able to win the game on the final drive.

I'd recommend a start with the first 4 pages of this very thread.

LombardiTime wrote: ↑

07 Sep 2024 07:34

Labrev wrote: ↑

07 Sep 2024 07:16

We hated "bend but don't break" and wanted an attacking defense even if it would risk giving up more big plays.

This is what that looks like.

Really?

I saw a D that gave up one long TD to AJ Brown and otherwise was methodically worn down like most every other iteration of the Packers defense the past ten plus years.

34 points and 74 offensive plays by Philly and that is with Hurts making 2 horrible throws that were picked and a gift botched snap for a turnover. Hurts was not very good and the Eagles still dominated this defense.

Poor tackling, easy pitch and catches on third downs beyond the sticks, missing run gaps, lack of a pass rush and other Packer defensive staples were on full display.

This organization has failed on the defensive side of the ball for so long that I think most fans have come to unconsciously accept it, just like with Special Teams.

Yes. It's Week 1, most teams look really sloppy, and this Eagles team has lots of weapons: Barkley, Brown, Smith, Goedert. If they play up to their on-paper talent, they are going to be one of the top offenses in the league and one of the teams to beat in the NFC.

That TD to Brown probably does not happen in the Barry scheme, because one of two safeties over the top would have stopped it. But then what would have happened instead is Hurts would have had record-breaking success running on us and we would have been trying to dig ourselves out of a hole all game, whereas in this game the O had the opportunity to take a comfortable lead and stay in control but failed to do so, and it fell apart late because the O couldn't stay on the field.

That is the other thing that Packers fans never appreciate, and that has been the case through all the previous several DCs, is a sputtering offense makes the defense look worse than it is, because it gives the opposing offense more opportunities to go down and score.

I don't agree with the earlier take that the issue is our players/talent on D are not good enough to have a quality defense, and that we excuse bad talent acquisition. Spags has a good defense every year without all of them being world-beaters, really only Chris Jones is a star player. What we excuse too much is O not getting the job done when they are in perfect position to do so.

If we score a TD on the two turnovers, this is probably a Dallas-style blowout. Instead we only got 6 out of it, like last year when we only got 3 out of the same against Detroit and got blown out.

I kinda forgot that the Eagles have a new defense, too, the vaunted Vic Fangio! His defense looked about the same as ours: sloppy, giving up big plays, but also doing some good things.

___

Hafley clearly needs to use Jaire more carefully. He's not a physical corner and he can't tackle, so bump-and-run doesn't really fit him. His strength is pure coverage. (It sure looked like his pick was an ad-lib ala Charles Woodson. Can't teach that.)

I don't know what to think about the run defense yet; the Eagles O-line and Barkley are a rare combination.

Anyway, it's week 1, I don't think we'll have a good feel for anything for 4 games or so.

Labrev wrote: ↑

07 Sep 2024 11:34

That is the other thing that Packers fans never appreciate, and that has been the case through all the previous several DCs, is a sputtering offense makes the defense look worse than it is, because it gives the opposing offense more opportunities to go down and score.

Totally agree. This never crosses the mind of most people, and in reality, it's a huge factor.

I think the slippery field sort of mutes any conclusions we can make from this performance. I mean yeah they were garbage like they always are, but it's a long season and this game was just so abnormal that I wouldn't take too much away from it yet.

One hilariously bad play was when Bullard tried to make a tackle without using his arms. That's going to need to get sorted out!

texas wrote: ↑

07 Sep 2024 13:32

Labrev wrote: ↑

07 Sep 2024 11:34

That is the other thing that Packers fans never appreciate, and that has been the case through all the previous several DCs, is a sputtering offense makes the defense look worse than it is, because it gives the opposing offense more opportunities to go down and score.

Totally agree. This never crosses the mind of most people, and in reality, it's a huge factor.

Over the past 13 seasons, the Packers had a QB who won 4 MVPs and who was generally regarded as one of the best to play the position. The Packer offense has consistently out-performed the Packer defense since 2010.

Even last year, when a first-year starting QB caught fire over the last half of the season, including putting up 33 points against Carolina in a late season game against the worst team and worst offense in the league, the Panthers managed to put up 30 on the Pack's D. That same D allowed Baker Mayfield to put up a perfect rating in a December game at Lambeau and lost to a woeful Giants team led by the immortal Tommy DeVito.

The argument that the Pack's perennial DEFENSIVE woes are a consequence of, or even significantly related to, a "sputtering offense" would be more persuasive if the defense didn't also &%$@ the bed when the Packer offense has not sputtered.

As for sputtering offenses, the Chiefs sputtered mightily on O in 2023 (including averaging just over 21 points in the team's four playoff games).

Yet, somehow, some way, the KC defense was able to overcome all that sputtering and help lead the Chiefs to another win the Super Bowl.

I am not writing Halfley or the Defense off after one game, but last night was a poor performance by any objective measure and it looked like so many of the past performances we have seen from this unit.

LombardiTime wrote: ↑

07 Sep 2024 13:52

The argument that the Pack's perennial DEFENSIVE woes are a consequence of, or even significantly related to, a "sputtering offense" would be more persuasive if the defense didn't also &%$@ the bed when the Packer offense has not sputtered.

right, my thoughts too, our offenses have had some sluggish games, plenty, but ya can count on 1 hand the games our defense did enough to carry the offense to a win.

new schemes, new cord, a few news faces, problems in zone coverage, and up against a big seasoned offensive line, the goal seemed to be, coral Hurd, don't let him run, and play single high and a lot of zone mix from what I could tell with Peacocks limitations ( no ability to pause, rewind, FF ) lot of confusion in coverages, and sloppy tackling, theirs plenty of work to do in all phases.

I thought some of the line stunts were very affective, against a less mobile QB they were very possibly sacks, we did well containing the edge, better against those short yardage pushing contest too, I see improvement, with let downs from several players at times thrown in, I expect with more play time together there will be less mistakes.

LombardiTime wrote: ↑

07 Sep 2024 13:52

texas wrote: ↑

07 Sep 2024 13:32

Labrev wrote: ↑

07 Sep 2024 11:34

That is the other thing that Packers fans never appreciate, and that has been the case through all the previous several DCs, is a sputtering offense makes the defense look worse than it is, because it gives the opposing offense more opportunities to go down and score.

Totally agree. This never crosses the mind of most people, and in reality, it's a huge factor.

Over the past 13 seasons, the Packers had a QB who won 4 MVPs and who was generally regarded as one of the best to play the position. The Packer offense has consistently out-performed the Packer defense since 2010.

Even last year, when a first-year starting QB caught fire over the last half of the season, including putting up 33 points against Carolina in a late season game against the worst team and worst offense in the league, the Panthers managed to put up 30 on the Pack's D. That same D allowed Baker Mayfield to put up a perfect rating in a December game at Lambeau and lost to a woeful Giants team led by the immortal Tommy DeVito.

The argument that the Pack's perennial DEFENSIVE woes are a consequence of, or even significantly related to, a "sputtering offense" would be more persuasive if the defense didn't also &%$@ the bed when the Packer offense has not sputtered.

As for sputtering offenses, the Chiefs sputtered mightily on O in 2023 (including averaging just over 21 points in the team's four playoff games).

Yet, somehow, some way, the KC defense was able to overcome all that sputtering and help lead the Chiefs to another win the Super Bowl.

I am not writing Halfley or the Defense off after one game, but last night was a poor performance by any objective measure and it looked like so many of the past performances we have seen from this unit.

The game script of most of our gut punch playoff losses under Rodgers was:

go 3 and out a bunch early
get down by 2+ scores
come back a little bit in the 4th quarter

One notable loss where this didn't happen was 2020 TB, but from my recollection, a lot of the other losses were sort of like this.

In any event, 3 and out has consistently cost us under Rodgers in the playoffs. 9 and out would be a lot better, but 3 and out is basically kryptonite. 6 and out isn't great. Much better to go like 10 and out or whatever. Rodgers would have the offense back on the bench within a minute or less, on many occasions. Obviously he is a HOF QB but playoff game script seemed to always involve him not giving the defense much of a break

The communication in the secondary, which has been a problem for years, was definitely better. However, no defensive system works very well if you miss so many tackles. The field conditions were certainly a problem, but the tackling was once again atrocious.

34 = Most points allowed in a single game by Joe Barry’s D in 2023.

Sure the field sucked, Philly has a good offense, the game was in Brazil, it was Halfley’s first-ever game as Defensive Coordinator, and any other explanation (excuse) one can come up with, but if Joe was still the DC he would be getting ripped for allowing the Eagles offense to generally dominate while putting up 34 on Friday night, and rightfully so.

Watching the game back, the tackling was bad like atrociously bad.

Indy has a QB who will be making start number 6 or so in his career, Tennessee has Will Levis, and Sam Darnold is the QB in Minnesota. Two of the three games are at Lambeau.

No (good) reason a D featuring 7 1st round picks, 2 2nd round picks, and 2 prominent free agents should not be expected to hold these three offenses down.

Can’t ever give up 34 points. There’s no sugar coating it, unfortunately. Going to really need to be better the next few weeks or we can kiss the season goodbye. Very disappointing.

Yup. The defense needs to show it's worth the next few games. If we want to be anything the needs to be good anyways. Now is the time to show it.

poor field condition typically benefits offense, and that was on display as both offenses moved the ball well with 29 pts or more and over 400 yrds of offense, however we were beaten in every facet of the game that mattered, we had penalties to the tune of over 70 yrds, we didn't block well, and the tackling was terrible, yet we only lost by 5 pts, in the first half I was worried about a blow out.

no more resting starters in PS games

Yoop wrote: ↑

08 Sep 2024 08:34

poor field condition typically benefits offense, and that was on display as both offenses moved the ball well with 29 pts or more and over 400 yrds of offense, however we were beaten in every facet of the game that mattered, we had penalties to the tune of over 70 yrds, we didn't block well, and the tackling was terrible, yet we only lost by 5 pts, in the first half I was worried about a blow out.

no more resting starters in PS games

We actually prevailed in perhaps the most significant statistic when it comes to winning or losing games in the NFL, turnover differential.

Records Based Off Turnover Margin Since 2005 (Regular-Season):
+1 888-410-5 68.4%
+2 699-150 82.3%

That we gave up 34 points despite the 3 takeaways and despite being +2 in the turnover battle makes the defensive performance look that much worse in my estimation.