Great points Hungry5 and I agree. They really threw a ton of different personnel groups out there on both O and D. They were evaluating all the way, nothing more.
I was really impressed by the number of different groups they had out there, especially working OL and LB. Some guys played themselves onto the team with some decent to great play. Others are in trouble.
I agree with Bob McGinn's assessment:
Show up soft, slow, disorganized, unemotional and unprepared against Kelly's Philadelphia Eagles, as coach Mike McCarthy's Green Bay Packers did Saturday night at Lambeau Field, and you'll get taken to the proverbial woodshed.
Really no excuse for the performance of the defense and ST.
I agree with you, michiganjoe, more than McGinn.
I believe McCarthy and Kelly went into this with completely different goals, but there is no excuse for the **** show aspect of what we saw first half last night from those 2 groups.
I believe McCarthy and Kelly went into this with completely different goals, but there is no excuse for the **** show aspect of what we saw first half last night from those 2 groups.
Caught the game on NFL Network this morning.
The good.
Neal. Pretty much locked up the 3rd RB spot. His ability to catch the ball separates him from Crockett and Harris. White. He's the 4th WR. Backman with an athletic catch in tight coverage while getting drilled. Liked that catch a lot. Nice catch and stretch for TD.
The bad.
Starting D. LB play was not good.
The ugly.
ST. ST are always a mixed mess in the preseason with all the personnel rotation. But my God that was a hot mess. You have to expect a few penalties. But when Janis calls for a fair catch inside the 10, that's bad coaching. You either run that back or get away from that football. There is zero upside fair catching a punt inside the 10. Just a horrible showing on every level. Masthay? It's time to be concerned.
The whatever.
I think MM and GB's entire mentality for this game changed when Cobb went down. As far as MM knew, his #2 WR had a broken collar bone a week after losing his #1 WR for the year. First half looked like "let's get out of this game ASAP".
They're 0-4 in the one's that really count.
Note to self: If team facing the Pack has a quick scatback who can catch, get Sam Barrington off the field ASAP.
Give the Eagles credit for working him over, but somehow, if these teams face each other again, I'd like to think the Pack finds a way to get Barrington off the field when a guy like Sproles is in there.
From the live watch last night seems like they played a lot of base D, something they won't do in regular season. If last year is any indication.
Kelly's team needed some confidence after a tumultuous offseason with plenty of distractions. His team came to play, GB didn't. Fortunately the game meant nothing, but McCarthy will have to get the attitudes right before Chicago.
Originally Posted by fightphoe93:
Note to self: If team facing the Pack has a quick scatback who can catch, get Sam Barrington off the field ASAP.
Give the Eagles credit for working him over, but somehow, if these teams face each other again, I'd like to think the Pack finds a way to get Barrington off the field when a guy like Sproles is in there.
You might be expecting too much.
Weston Hodkiewicz @WesHod <small class="time">4 minutes ago</small>
After the #Packers' punt coverage unit was flagged for 12 men on the field in 2nd quarter, there were 10 on the field during re-punt
Eventually, the clown unit will figure out that you need 11 players on the field
Originally Posted by fightphoe93:
Note to self: If team facing the Pack has a quick scatback who can catch, get Sam Barrington off the field ASAP.
Give the Eagles credit for working him over, but somehow, if these teams face each other again, I'd like to think the Pack finds a way to get Barrington off the field when a guy like Sproles is in there.
Have we seen his replacement for these situations? Is he on the roster?
Originally Posted by CAPackfan:
After the #Packers' punt coverage unit was flagged for 12 men on the field in 2nd quarter, there were 10 on the field during re-punt
That's Zook Special Teams quality control methods.
See...if you get flagged for 12...immediately only send out 10...leave yourself some cushion is the thinking.
Zook...putting the "Special" back in Special Teams.
What's next?
I predict it will be bounty hunter towels with numbers scribbled on, ala Kenny Stills back in the day. Good times.
**** Chip Kelly. All he did last night was provide regular season game tape with 2015 personnel three weeks early to opponents. Eagles will get a lot of pub early in the season but after Bradford goes down or regresses to his average mean they'll get their dicks pounded in the turf by any decent opponent. After they miss the playoffs again this season he'll be a featured player on ESPN's Saturday schedule somewhere.
quote:I predict it will be bounty hunter towels with numbers scribbled on, ala Kenny Stills back in the day. Good times.
You can always use the towels for grilling meat.
Last night will be great motivation when we play Philly in the NFC Divisional Round.
Originally Posted by CAPackfan:
Eventually, the clown unit will figure out that you need 11 players on the field
Boy, only 10 on the field again during third-quarter punt return where Janis called for the fair catch
You might be giving Ron Zook too much credit.
To be fair to Kelly, he has had a lot of personnel turnover his offseason and I'm sure this new group needed some experience together. There's a huge margin for error with his fast paced, speed score offense so I'm sure he wanted to get them live game experience running it to work out the kinks.
He needs to be concerned about his D. The Packers subbed in from the start and still managed some production. They should have dominated a rookie 5th round QB, and they didn't. They had an INT that wasn't the QBs fault and a couple of drive killing sacks against 2nd/3rd team OL. If Rodgers and the other 3/5 of our starting OL had been in there I'm not sure the game would have been so one sided.
The only real negative, IMO, was penalties. We don't need young players making critical mistakes. We know better than any other team that all it takes is one simple lapse in judgement by a backup TE to keep you from a SB.
He needs to be concerned about his D. The Packers subbed in from the start and still managed some production. They should have dominated a rookie 5th round QB, and they didn't. They had an INT that wasn't the QBs fault and a couple of drive killing sacks against 2nd/3rd team OL. If Rodgers and the other 3/5 of our starting OL had been in there I'm not sure the game would have been so one sided.
The only real negative, IMO, was penalties. We don't need young players making critical mistakes. We know better than any other team that all it takes is one simple lapse in judgement by a backup TE to keep you from a SB.
I thought Kelly followed the traditional 3rd preseason game scheme.
Starters through the first half and possibly into the 3rd quarter.
Not possible. Chip does everything different. Breath of fresh air. Innovator. Breaks china. Just ask his nutsack brigade.
It is just unbelievable how much the media is all over Bradford's performance in this game. There are many reasons why that 25 point first quarter doesn't matter that it's pointless to even point them out. Bradford is a 7th year player, I sure hope he'd be able to dominate a meaninginless preseason game. This is the same BS the media was spewing about Mariota's zero interceptions in training camp. Good players use training camp and preseason games to improve on weaknesses and try new things. Obviously Chip is just boosting his and his team's ego which hey, if that's what you need then by all means....... but it's so frustrating with how unintelligent the media has become on preseason.
When I watch/read about preseason, I look at 2 things:
1) No injuries
2) Performance by young players
That's it. If you're raving about your veterans in preseason, your team has no shot in the regular season.
I guarantee you plenty of people here were raving about how great the Packers No. 1 offense looked in past preseasons.
Green Bay played like **** on Saturday.
If Mike knows why, great. If he doesn't but devotes the majority of this week finding a reason why, great.
**** Chip Kelly and **** Sam Bradford.
Originally Posted by ChilliJon:
**** Chip Kelly
Right on man 
I'm looking forward to seeing him fail
For Kelly's system to work, the offense must get a first down on their initial set of downs on every drive & not turn the ball over. If they do this it serves 2 purposes; 1) It keeps their defense off the field 2) It tires your defense. The problem with his system is that one bad play (15 yard penalty, sack, turnover) gets magnified because they need possession of the ball to run significantly more plays than their opponent and wear them out. The problem we had against them was that we could not force them into any "bad plays"...no one on our defense could make a play. What I have observed in basketball over the years is systems, which are far from the norm, can win a lot of games, but it is difficult to win a championship by beating a number of excellent teams in a row ( think of John Chaney at Temple, Paul Westhead at Loyola, Pitino at KU did not win it all until they went from shooting 30 threes a game down to low 20s). I have hope that during regular season game, Dom's exotic blitzes & change up of schemes would have resulted in some negative plays for Eagles offense.
Kelly does this **** every year. By week 6 his team will run out of gas.
FLPACKER, I agree with you that Dom would have thrown way more at Kelly if it had been regular season. Boy, too bad Sal Palantonio is unable to control himself now. What a sad man. I don't think we were trying too hard to stop their 1s... but the result should provide good motivation for us going into the season. Mike Daniels said the GB D was pissed at their showing.
Kelly needed a good showing for his team. McCarthy did not, not to that level anyway. And, McCarthy's team looked pretty damn good in the 2nd half. I thought that was great.
Peppers said it was still just a glorified practice.
I think the Eagles could be pretty good, but I've seen enough pre-seasons to know that you can't put in too much stock into one game. I remember when Steve Spurrier started coaching the NFL at Washington, his team absolutely dominated the pre-season and some thought his coaching style might be the next big thing. It was totally deceiving and he ended up flaming out of the NFL as a coach in just a couple of seasons.
That said, I think Philly does have some talent and they do have a shot at winning the NFC East which is not particularly strong this year. That set of RBs they have Murray, Matthews, and Sproles looks like the best group in the NFL and I don't think that is just pre-season hype. Those RBs particularly Murray and Sproles are great at what they do and will give Philly a fighting chance in that division.
Regarding preseason games, as another poster mentioned in another thread the Lions went 4 - 0 in the preseason, and went on to a record setting 0-16 regular season.
And phoe93 is right on, the first year Spurrior was in D.C, they lit up the preseason, and failed miserably in the regular.
It looked to me like the Eagles attacked our defense much like the better teams have over the last few years; isolate a TE or RB on an ILB that is slow and can't cover.
IIRC, SF or Seattle had a 'bullseye' on Brad Jones, and they had specific plays to run if he was on the field. I'd guess Philly had something similar when Barrington was in the game. He was exposed early and often, and they killed us with YAC.
(Lack of?) effort and attitude aside, 6-7-8 yard gains on their 1st down plays made it easy for them to sustain drives and played to their strengths perfectly. 2nd and short turned into 15-20 yard plays too often, and they were able to score within 2-4 minutes. Bradford had a 4 play/59 yard 'drive' that took all of 1:29. Sanchez took the longest; 3:57 to go 55 yards in 11 plays. However, he did follow that with a 7 play 92 yard drive in only :57 for their last score.
That's just butt-ugly no matter who is/isn't in the game.
That's just base defense though. If it were a real game, Barrington wouldn't have been asked to cover Sproles that often or at all. To be fair to Barrington, there aren't many ILBs that could cover him, he's a mismatch for almost any LB.
I don't get the disdain for Chip Kelly. His O system is very tough to defend against, is strong schematically, and he wants to run the ball a lot. If Bradford stays healthy, he's found an accurate QB that can execute it. That's very favorable for success. It Philly's D that is the big question mark.
As for the Packers D, I'm not too worried. I would like to have seen more wins one on one, but I didn't see a lot of that.
Something to do with aiding and abetting the creation of a mythos that not only are you the next best thing, but that you're so much smarter and creative than anyone else.
Chip takes this a step farther by not being publicly bombastic like Rex Ryan but by subtly courting the image makers like Peter King, bringing them behind the magical curtain and sprinkling his faerie dust.
Dude's team goes Tecmo Bowl on the unwitting but hasn't won a damn thing yet.
Originally Posted by 50k Club:
I don't get the disdain for Chip Kelly. His O system is very tough to defend against, is strong schematically, and he wants to run the ball a lot. If Bradford stays healthy, he's found an accurate QB that can execute it. That's very favorable for success. It Philly's D that is the big question mark.
Bradford looks great on those bull**** college option plays.
Originally Posted by Grave Digger:
That's just base defense though. If it were a real game, Barrington wouldn't have been asked to cover Sproles that often or at all. To be fair to Barrington, there aren't many ILBs that could cover him, he's a mismatch for almost any LB.
This is true. Darren Sproles has been one of my favorite RBs since he was drafted. He is incredibly elusive. Tough to defend for anyone.