I'm still not over how refreshing a change this is:

If there’s one thing Matt LaFleur has shown over his short time as Green Bay Packers head coach, it’s that he doesn’t favor one skill position over another.

 It doesn’t matter if you’re a halfback, fullback, wide receiver or tight end, LaFleur’s offense will get you the ball if you’re open.

 As the last three games have showed – all of them sans star receiver Davante Adams – trying to get the ball to a single player or position isn’t the objective. Identifying a weakness – either the opponent’s or yours – and exploiting it is what matters most.

Link

Original Post

This week I am not so much worried about the offense because to me if the Chiefs have one weakness its that their defense can be scored on.  My worry is can the defense step it up and stop giving up so many yards? and can they stop Kelce and Hill from running wild?

Not facing Mahomes is something the Packers may have gotten lucky with but the rest of that offense even without him is still very potent.

For whatever reason, Packers' teams have not fared particularly well in Kansas City over the years.  That said, this a completely different couple of teams from ones that have lost in KC in the past.  The Chiefs gave the 2011 Packers their only regular season loss.  I believe the 2007 team is the only one that I can remember that actually won a game in KC. 

I am going into this game thinking it's going to be high scoring no matter who the QB is.  I remember even in 2017 when Alex Smith was a QB, he was lighting up the scoreboard for much of that season and was an MVP candidate.  He's obviously better than Matt Moore, but it shows that Mahomes isn't the only reason the Chiefs have had a great offense the past few years. 

Per reports, Savage is making "progress" and is doing better, but just like Adams, I am sure they do not want this lingering in December when games will really matter and the Packers are jostling seeding.

They miss his sideline-to-sideline speed. That's what covered much of the "warts" where he could quickly close in on a route and break it up or make it a contested catch. That's what he was doing earlier in the season.

As for KC, their run defense is terrible (minus a better performance against the Broncos) . MLF should be able to run it down their throat and that should set up play action beautifully. With Mahomes, I would have expected an offensive show down with the edge to KC. But now? If the Packers get ahead, they can just step on the gas. And unlike MM, I have full confidence MLF will do just that. 

Ubetcha posted:

Yup, still not comfortable with this defense looking so porous at times. I'm starting to see a TE theme here with Ertz, Waller, and now Kelce coming up. I know they miss Savage but hopefully Pettine comes up with some answers.

I think their best bet is to match up Amos on the TE when we are facing these special guys.    Last week the zone defense killed us as the TE was running completely uncovered a couple times.   (One long TD called back for holding too).

We seemed confused and out of sorts a lot when running zone yesterday.   I'd much rather see them man up, especially against a team like Oak that was weak at WR.    It fits our players skills better IMO.   

At least against OAK I know the issue really seemed to be centered on getting pressure. Pettine wasn't getting pressure with 4, so he lost players from coverage and the TE's found the gaps in Zone. We need more help at ILB. I like Martinez, but he doesn't need to be on the field in passing situations and Burks didn't seem like the answer yesterday either. Give him a little more time, but they're hurting for LBs who can support the run and play smart in coverage. Savage and Greene were actually filling these roles really well, which is why when/if both return I don't think we will see this issue pop up again. If we had better depth at CB I'd almost rather see Tramon back at FS and let Amos play closer to the line. Jackson doesn't seem to be cutting it anywhere unfortunately. 

If Mahomes would have been healthy, I'd have expected to have the Chiefs hang 40+ on this Packers defense. Of course, the Chiefs are capable of putting up big numbers against anyone's defense. 

The Packers are likely to score points, the key will be to take advantage of any opportunities that Matt Moore gives you for turnovers that Mahomes wouldn't have given you. Moore is a solid backup QB, but he's thrown for 46 TDs and 36 interceptions in about 1000 pass attempts in his career. Mahomes has 65 TDs and 14 ints in around 850 attempts. 

In large part, the Packers have won two games this year that their defense was run over in terms of yardage because they took advantage of turnover opportunities: Cousin's mistakes and Carr's fumble and interception (although the Packers offense probably would have outscored the Raiders even if they'd have put up the 38 points they probably should have had). If they do the same thing for Moore, they'll have a chance. 

Kelce may have 150 yards though. 

Grave Digger posted:

At least against OAK I know the issue really seemed to be centered on getting pressure. Pettine wasn't getting pressure with 4, so he lost players from coverage and the TE's found the gaps in Zone. We need more help at ILB. I like Martinez, but he doesn't need to be on the field in passing situations and Burks didn't seem like the answer yesterday either. Give him a little more time, but they're hurting for LBs who can support the run and play smart in coverage. Savage and Greene were actually filling these roles really well, which is why when/if both return I don't think we will see this issue pop up again. If we had better depth at CB I'd almost rather see Tramon back at FS and let Amos play closer to the line. Jackson doesn't seem to be cutting it anywhere unfortunately. 

Agreed on ILB help needed. However, part of the reason there was little pressure is because Carr was getting rid of the ball very quickly and that was due in large part because of the zone defense. If they man up in the backfield then maybe Carr has to hold the ball one or two seconds longer and we'd see more pressure or even a couple sacks. . 

Has anyone asked Pettine why they were in zone yesterday? And why didn't they switch to man after getting gashed so much? I know his thing is man so there must have been special circumstances.  Have they played more zone with Savage out?  

DH13 posted:

Has anyone asked Pettine why they were in zone yesterday? And why didn't they switch to man after getting gashed so much? I know his thing is man so there must have been special circumstances.  Have they played more zone with Savage out?  

Maybe a better question would be not why were they in zone, but why did the defense look so confused most of the day? They couldn't get lined up, they were talking as the ball was being snapped. They had blown coverage all day long.

Me thinks that Pettine got out coached from the get go and never caught up with the Raiders offense. Chuckie schooled him.

AtTheMurph posted:
DH13 posted:

Has anyone asked Pettine why they were in zone yesterday? And why didn't they switch to man after getting gashed so much? I know his thing is man so there must have been special circumstances.  Have they played more zone with Savage out?  

Maybe a better question would be not why were they in zone, but why did the defense look so confused most of the day? They couldn't get lined up, they were talking as the ball was being snapped. They had blown coverage all day long.

Me thinks that Pettine got out coached from the get go and never caught up with the Raiders offense. Chuckie schooled him.

There is a reason that Savage starts over Redmond and we saw it yesterday. 

fightphoe93 posted:

For whatever reason, Packers' teams have not fared particularly well in Kansas City over the years.  That said, this a completely different couple of teams from ones that have lost in KC in the past.  The Chiefs gave the 2011 Packers their only regular season loss.  I believe the 2007 team is the only one that I can remember that actually won a game in KC. 

I am going into this game thinking it's going to be high scoring no matter who the QB is.  I remember even in 2017 when Alex Smith was a QB, he was lighting up the scoreboard for much of that season and was an MVP candidate.  He's obviously better than Matt Moore, but it shows that Mahomes isn't the only reason the Chiefs have had a great offense the past few years. 

2011, 2007, etc. have absolutely nothing to do with a game being played in 2019.  

DH13 posted:

So if this is a "former member of the Packers now HC" thing, it means Andy Reid will do the same to Pettine?

Chefs are coming off a Thurs game and will have more time to work on game plan. So I expect Reid to create some really tough things for GB to deal with. 

Chuckie certainly did and I think Reid is a better game planner and play designer. And he has a hell of a lot more weapons to use than Chuckie did. 

FLPACKER posted:
AtTheMurph posted:
DH13 posted:

Has anyone asked Pettine why they were in zone yesterday? And why didn't they switch to man after getting gashed so much? I know his thing is man so there must have been special circumstances.  Have they played more zone with Savage out?  

Maybe a better question would be not why were they in zone, but why did the defense look so confused most of the day? They couldn't get lined up, they were talking as the ball was being snapped. They had blown coverage all day long.

Me thinks that Pettine got out coached from the get go and never caught up with the Raiders offense. Chuckie schooled him.

There is a reason that Savage starts over Redmond and we saw it yesterday. 

Not sure who looked worse, Redmond or Amos.

AtTheMurph posted:
FLPACKER posted:
AtTheMurph posted:
DH13 posted:

Has anyone asked Pettine why they were in zone yesterday? And why didn't they switch to man after getting gashed so much? I know his thing is man so there must have been special circumstances.  Have they played more zone with Savage out?  

Maybe a better question would be not why were they in zone, but why did the defense look so confused most of the day? They couldn't get lined up, they were talking as the ball was being snapped. They had blown coverage all day long.

Me thinks that Pettine got out coached from the get go and never caught up with the Raiders offense. Chuckie schooled him.

There is a reason that Savage starts over Redmond and we saw it yesterday. 

Not sure who looked worse, Redmond or Amos.

Haters gonna hate. 

AtTheMurph posted:
DH13 posted:

Has anyone asked Pettine why they were in zone yesterday? And why didn't they switch to man after getting gashed so much? I know his thing is man so there must have been special circumstances.  Have they played more zone with Savage out?  

Maybe a better question would be not why were they in zone, but why did the defense look so confused most of the day? They couldn't get lined up, they were talking as the ball was being snapped. They had blown coverage all day long.

Me thinks that Pettine got out coached from the get go and never caught up with the Raiders offense. Chuckie schooled him.

Yeah, I agree.  To be fair to Pettine, Gruden was coming off the bye week so not only did he have time to comprehend what the Packers do, he had time to self scout and go to stuff they hadn't shown yet.  

AtTheMurph posted:
DH13 posted:

So if this is a "former member of the Packers now HC" thing, it means Andy Reid will do the same to Pettine?

Chefs are coming off a Thurs game and will have more time to work on game plan. So I expect Reid to create some really tough things for GB to deal with. 

Chuckie certainly did and I think Reid is a better game planner and play designer. And he has a hell of a lot more weapons to use than Chuckie did. 

Agree with this too.   Take the over.    Only thing thats keeping from taking out a 2nd mortgage is the QB isn't as mobile as Mahomes.    If we can get pressure on him, play design won't mean shit. 

AtTheMurph posted:
DH13 posted:

So if this is a "former member of the Packers now HC" thing, it means Andy Reid will do the same to Pettine?

Chefs are coming off a Thurs game and will have more time to work on game plan. So I expect Reid to create some really tough things for GB to deal with. 

Chuckie certainly did and I think Reid is a better game planner and play designer. And he has a hell of a lot more weapons to use than Chuckie did. 

There is one thing that Reid does not have that Chuckie did & that is an outstanding offensive line. 

The Heckler posted:

This week I am not so much worried about the offense because to me if the Chiefs have one weakness its that their defense can be scored on.  My worry is can the defense step it up and stop giving up so many yards? and can they stop Kelce and Hill from running wild?

Not facing Mahomes is something the Packers may have gotten lucky with but the rest of that offense even without him is still very potent.

Never underestimate your opponent. 

TouchdownWhitewaterJesus posted:
R MaN posted:

Packers are 4.5 favorites 

Betting lines are used to do one thing, bring in bets.

Sure..  and the ultimate goal that bringing the bets works toward is making money for the Casino.    Therefore it behooves the casino to place a number that will draw equal action on both sides (They win regardless of outcome because they collect the juice or vig, typically 10%).     In other words, an accurate number. 

Boris posted:

Did you get the Pack at -3?

Caesars
-4.5
+4.5
GB: -110
KC: -110
48 O/Uo: -110
u: -110
GB: -220
KC: +185
Westgate
-4.5
+4.5
GB: -110
KC: -110
47.5 O/Uo: -110
u: -110
GB: -240
KC: +190
Unibet
-5.5
+5.5
GB: -110
KC: -110
48 O/Uo: -110
u: -110
GB: -238
KC: +190
Betradar
-4.5
+4.5
GB: -113
KC: -108
47.5 O/Uo: -111
u: -110
GB: -224
KC: +179

Add Reply

Likes (2)
Timmy!YATittle
Post
×
×
×
×