Get healthy, the goal for this week.
Beat CIN and CHI at Lambeau and they are 3-1 in the first quarter. That won't wipe away the bad taste of how they lost last night, but it is the W/L record I expected after 4 games when looking at the schedule.
That the Packers didn't win is not a surprise, but 3 main things were disappointing despite the injuries, mostly on O.
- For some reason, Rodgers kept force feeding the ball to Bennett. I get that it's early and they are working on building chemistry, but it was apparent that they aren't on the same page yet.
- McCarthy's static formations for the WR's strike again. The lack of WR speed is glaring on a fast track. Every year it's the same - spread formations, no WR's open, DB's know the routes the WR's are running. I don't understand why having the same problem year after year doesn't get MM to adjust his philosophy and scheme to get WR's open with stacks, bunches, etc. (Obviously the rub routes are a problem) Forcing Rodgers to play sandlot is not a long-term plan for success.
- On a night when the O was hobbled, it was incumbent on the D to step up and they didn't. I know Daniels is a big piece, but there are 10 starters on D available. There was more front seven pressure this time around, but the first half was indicative of just how lopsided the Atlanta O vs. the Packers D was. The second half, Atlanta let up. And even when there was a small chance of trying to come back, Atlanta just ran over the Pack at the end. I like a lot of the players on the defense; however, they will never be stout and reliable under Capers.
50k Club posted:That the Packers didn't win is not a surprise, but 3 main things were disappointing despite the injuries, mostly on O.
- For some reason, Rodgers kept force feeding the ball to Bennett. I get that it's early and they are working on building chemistry, but it was apparent that they aren't on the same page yet. He might have been the only one open? see your 2nd point.
- McCarthy's static formations for the WR's strike again. The lack of WR speed is glaring on a fast track. Every year it's the same - spread formations, no WR's open, DB's know the routes the WR's are running. I don't understand why having the same problem year after year doesn't get MM to adjust his philosophy and scheme to get WR's open with stacks, bunches, etc. (Obviously the rub routes are a problem) Forcing Rodgers to play sandlot is not a long-term plan for success. Agree with this for the 1st half, they adjusted at the half. Was just too late.
- On a night when the O was hobbled, it was incumbent on the D to step up and they didn't. I know Daniels is a big piece, but there are 10 starters on D available. There was more front seven pressure this time around, but the first half was indicative of just how lopsided the Atlanta O vs. the Packers D was. The second half, Atlanta let up. And even when there was a small chance of trying to come back, Atlanta just ran over the Pack at the end. I like a lot of the players on the defense; however, they will never be stout and reliable under Capers. ATL offense is very good. Losing Daniels after the first ATL drive was significant, it just was.
Lot of bad things happened last night, but all of that is correctable. Question is, will they?
It may be correctible in theory but I don't know that it is in practice. For this bunch. You need DB's who can press successfully and then have the guys behind them to cover the releases and deeper routes. Hard to guage how much of solving that can be chalked up to younger guys still learning the scheme and how much of it is inferior talent and inadequate scheme. It seems clearer and clearer how critical a guy like Woodsen was/is to Dom's secondaries' success.
RE: I don't understand why having the same problem year after year doesn't get MM to adjust his philosophy and scheme to get WR's open with stacks, bunches, etc. (Obviously the rub routes are a problem) Forcing Rodgers to play sandlot is not a long-term plan for success.
We do what we do.
+ GBP will drop in the power rankings. They play better when under the radar. 
Mike Daniels is the engine of this D. no MD, not much power. Kenny Clark is getting there but it's MD's D.
I wish it weren't the case but it's apparently true.
- Another classic start to the Season for the Green Bay Packers
+ Rodgers didn't get hurt
YATittle posted:RE: I don't understand why having the same problem year after year doesn't get MM to adjust his philosophy and scheme to get WR's open with stacks, bunches, etc. (Obviously the rub routes are a problem) Forcing Rodgers to play sandlot is not a long-term plan for success.
We do what we do.
Need to run perfectly executed rub routes with Bennett and Cobb that go for 40 yards.
And not draw a flag....
Funniest thing from last night happened on Cobbs TD that Allison was flagged for a pick. Before rolling the replay Collinsworth drew up what Allison should have done to avoid getting a flag on the telestrator. Then the replay rolls and Allison does exactly what Collinsworth said he should have done. And Collinsworth is suddenly at a loss for words. Gold.
Yeah, I thought 81 played that perfectly. NE may hire him as a consultant.
Positives: Packers were missing their 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th best players and it was not an embarrassing performance. After I heard Bulaga and Bakhtiari were out, I didn't give them much of a chance on the road against the reigning NFC champs unless some other players really stepped up. But when Jordy and Daniels went out, it was just too much. Bring those 4 guys back and this is a different matchup. Reminds me when the Pack lost in Atlanta back in 2010. They came back healthy in January and it was a different game. Would not surprise me if that happened again.
Negatives: With so many of their top players out, it was disappointing that no one stepped up. Bennett flopped. Cobb and Adams were ok but neither stepped up in Jordy's absence. Secondary looked a lot like last January (although King flashed some serious ability).
Overall, hard to get too down on this. This was a tough game even when healthy so with so many top guys out, it wasn't surprising they lost. Just hard to stomach that secondary and the 2 costly Rodgers turnovers. But this result doesn't change how I view the rest of their season. They get healthy and that secondary continues to develop, I see so reason they can't play into February.
When your 5 minutes into the first quarter, and have 4 of your best 7 guys out, you're probably gonna loose. That said, the refs did us no favors either.
I believe if we walked in there with our full compliment of tackles, our top receiver, our best defensive player, packers win.
I'm not sure where that puts us because we will never have a 100% healthy roster for any game. I don't think any team does.
Health of Rollins and Randall was the excuse last year for the inability of the Packer secondary to hold up and that doesn't work for last night. Gap between the teams goes well beyond injuries and hard to see them beating the Falcons unless they somehow manage to get the game in Lambeau.
YATittle posted:RE: I don't understand why having the same problem year after year doesn't get MM to adjust his philosophy and scheme to get WR's open with stacks, bunches, etc. (Obviously the rub routes are a problem) Forcing Rodgers to play sandlot is not a long-term plan for success.
We do what we do.
I don't think he's forcing Rodgers to play sandlot football, I honestly believe that is a choice that Rodgers makes. I think McCarthy gives him a lot of flexibility to throw easy open passes (which has been shown in the past on many occasions that he won't take) or scramble and wait for something to open up deep. Rodgers wants the deep ball every play, I don't think he's satisfied with dink and dunk. I'd like to see the All 22 with our offense, I have a hunch Rodgers is passing on more open targets than we think in favor of waiting for a deep ball. I think the problem ends up being when defenses show Cover 2 and then bail into more of a Cover 3, effectively destroying any chance of a deep ball. I think that's why he has so much trouble with Mike Zimmer and with the Tampa 2. He keeps his eyes downfield and disciplined defenses like those won't give him a window. Favre would just force it in, but Rodgers waits. This is where those sick back shoulder throws are so dangerous, but those throws and throws in the flanks are hard to make consistently. Rodgers feasts on Safetys and Corners who bite on underneath routes and double moves. Moving Jordy to the Slot on more full time basis with Cobb in the Slot on the other side would give them more flexibility to attack that scheme.
So Rodgers was not protected very well but he threw about 6 dummies - 4 of which were or could be turnovers.
Watching that D against that O is very, very hard. What a bunch of Dum
What the hell with the officiating? What in the **** is " time out because we need to have time to get set so we can work"? I think both Pick Offensive Pass Int were bogus.
Depth at O line. ugh
D backs, fer ****s sake
Marty B needs to focus on football and stop being a whiny douche.
Monty has no quit, love watching him play. Cobb great, Adams could be great.
Bad coaching, especially D coordinator (I'm sure Dum will turn it around though)
michiganjoe posted:hard to see them beating the Falcons
Disagree - This Falcon team ain't the 1978 Steelers
- They caught some breaks
- Packers had key personnel missing
- Packers made mistakes
All adds up to an 11 point loss in September. It ain't like Green Bay played perfect football & still got beat by 11. Gimme a break, this Falcon team is very VERY beatable.
Toofless posted:When your 5 minutes into the first quarter, and have 4 of your best 7 guys out, you're probably gonna loose.
Although, you might tight.
Brainwashed Boris posted:michiganjoe posted:hard to see them beating the Falcons
Disagree - This Falcon team ain't the 1978 Steelers
- They caught some breaks
- Packers had key personnel missing
- Packers made mistakes
All adds up to an 11 point loss in September. It ain't like Green Bay played perfect football & still got beat by 11. Gimme a break, this Falcon team is very VERY beatable.
I agree Falcons are beatable but it is verry hard to see how this Packers team can do it. The D can be very good, we saw it against the (bad Oline) Hawks. But no one or two can cover Jones and the Sunu and the rest are wide ****ing open. They can't seem to stop the backs and I don't think Ryan is great but he picks them apart. It's not an 11 point loss, really. Atlanta could have turned up the heat with Jones crossing routes like in the second quarter anytime in the 3rd, 4th. and when they needed 12 yards, they did. We can't stop them. IF we would have made it closer sooner, Atlanta would have just pulled further away.
D was emabarrassing
It seemed to me ATL took their foot off the gas in the second half. I'm sure that's why Julio Jones had 1 catch. That had more to do with it than GB scheming it up although I did like what I saw from King and Jones. Randall and Rollins and House? Not so much.
GB can certainly beat those guys but Dom is Dom. He does not put them in the best position to succeed unless the talent is clearly tilted in GBs favor.
Tschmack posted:It seemed to me ATL took their foot off the gas in the second half.
Agree completely. Falcons went into coast mode in the second half and the game wasn't anywhere near as close as the score indicated.
sh!tty turf
BREAKING: Falcons LB Vic Beasley (hamstring) expected to miss a monthhttps://t.co/WGOszPYHLL
— Around The NFL (@AroundTheNFL) September 18, 2017
And to think they have to play 7 more games on that turf. Good Luck!!
packaddict posted:And to think they have to play 7 more games on that turf. Good Luck!!
Long term, could be a serious issue for the franchise in recruiting free agents. Who wants to shorten their career by playing somewhere like that? Credit to the Pats for ripping up their field and already replacing it.
The injuries last night may have nothing to do with the turf installed and everything to do with the CBA limiting organized team activities.
Brainwashed Boris posted:michiganjoe posted:hard to see them beating the Falcons
Disagree - This Falcon team ain't the 1978 Steelers
- They caught some breaks
- Packers had key personnel missing
- Packers made mistakes
All adds up to an 11 point loss in September. It ain't like Green Bay played perfect football & still got beat by 11. Gimme a break, this Falcon team is very VERY beatable.
The key to beating Atlanta (and almost any team with a good QB) is being able to generate pressure with by rushing 4 or 5 - especially pressure up the middle. Rodgers is an exception to that because he is so good at extending plays without risking turnovers.
Matt Ryan is a great pocket passer, but he's a statue. A healthy Daniels collapsing the pocket and CM3 with edge pressure is what's going to give them a chance. Outside of putting peak-Deion Sanders on Julio Jones - it you give Ryan enough time, it doesn't matter who the CB is, Jones is going to get open.
Ryan wasn't standing in clean pockets for extended periods last night. Ball was out fast to open recievers. Pass rush wasn't the problem.
MichiganPacker posted:Brainwashed Boris posted:michiganjoe posted:hard to see them beating the Falcons
Disagree - This Falcon team ain't the 1978 Steelers
- They caught some breaks
- Packers had key personnel missing
- Packers made mistakes
All adds up to an 11 point loss in September. It ain't like Green Bay played perfect football & still got beat by 11. Gimme a break, this Falcon team is very VERY beatable.
The key to beating Atlanta (and almost any team with a good QB) is being able to generate pressure with by rushing 4 or 5 - especially pressure up the middle. Rodgers is an exception to that because he is so good at extending plays without risking turnovers.
Matt Ryan is a great pocket passer, but he's a statue. A healthy Daniels collapsing the pocket and CM3 with edge pressure is what's going to give them a chance. Outside of putting peak-Deion Sanders on Julio Jones - it you give Ryan enough time, it doesn't matter who the CB is, Jones is going to get open.
I agree with your take on what it takes to beating Atlanta/Matt Ryan.
However, I've got to ask, if Ryan is a statue, what does that make the #51 in Green & Gold whom Ryan "sprinted" away from in the open field last night?
+ No funeral for Rodgers.
- Injuries
+ My new avatar
House doesn't look as if he had the speed to keep up with Atlanta's receivers. I'm betting that King sees a lot more playing time against quality receivers than House does, in the not too distant future.
My guess is King and House start outside as soon as Sunday.
Starting outside corners need to be King and House. Period. Slot is Randall. For now. If he falls apart then Rollins. If Rollins falls apart go back to Randall. If Randall fails at the slot again then it's time for Hawkins.
Its time that Randall / Rollins don't see much if any time on the boundaries.
Grave Digger posted:YATittle posted:RE: I don't understand why having the same problem year after year doesn't get MM to adjust his philosophy and scheme to get WR's open with stacks, bunches, etc. (Obviously the rub routes are a problem) Forcing Rodgers to play sandlot is not a long-term plan for success.
We do what we do.
I don't think he's forcing Rodgers to play sandlot football, I honestly believe that is a choice that Rodgers makes. I think McCarthy gives him a lot of flexibility to throw easy open passes (which has been shown in the past on many occasions that he won't take) or scramble and wait for something to open up deep. Rodgers wants the deep ball every play, I don't think he's satisfied with dink and dunk. I'd like to see the All 22 with our offense, I have a hunch Rodgers is passing on more open targets than we think in favor of waiting for a deep ball. I think the problem ends up being when defenses show Cover 2 and then bail into more of a Cover 3, effectively destroying any chance of a deep ball. I think that's why he has so much trouble with Mike Zimmer and with the Tampa 2. He keeps his eyes downfield and disciplined defenses like those won't give him a window. Favre would just force it in, but Rodgers waits. This is where those sick back shoulder throws are so dangerous, but those throws and throws in the flanks are hard to make consistently. Rodgers feasts on Safetys and Corners who bite on underneath routes and double moves. Moving Jordy to the Slot on more full time basis with Cobb in the Slot on the other side would give them more flexibility to attack that scheme.
GD, not sure if you follow Andy Benoit at MMQB at SI.com, but he has been critical of Rodgers not throwing the ball on time/in rhythm within MM's scheme - there are guys open, at times. So, I know the sandlot stuff is not part of the scheme. But, I also do know that often the WR's are not winning on their routes either.
I'd actually put King and Hawkins outside and House in the slot, now. Speed outside and physical in the slot.
50k Club posted:GD, not sure if you follow Andy Benoit at MMQB at SI.com, but he has been critical of Rodgers not throwing the ball on time/in rhythm within MM's scheme - there are guys open, at times. So, I know the sandlot stuff is not part of the scheme. But, I also do know that often the WR's are not winning on their routes either.
I think it's Rodgers gambling that his guys can win deep rather than take what's available. WRs won't win deep routes against Cover 3, it's why Cover 3 and Quarters coverage exists, so either WRs need to do a better job adjusting routes on the fly or Rodgers needs to gamble less and take his wins where he can get them. He doesn't have to do that all the time, but it was fairly obvious early on that Atlanta wasn't going to be beat deep. The times he took what he was given and allowed his WRs to make plays after the catch were by far our most productive plays/drives of the night.
Hungry5 posted:I'd actually put King and Hawkins outside and House in the slot, now. Speed outside and physical in the slot.
No issues with this attangement at all.
Grave Digger posted:50k Club posted:GD, not sure if you follow Andy Benoit at MMQB at SI.com, but he has been critical of Rodgers not throwing the ball on time/in rhythm within MM's scheme - there are guys open, at times. So, I know the sandlot stuff is not part of the scheme. But, I also do know that often the WR's are not winning on their routes either.
I think it's Rodgers gambling that his guys can win deep rather than take what's available. WRs won't win deep routes against Cover 3, it's why Cover 3 and Quarters coverage exists, so either WRs need to do a better job adjusting routes on the fly or Rodgers needs to gamble less and take his wins where he can get them. He doesn't have to do that all the time, but it was fairly obvious early on that Atlanta wasn't going to be beat deep. The times he took what he was given and allowed his WRs to make plays after the catch were by far our most productive plays/drives of the night.
Seems to me this is the issue he had at the start of the year last year...
MM on clock management: What's that?
Criminy, hire someone to do it for you.
YATittle posted:Grave Digger posted:50k Club posted:GD, not sure if you follow Andy Benoit at MMQB at SI.com, but he has been critical of Rodgers not throwing the ball on time/in rhythm within MM's scheme - there are guys open, at times. So, I know the sandlot stuff is not part of the scheme. But, I also do know that often the WR's are not winning on their routes either.
I think it's Rodgers gambling that his guys can win deep rather than take what's available. WRs won't win deep routes against Cover 3, it's why Cover 3 and Quarters coverage exists, so either WRs need to do a better job adjusting routes on the fly or Rodgers needs to gamble less and take his wins where he can get them. He doesn't have to do that all the time, but it was fairly obvious early on that Atlanta wasn't going to be beat deep. The times he took what he was given and allowed his WRs to make plays after the catch were by far our most productive plays/drives of the night.
Seems to me this is the issue he had at the start of the year last year...
Now that he has Monty coming out of the backfield rather than a washed up Starks and an over 5.0-40 time Lacy for checkdowns, we should see a lot more 5-6 yard checkdowns to Monty.
When's the last time a back ran up receiving numbers like Monty did without a long screen for yardage? Almost all of his yards were on dumpdowns or one-on-one against a LB.
packaddict posted:And to think they have to play 7 more games on that turf. Good Luck!!
They could do as the Pats did and tear it out after one game.
So much credit to the Pats, they install new turf in April or thereabouts, play a game on it and hate it, so they tear it out. They are always on top of stuff. Anyone think Capers would last a minute as DC there? Yet here we are stuck on stupid.