Skip to main content

I understand the rules are the rules, but that "touch" on Stafford's helmet was ridiculous. Jones needs to have better control of his body, but to me it's the same as an incidental facemask (which they barely call anymore). I understand the spirit of the rule and the need for protecting the QBs head, but it's so frustrating that such a minor infraction can be a game changer (as we saw yesterday). 

Originally Posted by Fedya:
quote:
I think this will be the game that changes the NFL's position on part time officials.
What the hell are the officials supposed to do the rest of the week that will make them more effective?
 

Yes….because players attend their regular jobs at Wal mart during the week and meet sundays around 10 am and get dressed for the game... For $173,000 a year and a nice pension  they should be watching film, conferencing about what is and is not holding/interference/roughing and they d*** sure better be running wind sprints to be able to manage late game decisions without fatigue. They want to be paid like MLB umpires, they should be as dedicated….Everybody talked about how bad the low level college replacements were…and yes we got screwed by them on one play….but for the life of me, I couldn't tell the difference and can think of 10 games where the Pack was flamed by 'NFL' sanctioned officiating ineptness…..and not just the Pack, but every team…the reason I hate instant replay so much and think it should be abolished is that you have this crazy 'high tech' mechanism to get some plays right and at the same time  allow officiating calls to stand that are clearly inaccurate….if the game is flawed, at least let it be flawed without the joy killing, drudgery of'  'wait and see if this is going to be a touchdown'…or demand more from the officials. 

RichRod blocked well yesterday.

 

 

 Hawk was not responsible for any negative plays,  he was basically his normal Available/Accountable self. On the (1st) two DET TD drives Hawk was on the field for only 4 snaps, all on the 2nd TD drive, but not the TD play. Both drives the defense looked less than themselves compared to the rest of the game.

 

Benson Giuon had another solid game.  Very good push in the middle.

 

 

Brad Jones is absolutely lost in pass-defense.

Last edited by H5
Originally Posted by Johnson:
For $173,000 a year and a nice pension  they should be watching film, conferencing about what is and is not holding/interference/roughing and they d*** sure better be running wind sprints to be able to manage late game decisions without fatigue. They want to be paid like MLB umpires, they should be as dedicated….

 

 

 

You may be on to something

I don't think full- time would change much, the real issues surround the rule book imo

I'd review every single rule with an eye toward making it easier to adjudicate consistently

 

The networks have former- referee rules guru's standing by because neither the players, the coaches, the refs or the fans know all the rules- and even then Carey or Perriera aren't batting 1000

 

I think the NFL prefers all this gray area/interpretationability- it gives them an out when things don't pass the sniff test

 

Speaking of which: Did anybody see definitive video proof that Matthews stopped the Lions RB short on the 2pt conversion ? I never saw anything useful and they glossed it over it pretty quickly

 

good point, Satori.  I saw the RB's butt hit the ground, but it wasn't clear where the ball was...or...at least the viewpoints we got at home...maybe in the booth they had a better replay from the other side coming down the goal line.  At least with the side shot we saw it could not be determined.  The ball might not have crossed, but I didn't think there was enough to over turn the original call.

 

Last edited by SanDiegoPackFan
Originally Posted by Hungry5:

RichRod blocked well yesterday.

 

 Brad Jones is absolutely lost in pass-defense.

The problem is that the other guys are worse. There was a play in the first half where the Lions motioned Reggie Bush out of the backfield and ended up with him matched up one on one with our ILB, I believe it was Barrington. Stat Padford threw a quick slant to Calvin Johnson that was knocked down, but it looked like Bush was already about 2 steps by him at that point. Jones is faster and at least may be in the same area code as a RB or TE in pass coverage. Hawk is a complete liability and Barrington is a run stopper who needs to stay out of pass coverage at all costs.

 

Maybe the adjustment will be to play Richardson as an extra "LB". He's 6'2" and 220 Lbs. He ran a 4.43 at the combine.

 

Hawk is 6'1" and about 230 (maybe less based on McGinn's comments). Hawk's speed (whatever he had) at this point is gone.

 

Barrington is 6'1" and about 240. His 40 at the combine was 4.83.

 

Jones is listed at 242 and ran a 4.49 at his combine. That's why he's in on pass coverage.

 

The Packers options are what they are. Do you play Richardson and leave yourself susceptible to the run, or do you play Barrington and risk getting him matched up on a back or TE? Or do you go with the guys who are experienced and will know where they are supposed to be but may not physically be able to matchup (Hawk) or have a propensity for killer penalties (Jones)?  

 

 

 

 

 

Originally Posted by ChilliJon:

Bush single coverage outside is a mismatch against 90% of all NFL LBs. Not sure if GB rolled a S over the top which is why Stat took the underneath route or not. 

 

Not fair to call out Hawk, Jones, or Barrington covering Bush on a go route. That's a **** assignment for most LBs. 

 

I agree on Bush, but an average NFL RB is a mismatch for Barrington speed-wise, but not for Jones (theoretically).

Originally Posted by YATittle: 

...see how bad Hawk was. Piling in late on tackles, biting on fakes while CMIII detects it accurately and makes the play.

What's more is that Hawks suck is even more dramatic in person. Being at the game where you have a better view of the whole field, its readily apparent that Hawk does not belong in the NFL. He is always late in filling on run plays, late on blitz, can't get off blocks, can't neutralize blockers, he is awful....I'd like to see him at least guess once in a while. His play recognition, ability to get off blocks, speed/size ratio, etc...makes it seem at though you are watching a high school football player try to play with the big boys. Small , slow, and zero instincts. Can't wait till he is gone.

 

What's funny is that when they introduced the defense yesterday, and on other occasions, Hawk gets noticeably louder cheers ! Poorly informed fans ?

I think Richardson is a good idea, he is faster, can cover better, and hits harder than Hawk. Hawk being 10 pounds heavier is meaningless, Richardson is the better player and can sift through traffic better. I don't understand how Hawk suddenly has shown up again on the field. He's like Freddy... only a bigger nightmare. Think of him trying to sift through the massive Dallas O line to tackle Murray, or picking up Beasley in the middle. He'll do what he always does, flop at the feet of the linemen than get up and strut back to his spot. Capers needs to be sent a petition or something. I just don't understand how he is suddenly back on the field.

 

Originally Posted by YATittle:

For one the ridiculous razzle dazzle movement to the right that he bit on on CMIII dropped for a loss-- a running play.

 

Another when we had Bell behind the line, he was out of position and piled in after the tackle was made from behind, gain of about eight.

 

Which series were these plays? What was the down and distance?

 

 

RE: ridiculous razzle dazzle move... DET called a mis-direction and CM3 was on a run blitz, Hawk followed the mis-direction, so did about 2/3 of the defense. Great play by Matthews.

 

RE: we had Bell behind the line... not sure I see that one. There is a play were Hawk was held and Bell bounced outside, Hawk fought off the block/hold and made the tackle. There is another where the play was initially behind the LG and Bell again bounced outside, Hawk did pursue and got in on the tackle, again after fighting off a block. Those are the only plays out of his 22 snaps that I could find to fit YA's descriptions, though they were not negative plays.

 

 

After the game, McCarthy again praised Hawk for his play. His snaps have dropped because they have taken him out of the nickle and dime. A few weeks back Rodgers commented that Hawk's body is not responding like AJ would like it to, of course Hawk denied any injury issues. 

 

 

Hawk has never played like the 5th overall pick and that is why so many are on him so often. The NFL has had dozens of top 10 picks who bust after 2-3 seasons. Hawk is what he is and the Packers coaches like him. They also figured out that he has lost whatever speed he had for whatever reason and can no longer help in the pass defense, so they made changes.

 

Last edited by H5
Originally Posted by Hud:

I think Richardson is a good idea, he is faster, can cover better, and hits harder than Hawk. Hawk being 10 pounds heavier is meaningless, Richardson is the better player and can sift through traffic better. 

 

I didn't see any of that against Detroit and he was "tackling" like an idiot, grabbing high and getting dragged for 10 yards.   The only options for Hawk and Jones are limited use and smart package substitutions.  Richardson isn't better than Hawk for a ILB position.

McGinn on our Linebackers:

 

 It was more of the same for SLB Sam Barrington (41). He's a more explosive hitter than base ILB A.J. Hawk (22) or dime LB Brad Jones (28). Barrington also is giving up his share of big plays with imprecise zone drops and mistakes, gets engulfed at times and lacks desired speed to the boundary. Jones cost the Packers a TD with a third-and-13 slap to the side of Matthew Stafford's helmet. He didn't get much done in eight A-gap blitzes, lunged against RB Theo Riddick and allowed a 21-yard check-down, and showed agility deficiencies in space. He does provide a far more physical presence than Hawk.

 

http://www.jsonline.com/sports...582z1-287083121.html

 

Add Reply

Post
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×