Skip to main content

quote:
Aaron Rodgers greeted a pair of reporters Monday and grabbed a seat after the Green Bay Packers had practiced in full pads for nearly three hours. I reached deep into my training as a journalist, searching for an original and cutting question to begin our interview.

"How's it going?" I asked.

"Good," Rodgers said. "We're good."

And then we were off.

Aaron Rodgers is excited about the energy his teammates are bringing in the early stages of training camp."We're going to be a better team this year," Rodgers said. "We're going to play better. We'll be better up front [on defense], I think. Different attitude, I think. We brought in some guys with some nasty to them."

The Packers finished last season 15-1 before the New York Giants knocked them out of the playoffs in the divisional round. Historically speaking, it's unlikely the Packers will match or exceed last season's record. But the first few days of training camp have convinced Rodgers that the team's energy level is up, its comfort level down and a significant if underplayed flaw in last season's team has been corrected.

"I think there was a little bit of some too-comfortable mentality," he said. "One of the things that winning does is it masks some of the issues you might have. When you have a real successful season, the little things get swept under the rug and the big things become little things. It's hard to knock a team on energy and enthusiasm and effort when you're still going out and winning. But it can catch up to you at some point, and it did with us."

In retrospect, the Packers might have been too professional and clinical for their own good last season. We noted in the spring that the Packers were seeking more "juice" for their defensive front, adding excitable players like Anthony Hargrove and Daniel Muir via agency and drafting a couple of live personalities in defensive linemen Jerel Worthy and Mike Daniels.

The Packers hope those players add a level of pass rush and interior disruption that the defense missed last season. But just as important, they appear already to have injected a level of energy to the team's practices and mentality. Monday, it was worth noting that Rodgers was playfully engaging Hargrove in some verbal jousting during practice. When we spoke with Rodgers afterwards, the Packers' locker room was so loud that I could hardly hear him.

"And I'm not just talking about Hargrove," Rodgers said. "These are energy guys. Daniel Muir, Jerel Worthy, Daniels. Those guys are bringing some energy this year, and I think they are going to inspire some of the other guys, like B.J. [Raji] and [Ryan] Pickett, who aren't big energy guys -- good players, but not emotional energy guys -- maybe to pick their level up, too.

"And it's nice having a guy opposite Clay [Matthews], and because we brought in Nick Perry, I think [former starter] Erik Walden has had good start to camp as well."

More....


While I certainly don't want the ass clown behavior and lack of discipline a team like the Lions possess, I wouldn't mind seeing a nastier side to the Packers defense. Especially up front. Maybe it was me, but I don't recall a whole lot of games in 2011 where I thought the opposing offense would be waking up very sore on Monday. Perhaps that changes this season.
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

This defense needs significant contributions from Perry, Worthy, Hayward and Daniels. Other than a few journeyman DL, this is essentially the same defense they trotted out last year. Tough to count on those rookies so much, but sounds like all four have been pretty good so far in camp. Really hope they can keep it up.
quote:
Some of those tackling efforts last year were downright embarrassing


Watched a couple of defensive "highlights" of the 2nd half of the 2011 season and in some of those games, players like Shields, Hawk, and even Woody at times should have been embarrassed.

Tackling was awful and defense as a whole at times just played flat. Hoping this new energy translates well on the field.
quote:
Originally posted by CUPackFan:
This defense needs significant contributions from Perry, Worthy, Hayward and Daniels. Other than a few journeyman DL, this is essentially the same defense they trotted out last year. Tough to count on those rookies so much, but sounds like all four have been pretty good so far in camp. Really hope they can keep it up.


The new guys will help, but there is room for improvement with some of holdovers. Raji, T. Williams, and Burnett in particular have the capability to play better than they did last year. In Williams and Burnett's cases it was injuries and in Raji's case it was a combination of many things. 3 second year guys - House, MD Jennings, and L. Guy will all have more of a chance to contribute than they did last year.

The draft picks will be keys to improvement, but don't count out some of last year's holdovers to improve (or maybe regress).
This article is EXACTLY what I needed to hear.

And it's coming from the guy who knows the pulse of this team. And he he nails what happened last year dead on.

"Emotional energy," it sounds like a cliche, but it's spot on what this D needed.

Right on Rodgers!

quote:
Originally posted by CUPackFan:
Other than a few journeyman DL, this is essentially the same defense they trotted out last year. Tough to count on those rookies so much, but sounds like all four have been pretty good so far in camp.


And minus one player (Jenkins), the same one they "trotted out" the year before that, all the way to the Super Trot Out.

There's only 11 guys out there. One or two can make a huge difference.
quote:
Originally posted by CUPackFan:
Other than a few journeyman DL, this is essentially the same defense they trotted out last year.


Yes and no, here's my optimistic view so far:


Is Nick Perry an upgrade vs Walden/ Zombo/ Jones ? ( YES)
Will Jerel Worthy / A.Hargrove be an upgrade vs 2011 Wynn, Wilson, Neal ? ( YES)

Is Casey Hayward/ D.House an upgrade vs Bush / Lee at # 4 CB ? ( YES !)
Will M.Daniels & D.Muir be an upgrade vs Howard Green ? ( YES)

Will Woodson, MD Jennings/ McMillian/ Levine an upgrade vs Peprah at SS ? ( YES)
Will the LBs be better with a better DL ? ( probably)

Will Burnett be better without a cast and with a more athletic mate at safety ? ( YES)

More emphasis on tackling and fundamentals for all ( hopefully)

GB has made some great moves on the personnel side, and next up is coaching to bring out improvements from within
Energy and passion are big pluses for a defensive player. I like what the new additions are bringing to this team. Rodgers is talking about here and MM has touched on it as well with Worthy and Daniels.

Hate loud mouth pricks like Sapp all you want, but that's a guy I want on my defensive line.
Would love to see a nasty D. Maybe something like the Steelers usually have. Not dirty but nasty. It would be a great compliment to our offense.

I wouldn't be surprised if it takes Nick Perry a year or two before he's really good. Hope I'm wrong and he's good right away but I think there'll be a learning curve especially for him adjusting to standing up.
Speaking of nasty..

House wants to play like an A-Hole

quote:
Green Bay -- No guy wants to hear those dreaded words. Not on a date. And certainly not on the football field.

You're too nice.

Ugh. Painful. Yet that's what Packers cornerback Davon House heard far too often last year. Cornerbacks coach Joe Whitt stayed on House's case. He told the rookie to play with more aggression, more energy if he wanted to play on Sundays. Too often, House was in cruise control. So even as the secondary struggled, the fourth-round pick remained a game-day inactive. He appeared in a grand total of two games.

After a while, the message hit home. When House's competitiveness was challenged, he began to take it personal.

“Oh my god, I do. I do a lot," House said. "I hate it. I feel like I give it my all but when he shows it to me on tape, it’s like, ‘OK. I see it.’ I do need to change.”

So no more Mr. Nice Guy. The 6-foot-1, 195-pound cornerback is in a three- or four-man race for the No. 2 cornerback job. To win it, he needs an attitude adjustment on the field. House can't rely on pure speed, athleticism and coast by, as he admits he did during college practices.

In 2012, House says he needs to play with an "A-hole mentality."

"(Whitt) told me I needed to do better, needed to run to the ball and finish every play," House said. "You kind of need to have that A-hole mentality. That’s what I’ve always been told, that I need to be more of a mean player out there. I guess I’m nice.”

He's still behind Jarrett Bush at right cornerback, but House is starting to make some noise. Monday was a positive start. During red zone work, House broke up a lob intended for 6-foot-4 Tori Gurley in the corner of the end zone. Soon after that, House had an interception.

To catch Bush in this competition, House must continue disrupting receivers at the line and prove to be a willing tackler. A hamstring injury threw a wrench into his training camp last season. But House also knows that even when he was finally healthy, he didn't practice hard enough.

The competition wasn't as good at New Mexico State, he said. House could "cruise" through practice. In Green Bay -- at least for a while -- he did the same thing. He coasted.

“That’s true. Sad to say, but yeah," House said. "In college, I could do that. When I got here, I really didn’t know how to practice and what it meant to go full speed every play. That means to literally go full speed every play. Last year during the season, I wouldn’t finish to the ball or sometimes it looked like I was coasting.”

So House says he has to practice "like it's a game." Coasting created bad habits.

“Oh yeah, it did," House said. "Just not finishing. A receiver can break a tackle because I didn’t go full speed, and he scores.”

More...

quote:
Is Nick Perry an upgrade vs Walden/ Zombo/ Jones ? ( YES)
Will Jerel Worthy / A.Hargrove be an upgrade vs 2011 Wynn, Wilson, Neal ? ( YES)
Is Casey Hayward/ D.House an upgrade vs Bush / Lee at # 4 CB ? ( YES !)
Will M.Daniels & D.Muir be an upgrade vs Howard Green ? ( YES)
Will Woodson, MD Jennings/ McMillian/ Levine an upgrade vs Peprah at SS ? ( YES)
Will the LBs be better with a better DL ? ( probably)
Will Burnett be better without a cast and with a more athletic mate at safety ? ( YES)


The jury is out on Perry. He could be the most athletic guy on the defense, but he hasn't played one snap for this team in the regular season.

I do this Worthy/Hargrove/Muir/Daniels (overall) are better depth than they had last year. Time will tell but I think this is a solid backup group.

Are Hayward, House, or Bush better than Shields at the #2 CB spot? Probably, but they have Bush currently penciled in as a starter. That's no upgrade IMO. I hope like hell House or Heyward emerges because Bush is a trainwreck. I don't care how much he tries or how well he tackles the guy flat out cannot cover and his instincts are terrible. That being said, from what I've read the coaches are really pleased with House, but much like Perry, we need to see it in real games.

Woodson better than Peprah? Probably, but they lose a lot by not having him close to the LOS. There wasn't a better DB in the league at blitzing than Woody. C-Wood will still likely be a slot CB in the nickel packages which is a plus, but that means somebody needs to play safety behind him.

I guess the way I see it the defense would have to be pretty bad to equal the 2011 season. For this team, the key is the front 7. If they can pressure the QB I think we can cover up for 1) the lack of experience with Hayward and McMillan and House or 2) Bush at CB
quote:
Originally posted by Tschmack:

The jury is out on Perry.

but they have Bush currently penciled in as a starter. That's no upgrade IMO.

Woodson better than Peprah? Probably



Of course there is still lots TBD, but I look at it this way: Have the Packers addressed their weakest links ?

And I believe the answer is yes

SS, OLB, DE, # 4 CB. Bush is not going to be the number 2 CB, everybody knows that.
But in GB, players have to earn their spots and they will in TC and preseason

Woodson will be doing the same thing he always does, its mostly a change in nomenclature - he will still be around the LOS where he is most potent and he will spend less time outside as a perimeter corner( where he is becoming a liability.)
The Packers have minimized his weaknesses and maximized his strengths - should be an upgrade

See the notes from Peter King on MMQB as far as where Woodson lines up, its pretty interesting

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.c...ng/07/29/mmqb/3.html
The defense wasn't bad last year because they weren't nasty. They were bad because they couldn't tackle, couldn't get to the quarterback, and couldn't get off the field. Them being nastier would have solved none of that.

Rookies bring penalties and so does emotional play if it's not kept in check. I think that kind of emotion is fantastic for training camp to get the level of competition up. During the season the only nasty you need is covering your assignments, tackling the ball carrier to the ground, pressuring the quarterback, and hitting him hard and clean. If they don't take care of that first all the nasty in the world won't help them.

Traditionally, rookie defensive lineman are slow out of the gate and Perry is doing something he's never done before. The defense is rebuilding this year and there's no doubt going to be some bumps along the way. They need to focus on getting off the field and giving the ball back to the offense way more than playing with aggression.
I can't imagine they'll be worse or even as bad as last year. As long as there's some improvement, that's all GB needs. They don't need to be the 2000 Ravens of the 2002 Bucs. They just need to be decent. That whole defense seems to have come into camp with a chip on its shoulder. That and and offense/team overall with something to prove means good things.

I was told Worthy was a lazy bum anyway. It's probably all just smoke to get our hopes up.
Our hopes for a better D this year pretty much hinge on a bunch of rookies and Tramon's shoulder. We may see a big initial jump in performance early in the year when new players can suprise opposing teams (no game tape on them) but it's all going to come down to post season play. Will they start gelling more after a bumpy mid/later-season or will they hit the rookie wall? That's what I'll be watching for.
It may not matter, if Hargrove and (gulp) Neal start coming on late in the year when the rooks start hitting the wall. They've not only added a ton of athletes to that side of the ball, but they've seemed to restore their depth.
I forgot about those 2. Hopefully they won't remain that way when they come back so yes, that would be awesome to get an extra shot in the arm later in the season.

Another thing I'll be watching for is whether Caper's system continues to swoon after his big jump in the first couple years. He has a history of big improvements in year 1 and then continuous falloff after that. Maybe the big infusion of new faces will revive him/his system.
quote:
Originally posted by DeepChicago:
You have the resident thug in Charles Woodsen, but of course, the MSM forgives and forgets him because he's a Packer.
It's 2012. He's no angel, but he's hardly a thug anymore. Look to your manic new wide receiver for a better representation of that characteristic.
quote:
Originally posted by Pistol GB:
quote:
Originally posted by CUPackFan:
Other than a few journeyman DL, this is essentially the same defense they trotted out last year. Tough to count on those rookies so much, but sounds like all four have been pretty good so far in camp.


And minus one player (Jenkins), the same one they "trotted out" the year before that, all the way to the Super Trot Out.

There's only 11 guys out there. One or two can make a huge difference.


quote:
Originally posted by DeepChicago:
Sorry, the closer we get to the season the more I frequent these boards.

Here's to no injuries and no excuses when we cream your puff this year!


You're optimistic. You should be. It's mathematically impossible for the Packers to beat the Bears 4 times in 2012 like they did in 2011.
The 2011 Packers defense ranked as follows in points given up:

1st Quarter.... 16th
2nd quarter... 14th
3rd quarter..... 9th
4th quarter... 31st

Bonus points for anybody who can tell my why GB gave up so many points in the 4th quarters of 2011 games Cool

In 2011 the Packers defense held their opponents' under their scoring average in 13 of the 17 games played

EX:> The bears averaged 22 points/game in 2011, but only scored 17 and 19 vs the Packers D

In the 4 games that the Packers D didn't hold their opponents below their average - the difference often came in the 4th quarter of an already-decided game

EX- Denver averaged 19 pts / game, GB gave up 23 that day. 6 of those points by Denver came with 3 minutes left in a 49-23 blowout

EX- the vikes averaged 21 pts/game in 2011, but GB gave up 27 pts @ minny. 10 of those points came late in the 4th of a 33-17 game (GB needs to finish the deal)

The Packers were not very good on 3rd downs, yielding a whopping 43% conversion rate, 27th in the league. That has to improve

According to Bob McGinn:

"The Packers missed 140 tackles in 17 games for an average of 8.24/ game. ( ouch)
Last year, they missed 133 in 20 (6.65). In 2009, the last time they played 17 games, they missed 107 (6.29)"

"As an entire unit, the D-line had a mere 37 pressures in 17 games. In two previous seasons under Dom Capers, the unit had 62½ in 17 games in 2009 and 101½ in 20 games in '10."

And yet the Packers were number 1 in picking the ball off despite a decidedly anemic pass rush.

I offer these stats as some context around the 2011 season - Clearly they came up short, but they didn't suck IMO and they certainly weren't "the worst ever !"

They really aren't that far away from respectable, and as noted by booger, respectable should be good enough to win another Championship.

Go Packers

.
Last edited by Satori
quote:
Originally posted by Satori:
...And yet the Packers were number 1 in picking the ball off despite a decidedly anemic pass rush.

I offer these stats as some context around the 2011 season - Clearly they came up short, but they didn't suck IMO and they certainly weren't "the worst ever!"

They really aren't that far away from respectable, and as noted by booger, respectable should be good enough to win another Championship.



Yep. And I fully agree that in the end they "came up short".

Flawed and/or not good enough does not necessarily equal "the worst ever".

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×