Packers Lions Post Game

[TheOnlyThing]

Kenny Clark continues to rack up the snaps. He played all but five snaps against the Lions and recorded a tackle for loss and a QB hit. He's played more than 80 percent of the defensive snaps this season. Last season, he led all Packers defensive line with 65 percent of the snaps. Here's the snap count breakdown on defense from the 31-23 loss at Detroit.

Rob Demovsky, ESPN Staff Writer

Montravious Adams played 1 snap yesterday and has played just 19 snaps this season.

Is he injured?

[TheBitzMan]

3 minutes ago, {Family Ghost} said:

My guess is that the Packers will rebound to play some pretty good football down the stretch, but the slow starts and sloppy play has become a regular theme.  I do think the defense seems to be a bit more stout this season than the past few so perhaps the pack won't get blown out if they do make the playoffs this year.  As for McCarthy .. it's a tough call, but I think there comes a point where you've got to try and do something to move the organization forward.  The Packers seem to be spinning their wheels.  I think making the Mack deal might have helped move things forward.  The cost was high, but adding a hall of fame caliber guy in his prime would have been a step forward talent wise.  Our chances of finding that kind of talent with our draft picks is very small.

It could honestly be both (Relax & end of MM) - They play well down the stretch make the playoffs and bow out early. Gute decides he wants his guy in there, although Murphy supposedly makes that call, so that could get interesting. 

I agree with you on Mack. I would've done whatever I could to make the deal, but it does sound like the Raiders stopped taking calls from others once the Bears were involved. This team needs a jolt somewhere. 

[LacyIsGood]

19 minutes ago, Sasquatch said:

There's actually a litany of accounts to support AR's somewhat stand-offish demeanor with younger players - especially receivers - who he barks at or ignores altogether.  It's ok - "emotional" leadership is not, and never has been, AR's strong suit.  Doesn't mean it's not needed on this team - quite the contrary.  It's needed more than ever now by someone.

Rodgers should be elevating these guys with his talent in games, not demanding some imagined or practiced ideal.  Then refusing them opportunity to improve.

It's also gonna be impossible for the offense to get different looks out of a defense if they don't show they are willing to give multiple guys a chance to make plays in many ways.  No reason for a defense to not do what they've been doing for years against GB if more than 50% of their plays are incompletions, sacks, broken plays, or telegraphed runs.  

[skibrett15]

1 hour ago, Packerraymond said:

all the way down to #53

Especially 53!!! He needs to get some pressures.

[MacReady]

I just hate what this team has become.  There was a time when it didn't even matter if our defense was good or not, just having Rodgers would make other teams in the division play like crap because they knew they couldn't beat us.  Every other team in the division has gone through at least two head coaches.  McCarthy should be playing chess to their checkers, and yet it's McCarthy who looks lost and unable to keep up with the new coaches. 

The record doesn't often show it, but the Packers have started slow every single year.  Now we're 2-2-1 when we've faced some of our easiest competition on the season.  A first round bye is already out of the question.  If we drop too many more of the games we should win, the playoffs might be out of the question. 

We have the talent.  I know that's true based on how we've looked at times.  The third quarter of the Lions game looked like the Lions were the Lions of old.  Until that Matthews BS penalty, we were about ready to run away with that game.  We looked like we could be Super Bowl favorites in the second half of the Bears game, and our defense looked like it was getting its groove against the Bills. 

Even against the Redskins there were moments where we looked like we were about to turn it on, and yet a stupid penalty or mistake would kill our drives or extend their drives.

I really am leaning towards the fire McCarthy crowd again.  I'm right on the line, straddling it, putting a bunch of weight in the pocket that leans towards defending him.  I know it's tough to get a new head coach, and we could just as easily get a few stinkers, but I've never been able to get that one statistics out of my head about Super Bowl winners.  The majority of them have come from head coaches who were only a head coach for their current team less than five years. 

I think sometimes coaches get too caught in their comfort zone.  I think McCarthy is a very good head coach, but he still might not be what we need right now.  I don't want to hear the crap about his offense.  It works perfectly well when we're trailing and Rodgers has to get his head out of his own ***.  Rodgers looked elite yesterday when we were down 24 and he actually had to get rid of the ball. 

In fact, Aaron's best two games have come when he has HAD TO PLAY THE EFFING DAMN EFFING OFFENSE THE WAY IT IS MEANT TO BE DAMN EFFING PLAYED

Against the Bears, we were down 20.  He barely played the first half.  He finished with 286 yards for 9.5 yards per attempt and a 130.7 rating.

In the first half against the Lions, Rodgers was 9/19 for 140 yards passing.  That's a 72 rating.

In the second half, he was 23/33 for 300 yards and 3 touchdowns.  That's a 108 rating. 

Rodgers has to play like he HAS to move the ball on every single drive.  He's too stupid or too stubborn to realize that his precious yards per attempt, TD/INT, completion percentage and everything else goes UP when he takes what the defense gives him, forcing him them to cover those plays, which opens up the plays Rodgers wants to make.

He has to stop being stupid and stubborn. 

McCarthy calls those drag routes we all scream about.  Rodgers doesn't throw them.  You saw that as clear as day yesterday on one of Aaron's second half sacks.  One player streaked by, barely open, Rodgers didn't throw.   The other one streaked by, wide open.  Rodgers took the sack.

Towards the end of the first half, he literally had Aaron Jones WIDE OPEN for a first down.  He literally paused when every other QB would have the ball out of his hands so fast pass rushers wouldn't know what happened.  Instead, Rodgers pauses a beat allowing defenders to run towards Jones since they thought, "Heck, he's wide open and Rodgers is actually looking at him." 

I am not exaggerating when I say that Ty Montgomery would be (And will be) an 80 reception a year running back in New England when we don't re-sign him.  We called two screens yesterday. 

I woke up so frustrated today.  Our defense has the skill, talent, coaching and potential to hold teams under 20 points in the playoffs, CERTAINLY under 24 points, and Rodgers and our offense have the skill, talent and coaching to score 28 points in a playoff game. 

We have the pieces to win a Super Bowl right now, and I feel like it's Rodgers that is holding back our potential.  I feel like other than 2016 and 2015, Rodgers has let us down more than our defense has let him down.  2009 it was the refs who let us down.  2010 we won.  2011 Rodgers played not very well against the Giants once they figured out how to play him.  2012 it was the defense.  2013 I can't fault anybody since he was just coming off injury.  2014 he had a huge hand in that letdown and there's no way that shouldn't have been a 28 point lead entering the fourth quarter.  2015 it was pretty much defense.  2016 he didn't help, but it wasn't his fault.  2017 we probably would have gotten to the playoffs without him if we had a better backup QB.  People might laugh at that, but a QB with brains who hits wide open Jordy Nelsons is better than a QB without brains who does not do that. 

I'll continue ranting later. 

[TheBitzMan]

It's going to be wild when MM is the coach of the 2019 Browns...

[incognito_man]

11 hours ago, Sasquatch said:

I wouldn’t call a team who beat both the Packers and the Patriots a “not-quite-completely-inept team”.  We looked much more inept than them today.  Why begrudge them for taking full advantage of our mistakes?  And yes, I fully expect to beat them later in the year in our house, but certainly not if we’re still this inept.

I'm saying that any team that isn't quite completely inept would win games under those circumstances. That includes teams that are better than that too

[MacReady]

Just now, TheBitzMan said:

It's going to be wild when MM is the coach of the 2019 Browns...

That is exactly what happened in my Madden Franchise.  We drafted David Edwards and Chase Winovich with our two first round picks after some trades.  We ended up with the Patriots first round pick in 2020, hired a coach who completely turned our roster over and we're 1-0 after playing the Broncos in week one. 

Cobb is gone, Crosby is gone, Clay is gone, Perry is playing 4-3 DE.  We've got some holes at LB, but we run a lot of nickle and dime packages anyway, so that's alright.  Still weak at safety, but we've got a really strong pass rush now with Winovich.  Our offensive line is pretty damn good.  Our second round pick was a guard whose name I can't spell.  Taylor is our backup guard since Bulaga moved inside.  Bakhtiari, Beau (something) is a starting guard, Linsley, Bulaga, Edwards.  Moore had a really big 80+ yard TD reception, MVS is playing well.  We got a steal in the draft at TE (I cheated a little on this one by making him faster and more agile, but that's okay). 

Think we're winning the Super Bowl. 

[Leader]

 

[Stevein2012]

7 minutes ago, Leader said:

 

That kid did look smooth.  Wish he'd have had the top end speed to take that last one to the house but you can't really complain about any 54 yarder with some YAC.

[Mr. Fussnputz]

Didn't have a chance to watch or listen to the game yesterday. Just finished watching it on NFL Replay. Decided to take an analytic approach to viewing it. Unlike some others on here, I think the Packers played pretty well, considering they were down some key players on both sides of the ball. I think the game stats back that up. Take away the turnovers and missed field goals and we are having an entirely different conversation today.  They should handle San Fran easily.

Having said that, there are some (of my highly unqualified) observations. I have been watching the Packers since 1964. I've seen the good (Lombardi, Holmgren) the bad (Bengston, Infante), and the ugly (Devine, Rhodes). I don't think this is a bad team (like Infante's). But I don't think it's a great team either. First of all the talent is thin (based on this year's performances). There are only really three blue chip players, and one of them has a bum left knee. The others are  Clark, and Baktiari. There are a handful of red chip players (Bulaga, Adams, Daniels, Martinez, and Crosby). Then they have some aging vets who's arrows are pointing down (Graham, Cobb, T. Williams, and Matthews). Some vets in their prime who  just can't seem to pull it together (Haha, Perry). Lots of JAGs (Kendricks, Allison, Montgomery, Linsley, Taylor, Bell, McCray, Brice, House, Whitehead, Morrison, Lowery, Spriggs). And some promising young players with their arrows pointed up (Alexander, Jackson, Aaron Jones, King, Scott, Jamal Williams, and maybe Josh Jones). The over reliance on these last two groups is the problem. The promising, young players are going to make mistakes and great plays--the very definition of inconsistency. The JAGs are going to win some and lose some too. Right now, there are just not enough blue and red chip players to get this team over the hump. So here we sit at .500. 

As far as coaching, MM is not an Infante, or Rhodes, but neither is he a Lombardi, or Holmgren. I would compare him in talent (not style) with Sherman. Solid, but not great to overcome the talent level.

Bad drafting at the end of TT's career has sunk this team for the short term. I think he drifted away from his early philosophy of drafting the BPA and started drafting more for need. That diluted the talent quickly. 

I'm predicting the Packers finish around .500 and miss the playoffs setting up an interesting off season.

[Leader]

7 minutes ago, Stevein2012 said:

That kid did look smooth.  Wish he'd have had the top end speed to take that last one to the house but you can't really complain about any 54 yarder with some YAC.

It appears MVS is the fastest of our rookie WRs  but I think EQ's more than fast enough (for a guy his size) that he should be / could be a good weapon. I'm hopeful for all of them - but I like these players are at the upper edge of the athletic chart - as opposed to some 6'0 4.5 guy.

[Packerraymond]

12 minutes ago, Leader said:

 

He and MVS need more time on the field. They earned more PT yesterday. Both are far more dynamic than GMo or Cobb. The more they are on the field the better we'll be come December.

[Leader]

Just now, Packerraymond said:

He and MVS need more time on the field. They earned more PT yesterday. Both are far more dynamic than GMo or Cobb. The more they are on the field the better we'll be come December.

I agree.

[TheBitzMan]

2 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

He and MVS need more time on the field. They earned more PT yesterday. Both are far more dynamic than GMo or Cobb. The more they are on the field the better we'll be come December.

This is a WOW play from a rookie. Great route, changes direction on a dime and splits the defenders with speed. Rodgers has a little pep in his step afterwards as well. Also drew a long PI on another double move which would have been a TD. His route running was impressive in this game.