Jump to content

Week 2: VIKINGS (1-0) at Packers (1-0)


swede700

Last year, Kirk Cousins passed for 425 yds in Lambeau, how many will he throw for this time?  

56 members have voted

  1. 1. Last year, Kirk Cousins passed for 425 yds in Lambeau, how many will he throw for this time?

    • Less than 100 yds
    • 100-203 yds (Rodgers' total last week)
    • 204-275 yds
    • 276-325 yds
    • 326-400 yds
    • 400+ yds


Recommended Posts

The Bears D looked stout in week 1, but I still think they had a drop off from last year. Their pass rush, especially on the edge is very good, and their run defense is excellent, but the pass defense looked good but not great... and I think they looked better than they actually are due to the offensive issues for the Packers. Fangio’s departure might hurt more than we know yet.

The Packer’s offense was not operating great. The run game was lacking, the pass protecting looked rough like in recent seasons, but most surprisingly, Rodgers seemed to be having significant accuracy and target selection issues. There were several open receivers that didn’t get the ball sent their way, and he was throwing behind, throwing low, and even throwing some real wobbly passes. Maybe it was having to do with not playing in the preseason, but his footwork, throws, and decision making all looked degraded from years past. Even so, the passing attack can be dangerous, and the Packers seem to thrive off momentum shift: large yardage gain plays feed into one another and once they are on a roll during a drive, it’s tough to get them to stop.

The Packer’s D most likely is improved from last year simply because their young secondary is maturing and they added some solid players throughout FA. Unfortunately, the Bears offense looked atrocious (other than Montgomery) so it’s tough to gauge just how much the Packer’s D has improved. 

This game should be closer than our’s yesterday, but I feel like we will be able to use our relative lack of a passing game on Sunday to our advantage vs the Packers. We’ll continue to push the wide zone/ sweep plays and establish the run, but we’ll be able to set up more screen and play action than we needed to vs Atlanta. Once we got far enough ahead against the Falcons, we were able to shift to a run heavy, clock management style, but I think we’ll be much more diverse against Green Bay. The biggest weaknesses will be if our IOL gets pushed around (particularly Elflein) and if the slot CB void gets exploited too much. 

24-17 Vikings 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, swede700 said:

Agreed...it's literally the only thing they have to hang their hat on...and yet, I'll continue to barrage them with the fact that they should have more considering their luck in having back to back HOF QBs.  They should truly be upset at only having 2 in nearly 30 years.   

 

Actually, they have only 2 in 50 years.  They won the first two in the Super Bowl era, but that was with a team that was really on its last legs from the pre-Super Bowl era.  Do they have 4?  Sure, I'll give them that, but for the last 50 years, they are averaging only one every 25 years.  That's hardly something that should live up to the so-called "Title Town" moniker.  We have underachieved when it comes to Super Bowls, but the Packers have been barely above average, considering every team should win one every 32 years.  We also need to remember that there haven't been a full 32 teams during the whole Super Bowl era, so this brings the Packers even closer to "average" over the last five decades, which is longer than most of the people on this site have been alive - including the majority of Cheeseheads.  As Minnesotans, we could brag about the "championships" we won in the NBA during the Minneapolis Laker era, but again, since that happened before all of us (besides Vike Daddy) were alive, is it really worth bringing up?  Not in my book.

 

Edited by Uncle Buck
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Uncle Buck said:

Actually, they have only 2 in 50 years.  They won the first two in the Super Bowl era, but that was with a team that was really on its last legs from the pre-Super Bowl era.  Do they have 4?  Sure, I'll give them that, but for the last 50 years, they are averaging only one every 25 years.  That's hardly something that should live up to the so-called "Title Town" moniker.  We have underachieved when it comes to Super Bowls, but the Packers have been barely above average, considering every team should win one every 32 years.  We also need to remember that there haven't been a full 32 teams during the whole Super Bowl era, so this brings the Packers even closer to "average" over the last five decades, which is longer than most of the people on this site have been alive - including the majority of Cheeseheads.  As Minnesotans, we could brag about the "championships" we won in the NBA during the Minneapolis Laker era, but again, since that happened before all of us (besides Vike Daddy) were alive, is it really worth bringing up?  Not in my book.

 

Hey whatever floats your boat. At least I was alive to see two SB victories which is more than a lot of people can say. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm really interested in this game as a barometer for the Packers defense. The bears are mediocre on offense but IMO have a pretty good O line that the Packers totally dominated which I hope is a sign of things to come. If the Vikings put up points and yards early you will see a lot of disappointed Packers fans who have been clamoring for a good defence since 2010. I just hope the offense scores 24 or so. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Spartacus said:

Hey whatever floats your boat. At least I was alive to see two SB victories which is more than a lot of people can say. 

Hell, I've been alive long enough to remember both Packers wins and the Bears win...and then there's the Lions.   

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is this going to be any more of a test for the tackles than the Falcon's game was? Vic Beasley and Takk McKinley didn't seem to do much. There weren't many opportunities to rush the passer, but they got washed out a lot in the run game. Takk tackled Mattison through a pulling Elflein on one play (the play that Mattison was supposed to cut inside), but aside from that I don't recall any problems blocking their ends.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, JDBrocks said:

Is this going to be any more of a test for the tackles than the Falcon's game was? Vic Beasley and Takk McKinley didn't seem to do much. There weren't many opportunities to rush the passer, but they got washed out a lot in the run game. Takk tackled Mattison through a pulling Elflein on one play (the play that Mattison was supposed to cut inside), but aside from that I don't recall any problems blocking their ends.

If the Bears game is any inclination it should be but its hard to know for sure. Packers OLBs  are both new this year as well as the one major back up in Gary being a rookie. Adams & Lowry are now starters on the D line with Clark being the only really known known player on the defense. It will be interesting to see if the play last week transitions over to this week. 

Beasley and Takk are different pass rushers than the Smiths so they will present unique challenges I expect. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...