Revel8 Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 On 9/18/2017 at 1:12 PM, GSUeagles14 said: did you really just say that gb was in it until the end? that game was over at halftime tbh, falcons shut it down most of the 2nd half. which is why i find it laughable that some gb fans(not you thay i know) are sayi g tbe defense did ok cause they "only" gave up 27. its intentionally ignoring reality, atl just wanted that game to be over 4 minutes into the 3rd. I sure did, because it's an accurate statement. It wasn't until late in the 4th that the window for a win completely closed. That's reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteelKing728 Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 It was close because of the garbage time touchdowns. Atlanta could have dropped 50 on them if they wanted to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 4 minutes ago, SteelKing728 said: It was close because of the garbage time touchdowns. Atlanta could have dropped 50 on them if they wanted to. Honestly, you could make the argument that the Packers really coughed up the game. Not taking away anything that the Falcons did, but the Packers really shot themselves in the foot multiple times. The Rodgers fumble and INT were both two game-changing plays. Instead of going into halftime with a 17-7 deficit, they ended up going into halftime 24-7 which isn't a deficit you want to have when facing an explosive offense like the Falcons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteelKing728 Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 2 minutes ago, CWood21 said: Honestly, you could make the argument that the Packers really coughed up the game. Not taking away anything that the Falcons did, but the Packers really shot themselves in the foot multiple times. The Rodgers fumble and INT were both two game-changing plays. Instead of going into halftime with a 17-7 deficit, they ended up going into halftime 24-7 which isn't a deficit you want to have when facing an explosive offense like the Falcons. It doesn't help with the major injuries either. Honestly, I think the Packers did make improvements on defense this year, but there still seems to be quite a few weaknesses. Maybe that's just Capers fault? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Revel8 Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 5 minutes ago, SteelKing728 said: It was close because of the garbage time touchdowns. Atlanta could have dropped 50 on them if they wanted to. The Falcons may have been able to, especially as the injuries kept piling up on both offense and defense. They already had a stark advantage before the game even started due to the fact that the Packers top 4 OTs were all missing. The tackles they were forced to start this game had a grand total of 0 games at each of their positions. They were the back ups to the back ups. Multiple people pointed out before the game even started that this in itself was enough to lead to a loss. Playing their #5 and #6 OTs forced Green Bay into short passes, extra protection, and chip blocks, limiting their offense in scale and effectiveness. The injuries to their top 2 WRs during the game certainly didn't help anything either. Losing their best defensive player in Mike Daniels, then their #1 CB, staring safety, in addition to the other defensive players who were already out didn't do them any favors either. IIRC, McCarthy said that at one point during the game he had 10 players on the bench getting treatment due to injury. Things like this are not easy to adjust for or overcome, especially while playing a playoff caliber team in their 1st game at their brand new stadium. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packerraymond Posted September 20, 2017 Share Posted September 20, 2017 On 9/18/2017 at 1:12 PM, GSUeagles14 said: did you really just say that gb was in it until the end? that game was over at halftime tbh, falcons shut it down most of the 2nd half. which is why i find it laughable that some gb fans(not you thay i know) are sayi g tbe defense did ok cause they "only" gave up 27. its intentionally ignoring reality, atl just wanted that game to be over 4 minutes into the 3rd. When you watch the film and see the 3rd-4th Q switch from Randall/Rollins to King, there is a marked improvement from our defense. You guys really didn't shut it down ever, a lot of what you ran was the same stuff you ran all NFCCG long and early in that one. Play action, max protect crossers, then lots of quick out routes selling the inside cross. King played it so much better than Randall or Rollins. That and our ILBs were awful in the first half and played a much better 2nd half. You didn't tempo as much, and rightfully so, but it's not like you ran 3 times and punted. No we were not in the game, but there was easily noticeable improvement defensively in the 2nd half. Lot of it stemmed from King and House on the outside, hopefully we employ that same group Sunday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted September 20, 2017 Share Posted September 20, 2017 22 minutes ago, SteelKing728 said: It doesn't help with the major injuries either. Honestly, I think the Packers did make improvements on defense this year, but there still seems to be quite a few weaknesses. Maybe that's just Capers fault? I mean, if you look at the list of players who either missed the game altogether (i.e. Bulaga, Bakh, etc.) or missed a significant chunk of the game (Mike Daniels, Jordy Nelson, etc.) it was actually a decent showing by the Packers. Playing at a home opener of a Super Bowl contender with the sheer amount of injuries isn't any easy task. Either way, it's way too early to make a decision one way or the other about this defense. We will know more about them in a few weeks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteelKing728 Posted September 20, 2017 Share Posted September 20, 2017 20 minutes ago, Packerraymond said: When you watch the film and see the 3rd-4th Q switch from Randall/Rollins to King, there is a marked improvement from our defense. You guys really didn't shut it down ever, a lot of what you ran was the same stuff you ran all NFCCG long and early in that one. Play action, max protect crossers, then lots of quick out routes selling the inside cross. King played it so much better than Randall or Rollins. That and our ILBs were awful in the first half and played a much better 2nd half. You didn't tempo as much, and rightfully so, but it's not like you ran 3 times and punted. No we were not in the game, but there was easily noticeable improvement defensively in the 2nd half. Lot of it stemmed from King and House on the outside, hopefully we employ that same group Sunday. I'm a Vikings fan lol, but good points! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GSUeagles14 Posted September 20, 2017 Share Posted September 20, 2017 1 hour ago, Packerraymond said: When you watch the film and see the 3rd-4th Q switch from Randall/Rollins to King, there is a marked improvement from our defense. You guys really didn't shut it down ever, a lot of what you ran was the same stuff you ran all NFCCG long and early in that one. Play action, max protect crossers, then lots of quick out routes selling the inside cross. King played it so much better than Randall or Rollins. That and our ILBs were awful in the first half and played a much better 2nd half. You didn't tempo as much, and rightfully so, but it's not like you ran 3 times and punted. No we were not in the game, but there was easily noticeable improvement defensively in the 2nd half. Lot of it stemmed from King and House on the outside, hopefully we employ that same group Sunday. You could maybe argue that 1st possession of the 3rd the falcons were going 100%, but theres no case after that. Even that first drive opened with 5 straight runs, and the 4th quarter for them had runs 10 out of 14 plays. i dont know how you could see such noticable improvement when it was clear the falcons were just running out the clock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GSUeagles14 Posted September 20, 2017 Share Posted September 20, 2017 1 hour ago, Revel8 said: I sure did, because it's an accurate statement. It wasn't until late in the 4th that the window for a win completely closed. That's reality. no, not really. but if it makes you feel better we can pretend that it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Revel8 Posted September 20, 2017 Share Posted September 20, 2017 4 minutes ago, GSUeagles14 said: no, not really. but if it makes you feel better we can pretend that it is. It's a matter of mathematics, not opinion. Anyone who questions this should brush up on the 2014 NFC Championship game for more information. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAF-N72EX Posted September 20, 2017 Share Posted September 20, 2017 31 minutes ago, Revel8 said: It's a matter of mathematics, not opinion. But not even mathematics agree with you? 34 minutes ago, Revel8 said: Anyone who questions this should brush up on the 2014 NFC Championship game for more information. Everyone should draft a QB in the 6th round too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GSUeagles14 Posted September 20, 2017 Share Posted September 20, 2017 36 minutes ago, Revel8 said: It's a matter of mathematics, not opinion. Anyone who questions this should brush up on the 2014 NFC Championship game for more information. what are the mathematics? nevermind. just saw above post. But im glad you agree its not about opinion and can now admit gn wasnt in it after that fumble return. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.