TransientTexan Posted September 8 Share Posted September 8 6 minutes ago, HighCalebR said: Packers had more rush yards against an equally as invested DL front... but our Oline also cant run block so you tell me what happened here Maybe draft-wise, but dollar-wise, PHI DL has $15.82m (#29) in active cap towards the DL. & $48.9m (#22) towards the front-7. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoremore Posted September 8 Share Posted September 8 18 hours ago, R T said: You're emotionally hedging. None of the Packer's goals have changed with anyone in the organization. They are going to do everything to win, and they are not lessening their chances to do that by just getting some rookies reps just because a group of fans have lost faith. Probably so. Haven't lost any faith in the team just have no faith in Willis. It's going to be ugly. Getting some reps for the rooks should actually improve the team especially when they may get called upon later in the season. All I'm saying. And yes I'm emotionally hedging as is my right! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HighCalebR Posted September 8 Share Posted September 8 (edited) 17 minutes ago, TransientTexan said: Maybe draft-wise, but dollar-wise, PHI DL has $15.82m (#29) in active cap towards the DL. & $48.9m (#22) towards the front-7. you got me man. i guess talent isnt talent only money matters. Edited September 8 by HighCalebR Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TransientTexan Posted September 8 Share Posted September 8 Just now, HighCalebR said: you got me man. i guess talent isnt talent only money matters. Nobody ever said that. The point is that GB isn’t getting even close to their money’s worth. non-sequiturs about PHI’s defense don’t disprove that. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HighCalebR Posted September 8 Share Posted September 8 (edited) 27 minutes ago, TransientTexan said: Nobody ever said that. The point is that GB isn’t getting even close to their money’s worth. non-sequiturs about PHI’s defense don’t disprove that. Now do Packers OL vs Philly OL Both teams are built through the lines. Our unpaid guys beat their unpaid guys their paid guys beat our paid guys. It was the first game of the season. we're not getting our moneys worth lol Edited September 8 by HighCalebR 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TransientTexan Posted September 8 Share Posted September 8 3 minutes ago, HighCalebR said: Now do Packers OL vs Philly OL Both teams are built through the lines. Our unpaid guys beat their unpaid guys their paid guys beat our paid guys. It was the first game of the season. we're not getting our moneys worth lol Their OL isn’t “paid”. It ranks #14 in active cap. & again, this is all non-sequiturs. I’m talking about the GB defense. I already acknowledged that it’s the 1st game. People can walk & chew gum at the same time. We lose the advantage of paying only peanuts to our OL/WRs if the extra $$ it allowed us to spend on defense doesn’t amount to any production. I’ll change what I’m saying about the GB defense as soon as their performance warrants it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HighCalebR Posted September 8 Share Posted September 8 (edited) 57 minutes ago, TransientTexan said: Their OL isn’t “paid”. It ranks #14 in active cap. & again, this is all non-sequiturs. I’m talking about the GB defense. I already acknowledged that it’s the 1st game. People can walk & chew gum at the same time. We lose the advantage of paying only peanuts to our OL/WRs if the extra $$ it allowed us to spend on defense doesn’t amount to any production. I’ll change what I’m saying about the GB defense as soon as their performance warrants it. in a vacuum? like it doesnt matter who they face? and how the opposing team is built? If theyre getting beat by the bears OL like that. then yeah.. But its not a non sequitur to take in to account the opposition. Edited September 8 by HighCalebR Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TransientTexan Posted September 8 Share Posted September 8 30 minutes ago, HighCalebR said: in a vacuum? like it doesnt matter who they face? and how the opposing team is built? You can stop straw-manning anytime now. I already threw a bone in that direction at the beginning of all this. But GB D still didn’t perform well, even relative to what PHI typically does to teams. Even if you subtract the TD they scored off Love’s INT, 27pnts would rank #6 in ppg on offense last year. 410yd would rank #1 in ypg. 144 rushing yd would rank #2 in rush-ypg. Those are all higher than PHI ended up ranking vs a league-average season of teams. At best, you could say GB’s defense performed like an average defense vs PHI’s offense, unless PHI performs like the Greastest-Show-on-Turf Rams the rest of the year. And “average” performance falls well short of the amount of investments spent on it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KFP7 Posted September 8 Share Posted September 8 4 minutes ago, TransientTexan said: You can stop straw-manning anytime now. I already threw a bone in that direction at the beginning of all this. But GB D still didn’t perform well, even relative to what PHI typically does to teams. Even if you subtract the TD they scored off Love’s INT, 27pnts would rank #6 in ppg on offense last year. 410yd would rank #1 in ypg. 144 rushing yd would rank #2 in rush-ypg. Those are all higher than PHI ended up ranking vs a league-average season of teams. At best, you could say GB’s defense performed like an average defense vs PHI’s offense, unless PHI performs like the Greastest-Show-on-Turf Rams the rest of the year. And “average” performance falls well short of the amount of investments spent on it. 3 turnovers per game would be #1 for a defense last year though so that's something Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TransientTexan Posted September 8 Share Posted September 8 8 minutes ago, KFP7 said: 3 turnovers per game would be #1 for a defense last year though so that's something True, they can be the 2011 Packers Defense 🙂. All hail Capers ~ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mazrimiv Posted September 8 Share Posted September 8 After GB's hot start on defense that produced the two quick turnovers, the defense was quite bad. There's no getting around it. Blame the front 7, missed tackles, or whatever, but it was bad. PHI's next 4 drives after the 2nd turnover in Q1 11 plays, 70 yards TD (5:53) 9 plays, 70 yards TD (4:43) 15 plays, 57 yards, FG (5:11) 2 plays, 70 yards, TD (0:51) Then the coup de grâce that was PHI's final drive 16 plays, 67 yards, FG (7:25) I don't see any way to paint that other than bad defense. Not just bad, it was very bad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incognito_man Posted September 8 Share Posted September 8 15 minutes ago, Mazrimiv said: After GB's hot start on defense that produced the two quick turnovers, the defense was quite bad. There's no getting around it. Blame the front 7, missed tackles, or whatever, but it was bad. PHI's next 4 drives after the 2nd turnover in Q1 11 plays, 70 yards TD (5:53) 9 plays, 70 yards TD (4:43) 15 plays, 57 yards, FG (5:11) 2 plays, 70 yards, TD (0:51) Then the coup de grâce that was PHI's final drive 16 plays, 67 yards, FG (7:25) I don't see any way to paint that other than bad defense. Not just bad, it was very bad. It was really bad defense. Very disappointing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PACKRULE Posted September 8 Share Posted September 8 Good thing so many had expectations of a number 2 defense. I mean a few new pieces, and we have some rooks and were ok. Expectations should have been tempered and on here hey rarely are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mazrimiv Posted September 9 Share Posted September 9 1 hour ago, incognito_man said: It was really bad defense. Very disappointing At least this year I wasn't sucked in by the camp hype talking about how dominant the defense looked. One of the biggest issues is the bad tackling, and that issue isn't getting fixed in camp practices. It always annoys me to read the "would have been a sack" or "would have been a TFL" blurbs that come out of practice. There is a huge difference between being in position to make a play, and actually making it. The PHI game provides plenty of examples. The dull-gray lining to come out of the PHI game for the defense is that players actually were in position to make plays for a lot of the game. They were just failing to make them too often. No scheme will thrive when that's happening. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pugger Posted September 9 Share Posted September 9 3 hours ago, TransientTexan said: You can stop straw-manning anytime now. I already threw a bone in that direction at the beginning of all this. But GB D still didn’t perform well, even relative to what PHI typically does to teams. Even if you subtract the TD they scored off Love’s INT, 27pnts would rank #6 in ppg on offense last year. 410yd would rank #1 in ypg. 144 rushing yd would rank #2 in rush-ypg. Those are all higher than PHI ended up ranking vs a league-average season of teams. At best, you could say GB’s defense performed like an average defense vs PHI’s offense, unless PHI performs like the Greastest-Show-on-Turf Rams the rest of the year. And “average” performance falls well short of the amount of investments spent on it. I'm not wringing my hands - yet - over our D just yet. This is a new defensive scheme so it shouldn't surprise us if there are still things to iron out in week one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.