Jump to content

Random Packer News & Notes


Leader

Recommended Posts

On 5/10/2020 at 7:49 PM, TheOnlyThing said:

Are we referring to the the final 3 weeks of the 2018 season? If so, let's recap:No TFLs, no Sacks for the Adams-Lancaster-Lowry trio.

Week 15 = Chicago 24-GB 17.

The Trubisky-led Bears rush for 100 yards and Mitchell passes for 235 yards, 2 TDs and no picks.

Adams had 1/2 a sack, none for Lancaster or Lowry and no TFLs among the trio, though Lancaster did lead the team with 5 unassisted tackles.

https://www.packersnews.com/story/sports/nfl/packers/2018/12/16/chicago-bears-mitch-trubisky-picks-apart-green-bay-packers-his-terms/2317515002/

Week 16 = GB 44-NY Jets 38.

Rookie Sam Darnold throws for 345 yards, 3TDs and no picks for the 4-11 Jets. His 128.4 QB rating is a season high.

No TFLs, no Sacks for the Adams-Lancaster-Lowry trio.

https://www.northjersey.com/story/sports/nfl/jets/2018/12/23/live-updates-analysis-score-green-bay-packers-new-york-jets/2401578002/

Week 17 = Detroit 31-GB 0.

Somebody named Zack Zenner rushes for 93 yards (4.4 YPC) and the Lions as a team gain 130 yards. Stafford throws for 266, 2TDs, and no picks for the 5-10 (entering the game) Lions. "With good protection from his offensive line, Stafford completely dissected the Packers’ depleted secondary."

No TFLs, no Sacks for the Adams-Lancaster-Lowry trio. Lowry had 2 passes defensed.

https://www.prideofdetroit.com/2019/1/1/18163852/detroit-lions-week-17-5-game-ball-candidates-vs-packers/comment/500415845

Given that these were meaningless games to play out the season and the D did not really stand out against two bad teams and a good team with a mediocre offense, can anyone really be certain that in the final 3 games of 2018 Adams, Lancaster, and Lowry proved they could "play well" collectively in the NFL?

That's an inaccurate breakdown. First, to call the games meaningless is ridiculous. They playout the string in the NBA and MLB, not the NFL. No way you can spin the December Bear game in Chicago as "meaningless". The Bears were all in for a Super Bowl run and had the game circled after Rodgers destroyed them in the 2nd half of opening game in GB. The Packers showed up and played their hearts out that game. Philbin had the team dialed in until Rodger went out the last game against the Lions. I'll admit, it got ugly after Rodger left. I quit watching at half time. They were all in until that point, including the entire Bear game.

I see you cherry picked some stats that may or may not be relevant, so lets tell all the stats from the Bear game  They had 10T, 2 AST, .5 SCK, 2FF and 1FR- That's pretty good anyway you slice it... The Packers were a post MacCarthy firing mess and almost won that game in Chicago. A big part was the play of Lowry, Adams and Lacaster. Those three were suppose to be the 3rd, 4th & 5th DL. Instead they were the three DL that game. Simply, they had a good game against a motivated playoff bound rival.

As stated, those three guys played well when they had to step up at the end 2018 for the last eight games when Daniels went down to taking over the last three games when Clark went down. This was from three guys that consisted of a rising 3rd year player getting 10-30 defensive snaps a game, a 2nd year player coming off a redshirt season and an UDRFA..

The thinking was you expect those three to grow from 2018. Then add a Pro Bowl level DL (Clark) to be the alpha male and you have a fine young DL. Well, Adams got hurt, Lowry didn't progress and Lancaster was OK. He actually improved with his pass rushing snaps and was playing well before fading at the end of the season. All & all, he was just OK in general... Now, we'll see if they look more like they did to close 2018 then they did in 2019.  Add a 2nd year Keke to the mix and the Packer have options.

Definitely a lot reason for optimism.

Edited by Donzo
accident edit
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chargers OL Bryan Bulaga says that, based on the talent the Packers had during his time there, he's surprised they didn't reach another Super Bowl. "I've played in a lot of NFC Championship Games. I've lost a lot of NFC Championship Games."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Leader said:

Chargers OL Bryan Bulaga says that, based on the talent the Packers had during his time there, he's surprised they didn't reach another Super Bowl. "I've played in a lot of NFC Championship Games. I've lost a lot of NFC Championship Games."

It's true .. it's the biggest knock against the Packers that people can come up with .. only managed two championships in 27 years despite having two hall of fame qb's during that time.  It's not easy to win titles, but it seems we should have four or five in that stretch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, {Family Ghost} said:

It's true .. it's the biggest knock against the Packers that people can come up with .. only managed two championships in 27 years despite having two hall of fame qb's during that time.  It's not easy to win titles, but it seems we should have four or five in that stretch.

Ask me it doesnt come down to the HOF QBs but failure to execute plays (specifically missed INTs) on defense that cost us multiple championship games....then there's that SEA mess.....where we came up with plenty of INTs but failed to seal the deal on multiple occasions.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, {Family Ghost} said:

It's true .. it's the biggest knock against the Packers that people can come up with .. only managed two championships in 27 years despite having two hall of fame qb's during that time.  It's not easy to win titles, but it seems we should have four or five in that stretch.

Off the top of my head: 

 

2003 (4th and 26) - GB didn't even make the NFCCG, but that game vs Philly was in their hands and they blew it. And you aren't telling me that Carolina was a great team, so GB could've easily made the SB that year, against a good-not great NE team. 

2007 - Favre played like garbage and McCarthy got outcoached by Tom Coughlin, of all f'in people, in Lambeau. I don't think GB is beating the 07 Pats, but this was another SB appearance that they just blew. 

2009 - lost in the WC round in a game where Rodgers had the ball in his hand at the start of OT. There's a lot more projection going on here, but the Saints weren't appreciably better than GB. Minny, however handled GB easily in both games that season, so the probably don't win. This team was loaded, though, as evidenced by them overcoming a ton of injuries to win the SB in '10 and go 15-1 in '11. 

2011 - 15-1 and they get embarrassed by the freakin' Giants in the divisional round. This team was flawed, but it was a weird year (several players at or near 5k yds passing, NE, GB, and NO defenses falling off absolute cliffs); I don't know that they get past the Harbaugh-led 9ers, he seemed to have McCarthy's number. 

2014 - arguably the best team in the league at the end of the season and they crapped their pants in the NFCCG.

2015 - Lost Div vs Arizona in OT on an AMAZING Larry Fitzgerald play. I doubt they get past the Panthers in the NFCCG, or even if they did, past Den in the SB. Best case scenario is the refs don't let Den beat up Rodgers the way they did Cam Newton. 

Anyway, even by a conservative reading, GB left several playoff wins on the table, blew 2 for-sure SB berths (07 and 14), choked away at least one other good chance at one (03) and had at least an outside shot at another (09). Those '03 and '14 teams probably would've been favoured in the SB as well. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mr Bad Example said:

2015 - Lost Div vs Arizona in OT on an AMAZING Larry Fitzgerald play. I doubt they get past the Panthers in the NFCCG, or even if they did, past Den in the SB. Best case scenario is the refs don't let Den beat up Rodgers the way they did Cam Newton. 

They really should have gone for 2 after the Janis Hail Mary.  I doubt that they beat the Panthers the next week.  Would have gone in with Janis, Abby, and DickRod as the only healthy targets at Carolina.  Carolina destroyed the Cardinals 49-15.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Mr Bad Example said:

Off the top of my head: 

 

2003 (4th and 26) - GB didn't even make the NFCCG, but that game vs Philly was in their hands and they blew it. And you aren't telling me that Carolina was a great team, so GB could've easily made the SB that year, against a good-not great NE team. 

2007 - Favre played like garbage and McCarthy got outcoached by Tom Coughlin, of all f'in people, in Lambeau. I don't think GB is beating the 07 Pats, but this was another SB appearance that they just blew. 

2009 - lost in the WC round in a game where Rodgers had the ball in his hand at the start of OT. There's a lot more projection going on here, but the Saints weren't appreciably better than GB. Minny, however handled GB easily in both games that season, so the probably don't win. This team was loaded, though, as evidenced by them overcoming a ton of injuries to win the SB in '10 and go 15-1 in '11. 

2011 - 15-1 and they get embarrassed by the freakin' Giants in the divisional round. This team was flawed, but it was a weird year (several players at or near 5k yds passing, NE, GB, and NO defenses falling off absolute cliffs); I don't know that they get past the Harbaugh-led 9ers, he seemed to have McCarthy's number. 

2014 - arguably the best team in the league at the end of the season and they crapped their pants in the NFCCG.

2015 - Lost Div vs Arizona in OT on an AMAZING Larry Fitzgerald play. I doubt they get past the Panthers in the NFCCG, or even if they did, past Den in the SB. Best case scenario is the refs don't let Den beat up Rodgers the way they did Cam Newton. 

Anyway, even by a conservative reading, GB left several playoff wins on the table, blew 2 for-sure SB berths (07 and 14), choked away at least one other good chance at one (03) and had at least an outside shot at another (09). Those '03 and '14 teams probably would've been favoured in the SB as well. 

I have no doubt that 14 team would have absolutely **** stomped NE in the Super Bowl.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"One (area) we really need to improve on is creating more explosive plays. We were pretty efficient ... but were 23rd in explosive plays. That starts with play calling (and) maybe take a few more chances to help generate those plays down the field."

Matt LaFleur

According to Sharp Football Stats, Green Bay ranked 19th in explosive play rate in 2019 (18th in explosive passing plays, 19th in explosive run plays). Explosive plays are defined as runs of 10-plus yards and passes of 15-plus yards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Leader said:

"One (area) we really need to improve on is creating more explosive plays. We were pretty efficient ... but were 23rd in explosive plays. That starts with play calling (and) maybe take a few more chances to help generate those plays down the field."

Matt LaFleur

According to Sharp Football Stats, Green Bay ranked 19th in explosive play rate in 2019 (18th in explosive passing plays, 19th in explosive run plays). Explosive plays are defined as runs of 10-plus yards and passes of 15-plus yards.

Explosive plays take explosive risks.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

Explosive plays take explosive risks.  

And explosive athletes. 

We still really don't have that type of guy other than MVS. You could make the argument that after Adams/Jones and probably MVS, Tyler Ervin would probably be our No. 4 "most explosive" offensive threat. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Leader said:

"One (area) we really need to improve on is creating more explosive plays. We were pretty efficient ... but were 23rd in explosive plays. That starts with play calling (and) maybe take a few more chances to help generate those plays down the field."

Matt LaFleur

According to Sharp Football Stats, Green Bay ranked 19th in explosive play rate in 2019 (18th in explosive passing plays, 19th in explosive run plays). Explosive plays are defined as runs of 10-plus yards and passes of 15-plus yards.

 

38 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

Explosive plays take explosive risks.  

Yes, but...

Set aside for a moment whether or not we are taking enough risks or fielding explosive athletes, I think the thing that sets the table for explosive plays is the real fear by the defense that we can get 4-6 yard plays at will by running or passing. making the defense commit to stopping the little cuts that keep on coming makes the big gash more likely.

A better running game will set us up nicely.

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...