Nick Perry

[Sunshinepacker]

We're 3 games in at net zero takeaways. We have recently been a team that has finished strong in this category (in the top 10 four of the last 6 seasons).
Our 2 most successful seasons under Aaron had us ranked #4 in net takeaways in 2010 and #1 in 2014.
Currently in 2016 we are at net zero ranked #17. The Vikings and Eagles are #1 and #2. This is not a coincidence
We have to focus on this going forward if we want to be a contender.
Study of the Game film of the NFL leaders takeaways, increased drills such as punching the ball out, ripping the ball, QB Wrist chops, offense ball carrier security drills, fumble recovery drills, tipped pass drills. These need to be a focus the next several weeks. We need to set a goal of top #10 by mid season and top #5 by playoffs.

Might help if the guys on defense that actually went through those drill during training camp can get back on the field...

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Yep. The Vikings are now plus 10 or something. That probably the key difference between the two teams right now. Yes the Vikings defense is better but their offense is not. If you flipped those turnover margins what would the records be? Philly is also right at the top. Packers haven't been opportunistic enough and have gave other teams the ball a couple times. Philly and Minnesota have not given it away and have been opportunistic.

The Packers need to see that change if they want to move toward the top of the conference

Difference with the Vikings is that they are built around having one of the best defenses in the NFL and fielding an average offense (bradford is pretty similar skill-wise to Bridgewater so the drop-off on offense isn't very large for the Vikings). The Packers are built around an elite offense and a middle-of-the-road defense. The Packers' offense is obviously pretty far from elite right now and the problem with an average defense is that when the average defense is missing some of its best players, it falls apart pretty quickly.

 

[bigbubbatd]

Difference with the Vikings is that they are built around having one of the best defenses in the NFL and fielding an average offense (bradford is pretty similar skill-wise to Bridgewater so the drop-off on offense isn't very large for the Vikings). The Packers are built around an elite offense and a middle-of-the-road defense. The Packers' offense is obviously pretty far from elite right now and the problem with an average defense is that when the average defense is missing some of its best players, it falls apart pretty quickly.

Bradford is far better than Bridgewater. The Vikings actually got a little lucky that Bridgewater got hurt. They are better with Bradford.

I think you are completely under selling the Packers defense. They have the best run defense in the NFL and while they struggled against the pass they also played without half their secondary for over half the season. They have the potential to be much better than middle of the road

 

[Carl]

Bradford is far better than Bridgewater. The Vikings actually got a little lucky that Bridgewater got hurt. They are better with Bradford.

I think you are completely under selling the Packers defense. They have the best run defense in the NFL and while they struggled against the pass they also played without half their secondary for over half the season. They have the potential to be much better than middle of the road

I agree the defense can very good good and I'd take the under selling a step further. I think many fans are under selling the Packers in general. They lost by 3 on the road to a team that looks like top 3 in the league with Rodgers playing awfully. Then in true Packer fan fashion, the sky was falling.

If that game was simply at Lambeau instead, the Packers would be the undefeated NFC North team right now.

 

[HardRightEdge]

I always love the posts that talk about how other people have enough money.

Well, he certainly should have enough money, and it is money he did not earn.

But he's playing some very good football now, so happy days! The only black marks in the Detroit game were the missed tackle on Rid**** that would have been a 5 yard loss, and the 15 yard penalty for what I presume was the throat cutting gesture. Otherwise, it was nearly a perfect game.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Difference with the Vikings is that they are built around having one of the best defenses in the NFL and fielding an average offense (bradford is pretty similar skill-wise to Bridgewater so the drop-off on offense isn't very large for the Vikings). The Packers are built around an elite offense and a middle-of-the-road defense. The Packers' offense is obviously pretty far from elite right now and the problem with an average defense is that when the average defense is missing some of its best players, it falls apart pretty quickly.

This defense is not built to be middle of the road; that's an excuse for losing when the offense does not simply outscore the opponent. Despite the fact this defense has been middle of the road for going on 6 seasons, often worse at the most inopportune times, it would be foolish to claim this is somehow by design.

The last 4 first round picks went to the defense. Peppers was signed. Shields got the big bucks, Matthews got bigger bucks.

If that's not enough, the defensive cap hit for this season at this juncture is $69,608,519; on offense it's $69,089,674.

The defense is being paid to deliver the same level of performance as the offense. If it's a middle of the road defense, having spent a middle of the road amount of cap for it, then you must conclude that either the talent selection process or the coaching or both have been middle of the road.

I remain optimistic that the defensive pieces are falling into place if these injuries can be gotten past. Call it a feeling. A middle of the road defense is not wanted, not planned and in the final analysis would prove insufficient.

 

[swhitset]

This defense is not built to be middle of the road; that's an excuse for losing when the offense does not simply outscore the opponent. Despite the fact this has been middle of the road for going on 6 seasons, often worse at the most inopportune times, it would be foolish to claim this is somehow by design.

The last 4 first round picks went to the defense. Peppers was signed. Shields got the big bucks, Matthews got bigger bucks.

If that's not enough, the defensive cap hit for this season at this juncture is $69,608,519; on offense it's $69,089,674.

The defense is being paid to deliver the same level of performance as the offense. If it's a middle of the road defense, having spent a middle of the road amount of cap for it, then you must conclude that either the talent selection process or the coaching or both have been middle of the road.

I remain optimistic that the defensive pieces are falling into place if these injuries can be gotten past. Call it a feeling. A middle of the road defense is not wanted, not planned and in the final analysis would prove insufficient.

I agree with the entirety of this post, but I would guess that you could say the same thing about most teams in the league.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Clay Matthews producing 2 sacks 3 hurries and a TFFL in 1.6 games, with the bulk of his snaps in that .6 game against Minn was played on a bum ankle, looks like pretty good production to me.

Matthews has produced several splash plays this season but hasn't performed on a high level consistently. In addition when taking a look at his impact plays he was either unblocked or the offensive lineman did a terrible job.

I'd guess that probably comes from PFF. Historically they don't grade him well as a run defender; he's better coming from the backside than with the play right at him. He's more a big play guy than a down-in-down-out force.

True, PFF currently has him ranked as the 98th edge rusher with an overall grade of 37.4 and a pass rush grade of only 42.4.

Bradford is far better than Bridgewater. The Vikings actually got a little lucky that Bridgewater got hurt. They are better with Bradford.

At the time Bridgewater got hurt the Vikings didn't have a decent backup quarterback on the roster. They made an aggressive move acquiring Bradford. Something Thompson is too risk-averse to pull off.

 

[HardRightEdge]

True, PFF currently has him ranked as the 98th edge rusher with an overall grade of 37.4 and a pass rush grade of only 42.4.

That doesn't make much sense.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

That doesn't make much sense.

I haven't watched Matthews closely enough to make a fair evaluation but I know that PFF has taken a look at every single snap. While we might disagree with part of their work it's the most detailled information available.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Might help if the guys on defense that actually went through those drill during training camp can get back on the field...

Have to call you out on blaming injuries again, this time for lack of turnovers. You make it sound like nobody but the starters go through drills. While I can't list all of the Packer players who missed interceptions this year and in the past, I can assure you that all of them have gone through turnover drills, especially in training camp and throughout their time playing football at various levels. Having a "sure" interception go through a defenders hands isn't new to Packer starters or back-ups for sure and injuries shouldn't be used as an excuse for them.

I do remember one really key missed interception in a game. Sam Shields drop in the playoff game against Arizona last year. Packers were up 13-10 with less then 5 minutes remaining, Shields dropped an easy pick on the 3 yard line, 3 plays later, AZ scored a TD.

"For Sam Shields, he may have just dropped the game," NBC’s Cris Collinsworth said on the TV broadcast.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

This defense is not built to be middle of the road; that's an excuse for losing when the offense does not simply outscore the opponent. Despite the fact this defense has been middle of the road for going on 6 seasons, often worse at the most inopportune times, it would be foolish to claim this is somehow by design.

The last 4 first round picks went to the defense. Peppers was signed. Shields got the big bucks, Matthews got bigger bucks.

If that's not enough, the defensive cap hit for this season at this juncture is $69,608,519; on offense it's $69,089,674.

The defense is being paid to deliver the same level of performance as the offense. If it's a middle of the road defense, having spent a middle of the road amount of cap for it, then you must conclude that either the talent selection process or the coaching or both have been middle of the road.

I remain optimistic that the defensive pieces are falling into place if these injuries can be gotten past. Call it a feeling. A middle of the road defense is not wanted, not planned and in the final analysis would prove insufficient.

I don't care what round a pick came from, all that matters is how good the player actually is. Mike Daniels is the best player on the defense and he was a fourth rounder. Jones and Perry certainly haven't lived up to first round standards. So maybe the defense was intended to be a strength but the players drafted haven't lived up to their billing for the most part. So, as I said, this team is expected to have a middle-of-the-road defense.

And comparing the salaries on offense and defense is misleading. A great QB can make the entire offense better. There is no comparable effect on defense. So you can spend more money on defense and still have a better offense because the QB is making everyone better.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Have to call you out on blaming injuries again, this time for lack of turnovers. You make it sound like nobody but the starters go through drills. While I can't list all of the Packer players who missed interceptions this year and in the past, I can assure you that all of them have gone through turnover drills, especially in training camp and throughout their time playing football at various levels. Having a "sure" interception go through a defenders hands isn't new to Packer starters or back-ups for sure and injuries shouldn't be used as an excuse for them.

I do remember one really key missed interception in a game. Sam Shields drop in the playoff game against Arizona last year. Packers were up 13-10 with less then 5 minutes remaining, Shields dropped an easy pick on the 3 yard line, 3 plays later, AZ scored a TD.

"For Sam Shields, he may have just dropped the game," NBC’s Cris Collinsworth said on the TV broadcast.

No, I'm simply pointing out that when a defense is missing four starters it will naturally perform below the level that it would perform should those four starters actually be playing. It's pretty straightforward and yet everyone seems to believe that Micah Hyde should be as good as Burnett (even though he's not) and that Hyde's backup should then be as good as Hyde while Randall should be as good as Shields (which he's not) and that Rollins should be as good as Randall (which he wasn't last year but Randall hasn't really set the bar that high this year). Additionally, people think that Clark should be as good as Guion and that Clark's backup (who doesn't exist) should be as good as Clark at NT and that's REALLY tough since that player doesn't exist and I've never heard of somone who doesn't exist being as good as someone who does in fact exist.

Why am i pointing out such obvious facts? Because it's not only the guys replacing the missing starters that hurts, it's the fact that all the subpackages get screwed up since Capers has no decent players to change up the defense with. It also hurts in the second half of games when guys are playing more snaps than they should be because Casper the Ghost is backing up Clark at NT and Casper, while he tries hard, doesn't actually exist and therefore you can't actually play him.

And as for Shields dropping INTs...let's remember there was a reason that the Hurricanes switched him from receiver to CB.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

So, as I said, this team is expected to have a middle-of-the-road defense.

Once again, the Packers have invested a lot of early round draft picks on defense to improve the unit to a pretty good one. It hasn't worked out that way because Thompson missed on some of these prospects but the expectation was for sure not fielding a mediocre defense.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

And as for Shields dropping INTs...let's remember there was a reason that the Hurricanes switched him from receiver to CB.

LOL.....so this is the reason Shields dropped a sure interception? I was questioning your post on blaming dropped interceptions on injuries and back-ups. Shields is a current injured starter on defense, the secondary no less.

Not going to rehash the discussion we had in another thread about injuries and drop off in play.

 

[HardRightEdge]

So maybe the defense was intended to be a strength but the players drafted haven't lived up to their billing for the most part.

So, as I said, this team is expected to have a middle-of-the-road defense.

You don't see how those statements are self-contradictory in light of your earlier contention that the defense is "built" to be middle of the road which implies a design? If you want to say that has been the outcome and was not by design, then we are in agreement, though for some odd reason which I cannot explain beyond the look of greater coherence, the defense looks to me to be heading in the right direction.

And comparing the salaries on offense and defense is misleading. A great QB can make the entire offense better. There is no comparable effect on defense. So you can spend more money on defense and still have a better offense because the QB is making everyone better.

You should listen to what you're saying. From that statement, taken together with your earlier statement, one would conclude that the entire roster other than Rodgers is "built" to be middle of the road.

Fortunately, that's not the intent, nor the current reality in my opinion, even if this has been an 8-8 roster with the exception of the QB is some recent seasons.

Consider the facts. Rodgers 2016 cap number is only $5.5 mil more than Matthews'. The #2, #3 and #4 cap numbers are on the defensive side of the ball which, when taken together, equal the cap hit of the top 3 offensive players. In fact, you can go right down the line on the top 4, 5, 6, 7, etc. on both sides of the ball and find equivalence at each step of the way.

There's a clear intent to balance cap allocation between offense and defense all the way down the roster, while spending the last 5 first round picks on the defensive side of the ball (I misspoke earlier in saying 4), with 4 of the 5 still on cheap rookie contracts by the way.

 

[bigbubbatd]

The second half of the last season with Shields hurt much of the time the Packers secondary was rated number 3 by PFF. They only lost Hayward. It is reasonable to assume this secondary can play much better if it gets healthy. If that that happens with the way the run defense has been playing this is a top 10 or better defense easy

 

[easyk83]

I haven't watched Matthews closely enough to make a fair evaluation but I know that PFF has taken a look at every single snap. While we might disagree with part of their work it's the most detailled information available.

He seemed to be playing well when I watched him, I never liked PFF and it's "this was graded by some guy in his underwear" approach to football.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

The second half of the last season with Shields hurt much of the time the Packers secondary was rated number 3 by PFF. They only lost Hayward. It is reasonable to assume this secondary can play much better if it gets healthy. If that that happens with the way the run defense has been playing this is a top 10 or better defense easy

It's possible the Packers made a mistake evaluating Hayward as he has performed on a pretty high level for the Chargers. Nevertheless I agree that the team's secondary is capable of playing way better.

He seemed to be playing well when I watched him, I never liked PFF and it's "this was graded by some guy in his underwear" approach to football.

PFF offers the most detailled evaluation of players in the NFL. While I agree that there's no reason to take their grades as truth it's a pretty good indicator of a player's performance. With them having access to coaches film and watching every single snap I put more value into their opinion than most posters on a fan forum.

 

[bigbubbatd]

It's possible the Packers made a mistake evaluating Hayward as he has performed on a pretty high level for the Chargers. Nevertheless I agree that the team's secondary is capable of playing way better.

I don't know if the Packers evaluated hayward poorly but they may have had too high a view of Randall and Rollins. Hayward didn't seem like a need with Shields, Randall, Rollins, Hyde and Gunter. 3 of those were second year guys they were expecting to take another step. Gunter has but the other two have had their struggles one or two weeks. It is just so weird bc Randall was great week 1 and Rollins has been good weeks 2 and 3. If they play well the same weeks the defense is in great shape especially when Shields get back. Well it would be nice if they could cover TE's over the middle too

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I don't know if the Packers evaluated hayward poorly but they may have had too high a view of Randall and Rollins.

That might be true as well.

 

[HardRightEdge]

IWell it would be nice if they could cover TE's over the middle too.

I see this as more of a zone scheme issue. This has never been Capers' forte.

McCarthy was enthusiastic about the prospects of rule changes opening up the middle of the field for the offense. It's a little odd this defense gives it away.

 

[El Guapo]

He seemed to be playing well when I watched him, I never liked PFF and it's "this was graded by some guy in his underwear" approach to football.

I take great offense to your statement sir! I do some of my best work in my underwear!!!

 

[El Guapo]

It is just so weird bc Randall was great week 1 and Rollins has been good weeks 2 and 3. If they play well the same weeks the defense is in great shape especially when Shields get back. Well it would be nice if they could cover TE's over the middle too

I don't think it's that weird. They are a pair of 24 year old second year players in the NFL. They are probably working through adjusting to life as professional athletes, their increased roles on the team, and quite possibly maturity issues. It's quite common for kids at that age no matter the career. You always hope that we've drafted great athletes with brains to match but that's always just a hope and not often the case. I expect them to improve as the season wears on.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

You don't see how those statements are self-contradictory in light of your earlier contention that the defense is "built" to be middle of the road which implies a design? If you want to say that has been the outcome and was not by design, then we are in agreement, though for some odd reason which I cannot explain beyond the look of greater coherence, the defense looks to me to be heading in the right direction.

You should listen to what you're saying. From that statement, taken together with your earlier statement, one would conclude that the entire roster other than Rodgers is "built" to be middle of the road.

Fortunately, that's not the intent, nor the current reality in my opinion, even if this has been an 8-8 roster with the exception of the QB is some recent seasons.

Consider the facts. Rodgers 2016 cap number is only $5.5 mil more than Matthews'. The #2, #3 and #4 cap numbers are on the defensive side of the ball which, when taken together, equal the cap hit of the top 3 offensive players. In fact, you can go right down the line on the top 4, 5, 6, 7, etc. on both sides of the ball and find equivalence at each step of the way.

There's a clear intent to balance cap allocation between offense and defense all the way down the roster, while spending the last 5 first round picks on the defensive side of the ball (I misspoke earlier in saying 4), with 4 of the 5 still on cheap rookie contracts by the way.

No, I don't see the contradiction. A player can be "expected" to be really good when he's drafted. After a couple of years however reality might set in and, if the player hasn't lived up to those "expectations", then that player should no longer be expected (got tired of quotes) to be a great player. So yeah, you can draft a bunch of guys in the first round with the expectation that they will all be really good but after a few years you need to start accepting reality and adjust expectations. To think otherwise would be to expect the Browns offense to be really good because they spent a bunch of first round picks on QBs.

Regarding salary, I've said it before and it's a pretty obvious statement, the QB can create an effect on offense that no single position can duplicate on defense. If you have a great QB then you can spend more money on defense and still have a worse defense. Just because the Packers spend more money on defense doesn't automatically mean the defense is expected to be as good as the offense. I don't understand how else to explain this. What single position, in your opinion, can make the entire defense markedly better in the same fashion that a great QB can make an offense better? If you can point that out to me, then maybe I'll start to think that the aggregate salary matters.

How about if I put it this way; if you think "salary" matters then it would automatically follow that any two defensive players, if there salaries are greater combined than Aaron Rodgers' salary, would be two guys you would happily trade Rodgers for if they would take a pay cut. If salary is what matters, then the opportunity to flip Rodgers for two defensive players who make more money should be a no-brainer, IF salary is what truly determines expected impact.