Offical studs and duds lions

[Deleted member 6794]

Guess after reading this article, I would have to say "Starting Field Position" was a "Stud" during the Lions game. That was one area that seemed to continually hurt us in the Viking game.

http://www.acmepackingcompany.com/2...dominated-field-position-battle-against-lions

It´s interesting that the Packers have the eighth best average starting field position after kickoffs (25.67 yards) but rank only 22nd overall at 25.63.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

It´s interesting that the Packers have the eighth best average starting field position after kickoffs (25.67 yards) but rank only 22nd overall at 25.63.

Guessing that is a result of being pinned numerous times by good punting in the Jaguar and Viking games? Was good to see Hyde being pulled from returning punts in the Lion game. Not sure if this is permanent, but as of late it seemed like Hyde's only goal was to call a fair catch or get out of the way of the ball. Maybe Davis will provide a much needed spark in the punt return game.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Guessing that is a result of being pinned numerous times by good punting in the Jaguar and Viking games? Was good to see Hyde being pulled from returning punts in the Lion game. Not sure if this is permanent, but as of late it seemed like Hyde's only goal was to call a fair catch or get out of the way of the ball. Maybe Davis will provide a much needed spark in the punt return game.

It´s disappointing that the Packers have only returned two punts all season so far (dead last in the league) but I think the reason for that mostly being lousy blocking resulting in no room for the returner.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

It´s disappointing that the Packers have only returned two punts all season so far (dead last in the league) but I think the reason for that mostly being lousy blocking resulting in no room for the returner.

You may be right on that one. Rare have I seen much space between Hyde/Davis and guys coming in, especially on the short pooch kicks when the defenders don't have as far to run to cover. I do remember a few times though where Hyde did have some room to roam and it seemed like he had made his mind up to call a fair catch way before he had to. But I will say, I would much rather see a returner call a fair catch, then try to field one, that has little chance of netting many yards but a good chance of the returner getting popped and coughing up the ball. So Hyde did offer that surety aspect of the game, unless the sun was in his eyes (Jacksonville).

 

[Deleted member 6794]

You may be right on that one. Rare have I seen much space between Hyde/Davis and guys coming in, especially on the short pooch kicks when the defenders don't have as far to run to cover. I do remember a few times though where Hyde did have some room to roam and it seemed like he had made his mind up to call a fair catch way before he had to. But I will say, I would much rather see a returner call a fair catch, then try to field one, that has little chance of netting many yards but a good chance of the returner getting popped and coughing up the ball. So Hyde did offer that surety aspect of the game, unless the sun was in his eyes (Jacksonville).

I agree that ball security is the most important assignment for a returner. Nevertheless I would like the unit to provide the offense with better field position from time to time.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I know one Lions fan who came in and posted how much he hated the kick out of bounds call on Sunday, but that has to go on the highlight reel of "Smart Football". Kudos to Montgomery and probably Ron Zook, for playing smart. Hard to point to one play in a game as being "the game changer", but the results of that play IMO was huge at the time.

 

[easyk83]

Yeah I know it didn't look pretty that second half. I think we will see a slight improvement as the season progresses though. Also, although the run D was stellar our pass rush didn't get to Stafford often enough. I've gotta think Having CM3 in would've resulted in a few more QB hurries at the very least and having Shields in would've resulted in a few more contested throws to incompletion. We were missing arguably our best NT, LB, CB and an experienced S. IMO, if those guys get inserted into the same situation we wouldn't have looked so soft
Stafford can be a very formidable and accurate passer if given time and he showed that again last Sunday

Also would Capers have played as much zone? He moved to zone to try and protect Rollins and Randall... it didn't work. IMHO with Shields out there Randall doesn't play over his head and the coverage would have had a night and day difference.

 

[easyk83]

You may be right on that one. Rare have I seen much space between Hyde/Davis and guys coming in, especially on the short pooch kicks when the defenders don't have as far to run to cover. I do remember a few times though where Hyde did have some room to roam and it seemed like he had made his mind up to call a fair catch way before he had to. But I will say, I would much rather see a returner call a fair catch, then try to field one, that has little chance of netting many yards but a good chance of the returner getting popped and coughing up the ball. So Hyde did offer that surety aspect of the game, unless the sun was in his eyes (Jacksonville).

Anyone else remember Will Blackmon and his cajones? There were a couple punts that he fielded on the fly in traffic with human missiles zipping right past his ears.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Also would Capers have played as much zone? He moved to zone to try and protect Rollins and Randall... it didn't work. IMHO with Shields out there Randall doesn't play over his head and the coverage would have had a night and day difference.

There's absolutely no doubt the Packers need Shields to return as soon as possible and for him to stay healthy the rest of the season.

 

[OldSchool101]

Anyone else remember Will Blackmon and his cajones? There were a couple punts that he fielded on the fly in traffic with human missiles zipping right past his ears.

Speaking of which we don't seem to return many punts. On kickoffs a popular formation used to be "the wedge". Wouldn't it be possible for our punt receiving team to pull the man to man off a slower long snapper and place a guy with some size (like RIP) 5 yards in front of the PR (Davis) to take out the early gunner.
I'm trying to offer an idea for the punter to have slightly more protection to give him confidence that the 1st defender gets taken out routinely

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Speaking of which we don't seem to return many punts. On kickoffs a popular formation used to be "the wedge". Wouldn't it be possible for our punt receiving team to pull the man to man off a slower long snapper and place a guy with some size (like RIP) 5 yards in front of the PR (Davis) to take out the early gunner.
I'm trying to offer an idea for the punter to have slightly more protection to give him confidence that the 1st defender gets taken out routinely

I'm convinced the plan is to better block the gunners to free up some space for the punt returner. Unfortunately that hasn't worked so far this season.

 

[OldSchool101]

I'm convinced the plan is to better block the gunners to free up some space for the punt returner. Unfortunately that hasn't worked so far this season.

True that. I'd almost rather have my faster guys blocking vs bigger bodies if we are getting beat off the LOS. Meaning it doesn't matter how strong a guy is if the gunner etc.. is running past him convincingly. It's the one time we get to harass a player past 5 yards!

 

[Deleted member 6794]

True that. I'd almost rather have my faster guys blocking vs bigger bodies if we are getting beat off the LOS. Meaning it doesn't matter how strong a guy is if the gunner etc.. is running past him convincingly. It's the one time we get to harass a player past 5 yards!

I haven't paid attention to who the Packers are currently using to block opposing gunners but I guess they're mostly fast players.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Montgomery's blocked punt against Minnesota has me forgiving that unit for what has otherwise been a lackluster nothing through the first 3 games. While its nice to break a return once in awhile, I will trade a short return or no return for a ball that is either mishandled or fumbled during the run back. Also, I don't know at what point on the field Zook tells the returner when to fair catch it, maybe the 10 and out? Seems like there have been a few times, where it may have been worth taking a chance on letting the ball hit and possibly go into the endzone, something Masthay had perfected in his final few years with the Packers.

 

[Packerlifer]

http://www.packersnews.com/videos/sports/nfl/packers/2016/09/27/91167476/

 

[Poppa San]

It´s disappointing that the Packers have only returned two punts all season so far (dead last in the league) but I think the reason for that mostly being lousy blocking resulting in no room for the returner.

That was an off season topic also. From: http://archive.jsonline.com/sports/...-make-more-strides-b99768419z1-388498591.html There's another article I recall but I can find it now.

"We've got to get better," said Zook. "We know the issues we had last year. We really worked on our (kickoff-return) blocking techniques. We've got to do the same with our punt-return team this year. That's a major, major emphasis."

There's another article I recall from early in camp but I can find it now.