Packers Hire New Defensive Coordinator: Jeff Hafley, formerly Head Coach, Boston College

[AKCheese]

You're correct. The Eagles were better on the OL and the DL. The score was actually a lot closer than the game. The Packers were just outplayed across the board. Yes the field was a mess but it was a mess for both teams. Didn't slow Barkley down.

So now Love is out for, hopefully "just" three weeks. There's no good time for an injury like this, but the schedule is easier on the front end. Big question is who plays backup. I'd go with Willis. He can beat a team with his legs and the Packers may need that.

Yeah the playbook will have to be simplified, at least for a bit. The Packers still have a lot of talent elsewhere on the team so I expect them to be competitive against the Colts, Titans and Vikes. A good outcome is .500 ball until Love gets back. Ideally they win 2 out of the next 3 games and then Love returns.

Actually 3 of 3 would be ideal - Jes sayin

 

[Heyjoe4]

Actually 3 of 3 would be ideal - Jes sayin

That's fine with me. The next three teams are the Colts, Titans, and Vikings. All of these games are winnable, even without Love. The Packers are a talented team. Whoever starts at QB needs to play unglamorous, mistake-free ball. The rest of the team has to step up their collective game a notch.

 

[GB2016]

That's fine with me. The next three teams are the Colts, Titans, and Vikings. All of these games are winnable, even without Love. The Packers are a talented team. Whoever starts at QB needs to play unglamorous, mistake-free ball. The rest of the team has to step up their collective game a notch.

The Defense especially...Lets see if they can play like a lot of us are expecting. They will have a major roll on how we fair in the next few game without our QB.

 

[gopkrs]

I'm hoping we play Q and the two rookies at linebacker. I think we need to utilize the linebackers and not worry about chess with the offensive coordinator. Unless it's obviously a passing down. And even then, the two rookies look to be good at blitzing.

 

[OldSchool101]

Felt like we just we just didn’t get much pressure on the QB. Although that might have been estimated. Might not want Hurts running wild either. Seemed like a game of contain but our newer Secondary gave up some intermediate throws with several blown coverages. At least 3-4 times Receivers were wide open underneath in crossers etc.


Either Nixon or Alexander INT drops one would’ve changed the course or outcome of this game. Playing aggressive works both ways. It gives up some plays but once they begin to capitalize on Takeaways it changes the whole context. Nixon takes that to the house (pick 6) and it’s 65% a GB Win imo. It didn’t go our way but that’s the sacrifice of playing against the big play (Barry). Either die by slow bleeding or live trying to be the aggressor. I’ll take the latter I’d prefer going down by my mistakes over hoping for theirs

I think as we face teams that don’t have a top 5 OL or Top 5 Rushing QB? we will see more low hanging fruit. Loved what I saw from Edgerrin he immediately makes an impact. He looks like a Day 1 LB out of the gate.i think we’ll be fine as we get some continuity. Can’t expect a new scheme to gel week 1 either.

I also think our O stumbled a bit just being rusty. I’ve never seen #10 throw into the dirt like that.

 

[DoURant]

Felt like we just we just didn’t get much pressure on the QB. Although that might have been estimated. Might not want Hurts running wild either. Seemed like a game of contain but our newer Secondary gave up some intermediate throws with several blown coverages. At least 3-4 times Receivers were wide open underneath in crossers etc.

I felt Quay's primary responsibility was spying Hurts, so he didn't run wild. If that was in fact true, he did a good job. 13-33 yds, 8 yd run was the longest. In the 2022 game, Hurts went 17-157 yds

 

[Heyjoe4]

I felt Quay's primary responsibility was spying Hurts, so he didn't run wild. If that was in fact true, he did a good job. 13-33 yds, 8 yd run was the longest. In the 2022 game, Hurts went 17-157 yds

One of the high points for the D was how well they contained Hurts.

 

[OldSchool101]

I’m about positive that this D will improve as the season progresses with a new scheme. That was a Top 5-10 Offense we just played. They have weapons everywhere and a great OL.

Keep in mind 1 drive started at the GB 24 with the Love INT. Thats at minimum 3 points on our Offense and statistically 5 points on our O. Had we just stalled and punted it makes a huge difference.
So I look at the bigger picture. Our D gave up 29 points to a team that was #8 in yards, #7 in points last season. Our Offense wasn’t terrible, but they missed quite a few plays and also had lots of self infliction. The game flow ebb n tide is reliant on all 3 phases working together and spotting opponents turnovers near our Redzone is not an help. Our K wasn’t perfect either. Just massaging a few plays or penalties and this game would’ve been much closer. 1 FGM and its 32-34 needing their 40 yard line for a Try at the Win.


This is how age affects things. Last year it was exactly the same feel. Lots of close losses almost self defeating like. Losses in the last drive or last play even
Notice how our team gradually got synchronized as the season rolled on. That was a really good team we played and at several points we led. Age only means instability at first, but it also means a higher propensity for intra season improvement than an older team.

 

[milani]

They've had LBs who made a lot of tackles - AJ Hawk comes to mind and another guy they traded to the Giants whose name escapes me, but a lot of those tackles were made after gains. I think getting Cooper healthy and on the field will help a lot. And Walker has just not played up to draft status. He's gotten better, but he's not a Pro Bowl or All Pro guy.

Blake Martinez. Yes, but Hawk and Matthews and Bishop were part of the Thompson era. In the Gute era we went for edge rushers but not your run stuffers like a Ray Lewis or an Urlacher, guys who blow up the play. Of course, in the TT years we did not do enough at DL. There was BJ Raji and Kenny Clark and the one who was on our SB team that we refused to sign.

 

[milani]

That's fine with me. The next three teams are the Colts, Titans, and Vikings. All of these games are winnable, even without Love. The Packers are a talented team. Whoever starts at QB needs to play unglamorous, mistake-free ball. The rest of the team has to step up their collective game a notch.

Yes. But I do not see our D and special teams taking over a game like the Bears are today when your offense is AWOL. We have to get something out of our QB to have a chance to win.

 

[tynimiller]

One interesting observation: the Packers defensive woes have transcended numerous coordinators and numerous defensive schemes.

One thing has been constant through all this, though: the Packers have never really emphasized LB play, high end LBs who can stop the run.

False, Hawk was that...people *****ed he couldn't cover enough field.

I say false, but it is true for a time we didn't draft high LBs at all. BUT Quay, Cooper and Hopper all are first three round type guys and two first round graded by many.

 

[OldSchool101]

The past is the past. We now have 2 very good ILB’s and possibly 3. I think it’ll take a Qtr or 2 of the season to get them working in unison. Lots of individual talent, but none of it is a hill of beans when not congealed

I can’t believe the Bears came back from 0-17. We aren’t getting an ounce of help this week.

 

[milani]

False, Hawk was that...people *****ed he couldn't cover enough field.

I say false, but it is true for a time we didn't draft high LBs at all. BUT Quay, Cooper and Hopper all are first three round type guys and two first round graded by many.

I think they are talking recently not over time. And I believe he was referring to run staffers who blow up the play and can go sideline to sideline. We had been playing 3-4 since 2009. Before that Nick Barnett was drafted to be that guy who could go sideline to sideline. How many of our LBs over the last 30 years have gone to the Pro Bowl? Been a long time since Ray Nitschke played.

 

[gopkrs]

Levis didn't look good. I think that is what we would get with Clifford.

 

[DoURant]

Levis didn't look good. I think that is what we would get with Clifford.

Willis was the 3rd QB on that roster.... if that tells you anything

 

[sschind]

The past is the past. We now have 2 very good ILB’s and possibly 3. I think it’ll take a Qtr or 2 of the season to get them working in unison. Lots of individual talent, but none of it is a hill of beans when not congealed

I can’t believe the Bears came back from 0-17. We aren’t getting an ounce of help this week.

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[gopkrs]

Willis was the 3rd QB on that roster.... if that tells you anything

Yeah, that doesn't sound good. But that happens sometimes. Like I said before, Willis is going to have to have poise and oh yeah, some time.

 

[DoURant]

Yeah, that doesn't sound good. But that happens sometimes. Like I said before, Willis is going to have to have poise and oh yeah, some time.

....and unfortunately that is why I think the right move, at least against the Colts, is to have Clifford start.

 

[thequick12]

No his contract is virtually a non starter when it comes to a trade becas of the dead money.

I think he's still pretty good honestly but ive never thought he was elite. He drops far too many ints for my taste

 

[milani]

....and unfortunately that is why I think the right move, at least against the Colts, is to have Clifford start.

Colts are familiar with Willis. They got torched by Mixon today like Barkley did to us.

 

[Heyjoe4]

....and unfortunately that is why I think the right move, at least against the Colts, is to have Clifford start.

I think you're right. There should be fewer mistakes with Clifford and they can dumb down the pass game. Don't ask him to do anything too risky, and they may pull off a win against the Colts. I'd also like to see a heavy dose of Jacobs and Wilson. Wilson looked terrific Friday, and Jacobs got going later. Jacobs is also a good receiver, so they could go with two-back sets.

Back to my first point, they'll have to play TO-free football. The Colts and Titans are winnable games. Don't know what to make of the Vikes yet. Nice win against the Giants, but the Giants aren't very good.

This team should win some or all of these games even without Love.

 

[milani]

I think you're right. There should be fewer mistakes with Clifford and they can dumb down the pass game. Don't ask him to do anything too risky, and they may pull off a win against the Colts. I'd also like to see a heavy dose of Jacobs and Wilson. Wilson looked terrific Friday, and Jacobs got going later. Jacobs is also a good receiver, so they could go with two-back sets.

Back to my first point, they'll have to play TO-free football. The Colts and Titans are winnable games. Don't know what to make of the Vikes yet. Nice win against the Giants, but the Giants aren't very good.

This team should win some or all of these games even without Love.

The Colts got run over by Mixon and the Texan line. Their secondary is not the best. The blocked punt kept them in it. In light of our history of blocked punts we need to prepare for that. Richardson has an arm and is a very gutty QB. But he only completed about 47 % on Sunday. He likes to go long.

 

[Heyjoe4]

The Colts got run over by Mixon and the Texan line. Their secondary is not the best. The blocked punt kept them in it. In light of our history of blocked punts we need to prepare for that. Richardson has an arm and is a very gutty QB. But he only completed about 47 % on Sunday. He likes to go long.

Thanks for the info. Well hopefully the Packers can run against the Colts. I admit I wasn't a Wilson fan but he looked very good on a sloppy field Friday night. Where Jacobs is almost a pure power runner, Wilson showed sone finesse and ab ability to take advantage of gaps in the line.

The Packers are in survival mode until Love returns. Pretty early for "must win" games, but considering the opponents, wins are doable. The Packers are a talented team and guys need to step up.

 

[rmontro]

Back to my first point, they'll have to play TO-free football. The Colts and Titans are winnable games.

Bears beat the Titans, even though their rookie QB didn't play that well. No INTs though, that helped. They did lose a fumble. If our defense can play well, we run the ball well, and avoid TOs, we should stand a decent chance.

 

[sschind]

Bears beat the Titans, even though their rookie QB didn't play that well. No INTs though, that helped. They did lose a fumble. If our defense can play well, we run the ball well, and avoid TOs, we should stand a decent chance.

Didn't play that well? I guess he didn't throw an INT so that is something. If our D and ST can score TDs against the Titans I think we will beat them as well. If our O plays like the Bears did I don't think we will beat anybody.