Studs and duds vs Vikings

[Fat Dogs]

There's no evidence to support your claim. Since the 2014 NFCCG at Seattle the Packers haven't lost a single game in which they led by more than a score at any point in the second half.


Somehow those stats seem off.... I will say that Packer fans have had some last minute defensive heartbreaks that will last a lifetime so one cannot help but remember and cringe even if these stats are correct.

it would be amazing if Barnes proves to be a playmaker for this D. A lot is riding on one of these guys stepping up at ILB.


Krys Barnes had six tackles (two for a loss) while playing only 15 snaps. I don't expect him to end up performing at the same level as Queen but the Packers might have found a gem in him.

I like Queen a lot. Think he'll be good.

With that said, Kendricks from MN played a hell of a game. He's a very good ILB. Even with him playing excellent, that defense still have up 40+. So how valuable is a good ILB?

If Jordan Love hits, he will win a lot of games. If Queen hits, how many games does he win?

Queen was the guy I was hoping Gluten would take. We know how that worked out. We won't know if the move on Love was a boom, bust, or meh for a few years. Rodgers certainly doesn't look anywhere near retirement, or a trade. I still think Love was a wasted pick, but the past is the past.[/QUOTE]


Kendricks is a hell of a player but that Vikings D is depleted. The packers have some real playmakers and only need one or two more upper echelon talents to make us an elite D.

I 100% agree that QB’s run this league and Love would be more important for the organization if he transitions into a good QB. That being said, I’m not a believer and truly believe that Queen should have been the pick.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I think they moved away from Cook and threw more because of the early lead by the Pack.

Vikings were only down 22-10 halfway into the 3rd Q when they seemed to abandon the running game. Maybe they thought that they were going to need to score a lot of points to keep up with the Packers, but one way to stop a hot Offense is to keep them off the field with your own running game. I still contend that the Vikings made the mistake of not giving the ball more to Cook after it was quite obvious the Packers were giving up huge chunks of yardage on the ground.

 

[Fat Dogs]

Somehow those stats seem off.... I will say that Packer fans have had some last minute defensive heartbreaks that will last a lifetime so one cannot help but remember and cringe even if these stats are correct.

it would be amazing if Barnes proves to be a playmaker for this D. A lot is riding on one of these guys stepping up at ILB.

 

[Raptorman]

Dud. Packers "prevent" defense. Really? What the hell did they prevent? Cousins tossed for 16 yards per completion in the Vikings last 3 possessions. If that's the prevent defense you should be worried. The only thing that kept the Vikings from winning is that their defense sucked worse in the 4th than the Packers.

Stud. Rodgers. He looks different than the last 2 years. Something has changed.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

The only thing that kept the Vikings from winning is that their defense sucked worse in the 4th than the Packers.

But lets just forget about the fact that the Packers, who won by 9 points,were up my more points (+12) at the end of the first half (22-10), and up 29-10 (+19) at the end of the 3rd Q.

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

Admit it Raptorman, the better team won on Sunday, had nothing to do with both defenses playing bad in the 4th Q.

 

[PikeBadger]

A good ILB is pretty valuable. More valuable that a QB sitting 3rd. string on the bench maybe forever. Kendricks is another guy I had down as my favorite in Round 1 over Randall, a guy who should have never been playing CB. Kendricks was pretty rough in his rookie year but got better and better.

Agree about Randall. I think he may have become a really good free safety had he started out there. I think he would have been much better than Dix.

 

[JK64]

Duds: prevent defense. didn't even slow the Vikings down.

I agree. It seems like Pettine is too soft on these guys. Giving up 3 tds that fast is unacceptable.

 

[JK64]

MVS did a great job on his TD. But the other 2 passes he dropped,

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

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

.

Especially the first drop. It was a perfect pass into his hands and he had an open field in front of him. He needs to focus on the catch first.

 

[JK64]

That Z. stand-up DT business, run defense on the way to the QB, is not working. It got burned on the ground against SF and got beat a couple of times today. Something's got to be done about that. Gary was in for at least one snap as a 3-point 3-tech. Maybe there's something to be found there. If Clark is out for any period of time I think they'll have to go the street. Snackers may get their wish.

Right. The defense just keeps making the same mistakes over and over and Pettine gets a pass.

 

[Mondio]

Agree about Randall. I think he may have become a really good free safety had he started out there. I think he would have been much better than Dix.

Randall could be a really good DB or safety, i don't think he had the mental make up to realize half his talent though.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Detroit's strength is the running game, so they may actually be a tougher team to beat for the Packers than the Vikings are. They were last year.

The Lions offense is centered around throwing the ball, especially with Golladay possibly returning vs. the Packers.

With that said, Kendricks from MN played a hell of a game. He's a very good ILB. Even with him playing excellent, that defense still have up 40+. So how valuable is a good ILB?

Maybe the Vikings secondary isn't that good after all.

Somehow those stats seem off.... I will say that Packer fans have had some last minute defensive heartbreaks that will last a lifetime so one cannot help but remember and cringe even if these stats are correct.

Feel free to double check the numbers but they're correct.

 

[Raptorman]

But lets just forget about the fact that the Packers, who won by 9 points,were up my more points (+12) at the end of the first half (22-10), and up 29-10 (+19) at the end of the 3rd Q.

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

Admit it Raptorman, the better team won on Sunday, had nothing to do with both defenses playing bad in the 4th Q.

This wasn't about who won, but about the crappy "prevent defense" the Packers tried. I'm concerned about my Vikings Defense. They let a team put up 43 points. The Packers let a team put up 24 points, without a defensive turnover, in the fourth quarter after holding that team to 10 the first 3.

 

[GleefulGary]

.



Maybe the Vikings secondary isn't that good after all.


.

They have good pieces, they're just young. It takes a bit. That's all I'm saying. I just don't think they're as bad as you do. As a whole, I'd say they're close to an average secondary.

My point on Kendricks is that while he is very good, his overall impact on how good a defense is quite a bit lower than a pass rusher or DB. Therefore, the value for an ILB is lower. I think it's understandable not wanting to use a day 1 pick on one.

 

[gopkrs]

This wasn't about who won, but about the crappy "prevent defense" the Packers tried. I'm concerned about my Vikings Defense. They let a team put up 43 points. The Packers let a team put up 24 points, without a defensive turnover, in the fourth quarter after holding that team to 10 the first 3.

The thing about the "prevent" defense is like a number have said; it is not preventing anything. And so you might as well play normal and maybe give up the big play. Because your evidently going to give up fast points anyway.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

This wasn't about who won, but about the crappy "prevent defense" the Packers tried. I'm concerned about my Vikings Defense. They let a team put up 43 points. The Packers let a team put up 24 points, without a defensive turnover, in the fourth quarter after holding that team to 10 the first 3.

This isn't anything new in the NFL or Football for that matter when it comes to prevent defenses. While I agree with you, most of us fans hate seeing a ton of points being put up against our teams "prevent defense", I will disagree with you on "this wasn't about who won", the only thing that counts towards anything is the final score. The Packers won by 9 points, mission accomplished. I think CaptainWimm pointed out in a post, that the Packers have fared pretty well when leading by 7 or more in the second half.

Will Pettine and the Packers make some adjustments because of this game, sure. Will they panic because of it and never go into "prevent defense" again? Probably not. Quite honestly, I am more concerned about the Packers defense and their ability to stop the run, something that the Vikings didn't really attack after the first half. I'm just fine with running scores way up and then only winning by 9 points because our defense was instructed to not give up the big plays.

 

[Raptorman]

This isn't anything new in the NFL or Football for that matter when it comes to prevent defenses. While I agree with you, most of us fans hate seeing a ton of points being put up against our teams "prevent defense", I will disagree with you on "this wasn't about who won", the only thing that counts towards anything is the final score. The Packers won by 9 points, mission accomplished. I think CaptainWimm pointed out in a post, that the Packers have fared pretty well when leading by 7 or more in the second half.

Will Pettine and the Packers make some adjustments because of this game, sure. Will they panic because of it and never go into "prevent defense" again? Probably not. Quite honestly, I am more concerned about the Packers defense and their ability to stop the run, something that the Vikings didn't really attack after the first half. I'm just fine with running scores way up and then only winning by 9 points because our defense was instructed to not give up the big plays.

The Packers defense not giving up the big play in the fourth. 53 yards in 4 plays.


3-8-MIN 47 (9:11) (Shotgun) K.Cousins pass short middle to I.Smith to GB 42 for 11 yards (C.Sullivan).
1-10-GB 42 (8:49) (No Huddle, Shotgun) K.Cousins pass short middle to J.Jefferson to GB 25 for 17 yards (C.Sullivan).
1-10-GB 25 (8:29) (No Huddle, Shotgun) K.Cousins pass deep right to O.Johnson to GB 3 for 22 yards (K.King).
1-3-GB 3 (7:59) (No Huddle, Shotgun) D.Cook left end for 3 yards, TOUCHDOWN

 

[Do7]

I still think people are blowing that out of proportion. The Packers were up plenty and in my eyes, those points Minnesota scored were garbage points for the most part. The game was pretty much set by the time Minnesota scored those points, they weren't coming back.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I still think people are blowing that out of proportion. The Packers were up plenty and in my eyes, those points Minnesota scored were garbage points for the most part. The game was pretty much set by the time Minnesota scored those points, they weren't coming back.

A Viking fan obviously does not want to see it that way though

I think the most disappointing defensive play for me was at the beginning of the 4th Q and the score was 29-10. Savage lost coverage on Thielen, got no help from Jaire and allowed a 37 yard TD.

 

[bigbubbatd]

I still think people are blowing that out of proportion. The Packers were up plenty and in my eyes, those points Minnesota scored were garbage points for the most part. The game was pretty much set by the time Minnesota scored those points, they weren't coming back.

Agreed to an extent. The Vikings never had the ball with a chance to get within a score for most of the second half. The Packers were up 19, 18, and 17 before the Vikings' scores. After the first Vikings td they scored 3 points while they game was still remotely close. The Packers were more aggressive with their pass rush and cousins was under pressure. They quite pressuring the same and also played a bad version prevent.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Might be unpopular but I'm starting to think Jaire was closer to dud than stud in this game. Here me out, I'm NOT saying he was a dud but I am saying that his best play was because he didn't know the defensive assignment (that's not a replicable process), and while he DID get an interception he also allowed Thielen 4 catches for 66 yards and a TD on six targets. The interception saves him from being a dud but he didn't really shut anything down at corner.

Jaire has the skills and hype to be an elite corner but he gives up a lot more in coverage than other corners he's often compared to. He needs to be far more consistent before he actually earns that elite corner label.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

They have good pieces, they're just young. It takes a bit. That's all I'm saying. I just don't think they're as bad as you do. As a whole, I'd say they're close to an average secondary.

My point on Kendricks is that while he is very good, his overall impact on how good a defense is quite a bit lower than a pass rusher or DB. Therefore, the value for an ILB is lower. I think it's understandable not wanting to use a day 1 pick on one.

The Vikings secondary might develop into an average unit over the course of the season but they were awful vs. the Packers on Sunday.

I agree that an inside linebacker isn't as valuable as other positions on defense. With that being said Kendricks would have been a mich smarter choice than Randall at the end of the first round in 2015.

I'm just fine with running scores way up and then only winning by 9 points because our defense was instructed to not give up the big plays.

I'm fine with the Packers playing prevent defense to not give up big plays as well but there's no doubt that didn't work on Sunday at all.

It took the Vikings all of 5:21 minutes to score 24 points, that's definitely not good enough by any means.

Savage lost coverage on Thielen, got no help from Jaire and allowed a 37 yard TD.

There's no way Savage should cover Thielen one-on-one in the first place.

 

[Poppa San]

It took the Vikings all of 5:21 minutes to score 24 points, that's definitely not good enough by any means.

The Vikings also had a touchback and went far enough to get a midrange field goal to end the first half in 14 seconds. 2 plays 43 yards + the field goal.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I'm fine with the Packers playing prevent defense to not give up big plays as well but there's no doubt that didn't work on Sunday at all.

It took the Vikings all of 5:21 minutes to score 24 points, that's definitely not good enough by any means.

My intention was not to imply that the Packers Prevent Defense played well, my point to a Viking fan is that the Packers won the game and that was ultimately what counts in the standings. Pettine definitely has work to do with this defense, but there were some good things that the defense did, especially for the first game of the season, to build on. Bottom line, I'm not going to hit the panic button about the defense based on the way they played with a huge lead and a Viking fan trying to tell me that the Packers won only because the Vikings defense played worse than the Packers in the 4th Q.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

My intention was not to imply that the Packers Prevent Defense played well, my point to a Viking fan is that the Packers won the game and that was ultimately what counts in the standings. Pettine definitely has work to do with this defense, but there were some good things that the defense did, especially for the first game of the season, to build on. Bottom line, I'm not going to hit the panic button about the defense based on the way they played with a huge lead and a Viking fan trying to tell me that the Packers won only because the Vikings defense played worse than the Packers in the 4th Q.

I definitely agree with your overall point of view but I'm a bit more concerned about the way the defense played in the fourth quarter.

 

[longtimefan]

A a team aspect it was the 1st game of no pre season