wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member Topic Starter
13 years ago
Looking Back At Two Seasons Under Dom Capers  

Reading this article at Pro Football Focus on the top 10 defensive ends in a 4-3 alignment (obviously it doesn't include any Green Bay Packers because the Packers play in a 3-4 alignment) made me think back on the past two seasons under Dom Capers.

Here are the Packers defensive rankings over the past three seasons. 2008 was the last season in a 4-3 under former defensive coordinator Bob Sanders. Rankings from Football Outsiders:

Season 	Pass Ranking 	Run Ranking
2008 	        7 	                28
2009 	        4 	                 5
2010 	        1 	                16

Sanders was partially a victim of injuries in the secondary, and the mid-season loss of LB Nick Barnett, but that 28th overall run defense was well deserved. It was awful in 2008.

In 2009, the run defense's improvement in the new 3-4 was immediate and lasted throughout the season. It was a remarkable improvement, and it turned me into a believer.

But in 2010, the run defense slipped. Some of that was by design, as Capers often called for only two defensive lineman to sacrifice some run support for pass coverage. Maybe some of the blame can be placed on individual defenders, but run defense is as much about supporting the overall scheme and all the defenders have to take part of the responsibility on a stop. One player might hold the line, but it's useless if someone over pursues and opens a cut-back lane.

Defense is a lot about having the players to make plays. The Packers aren't going to switch back to a 4-3 because they don't have the personnel to do it, and Capers is a 3-4 defensive coordinator who probably isn't as effective in another alignment. But I think the players are responsible for the defensive improvement, and I'm not as sold on the 3-4 alignment as I was a year ago.



Based on GB's prior experience with a 3-4 defense I was more than a little skeptical.
UserPostedImage
Greg C.
13 years ago
The slip in the run defense ranking was irrelevant because the defense was better overall than it was the year before. That's all that matters. It doesn't make sense for this writer to be less sold on the 3-4 alignment than he was a year ago after the team played better defense and won the damn Super Bowl. To each his own, I guess. (Cue zombieslayer with an essay on the importance of defending the pass vs. defending the run. And he'll be right.)
blank
Nonstopdrivel
13 years ago
I have said it many times in the past. Let the running back get his yards. Shut down the passing game, and more often than not, you will win the game. I will cheerfully trade a dominant run defense for a dominant pass defense.
UserPostedImage
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member Topic Starter
13 years ago

I have said it many times in the past. Let the running back get his yards. Shut down the passing game, and more often than not, you will win the game. I will cheerfully trade a dominant run defense for a dominant pass defense.

Originally Posted by: Nonstopdrivel 




I thought of you when I read this article. I knew you would feel vindicated. Or at least enjoy it.
UserPostedImage
DakotaT
13 years ago

I have said it many times in the past. Let the running back get his yards. Shut down the passing game, and more often than not, you will win the game. I will cheerfully trade a dominant run defense for a dominant pass defense.

Originally Posted by: Nonstopdrivel 




Not to correct you, but I say limit the guy to 120 yds at least or else the other team dominates time of posession.
UserPostedImage
Pack93z
13 years ago

. (Cue zombieslayer with an essay on the importance of defending the pass vs. defending the run. And he'll be right.)

Originally Posted by: Greg C. 





And no one is going to argue that fact... but when an offense becomes one dimensional.. you are making it easier upon the opposing defense. Doesn't mean you can't win being one dimensional.. but it definitely doesn't make it easier to win or improve your odds.. and it certainly doesn't improve the odds of your QB staying healthy. See the punishment that Rodgers has taken in the past couple years.



Sucked in again.. I guess.. but the premise remains.. there are a 1000 ways to skin a cat.. but having an array of tools makes the job easier and the completion of the task more consistent.
"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"
Zero2Cool
13 years ago

I have said it many times in the past.

Originally Posted by: Nonstopdrivel 

That Dom doesn't deserve to be a DC and should be FIRED!! Yes, you have said that many times. πŸ™‚


UserPostedImage
zombieslayer
13 years ago

Not to correct you, but I say limit the guy to 120 yds at least or else the other team dominates time of posession.

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 



I'd take the points over time of possession. Let the stupid RB run up and down the field. Just keep him out of the end zone.

Meanwhile, we'll be throwing TD passes.
My man Donald Driver
UserPostedImage
(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. πŸ‡ΉπŸ‡Ή πŸ‡²πŸ‡² πŸ‡¦πŸ‡·
earthquake
13 years ago
A. Only Chicago and Pits had better run D in the playoffs.
B. Green Bay ranked #3 overall in rushings TDS allowed in the regular season, behind Pits and Baltimore.

Anyone who says GB didn't have a good rush defense based on rushing yards is simply a fool. Let them run, but keep them from scoring! Yards do not win games.

GB was also second in the league in overall scoring, which is the only statistic that really matters, they had an absolutely dominate defense, and no amount of secondary stats can question that.

I'd take the points over time of possession. Let the stupid RB run up and down the field. Just keep him out of the end zone.

Meanwhile, we'll be throwing TD passes.

Originally Posted by: zombieslayer 



Exactly, highly potent offense + 2nd lowest points scored on = superbowl. πŸ˜ƒ
blank
zombieslayer
13 years ago

A. Only Chicago and Pits had better run D in the playoffs.
B. Green Bay ranked #3 overall in rushings TDS allowed in the regular season, behind Pits and Baltimore.

Anyone who says GB didn't have a good rush defense based on rushing yards is simply a fool. Let them run, but keep them from scoring! Yards do not win games.

GB was also second in the league in overall scoring, which is the only statistic that really matters, they had an absolutely dominate defense, and no amount of secondary stats can question that.



Exactly, highly potent offense + 2nd lowest points scored on = superbowl. =D

Originally Posted by: earthquake 



Thank you Earthquake. Next time someone ranks D by yards allowed, slap them upside the head. There is only ONE statistic that matters - points allowed.

I like your way of thinking. Yes, we had the #2 D. I could care less about yards allowed, whether they be by rushing or passing. Stats don't win games. Points do.
My man Donald Driver
UserPostedImage
(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. πŸ‡ΉπŸ‡Ή πŸ‡²πŸ‡² πŸ‡¦πŸ‡·
Fan Shout
Zero2Cool (59m) : Merry Christmas!
beast (9h) : Merry Christmas πŸŽ„πŸŽ
beast (17h) : Sounds like no serious injuries from the Saints game and Jacobs and Watson should play in the Vikings game
packerfanoutwest (22h) : both games Watson missed, Packers won
Martha Careful (24-Dec) : I hope all of you have a Merry Christmas!
Mucky Tundra (24-Dec) : Oh I know about Jacobs, I just couldn't pass up an opportunity to mimic Zero lol
buckeyepackfan (24-Dec) : Jacobs was just sat down, Watson re-injured that knee that kept him out 1 game earlier
buckeyepackfan (24-Dec) : I needed .14 that's. .14 points for the whole 4th quarter to win and go to the SB. Lol
Mucky Tundra (24-Dec) : Jacobs gonna be OK???
Zero2Cool (24-Dec) : Watson gonna be OK???
packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : Inactives tonight for the Pack: Alexander- knee Bullard - ankle Williams - quad Walker -ankle Monk Heath
packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : No Jaire, but hopefully the front 7 destroys the line of scrimmage & forces Rattler into a few passes to McKinney.
packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : minny could be #1 seed and the Lions #5 seed
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : We'd have same Division and Conference records. Strength of schedule we edge them
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I just checked. What tie breaker?
bboystyle (23-Dec) : yes its possible but unlikely. If we do get the 5th, we face the NFCS winner
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Ahh, ok.
bboystyle (23-Dec) : yes due to tie breaker
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I mean, unlikely, yes, but mathematically, 5th is possible by what I'm reading.
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : If Vikings lose out, Packers win out, Packers get 5th, right?
bboystyle (23-Dec) : Minny isnt going to lose out so 5th seed is out of the equation. We are playing for the 6th or 7th seed which makes no difference
Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : beast, the ad revenue goes to the broadcast company but they gotta pay to air the game on their channel/network
beast (23-Dec) : If we win tonight the game is still relative in terms of 5th, 6th or 7th seed... win and it's 5th or 6th, lose and it's 6th or 7th
beast (23-Dec) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.
bboystyle (23-Dec) : i mean game becomes irrelevant if we win tonight. Just a game where we are trying to play spoilers to Vikings chance at the #1 seed
Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno
beast (23-Dec) : I agree that it's BS for fans planning on going to the game. But how does it bring in more money? I'm guessing indirectly?
packerfanoutwest (23-Dec) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I see what you did there Mucky
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : dammit. 3:25pm
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm
Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground
Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : Yeah baby!
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.
beast (23-Dec) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.
packerfanoutwest (23-Dec) : ok I stand corrected
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?
beast (23-Dec) : Saying no to the 6th lock.
beast (23-Dec) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.
beast (23-Dec) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games
beast (23-Dec) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality
beast (23-Dec) : We already have told you... if Packers lose all their games (they won't, but if they did), and Buccaneers and Falcons win all theirs
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2024 Packers Schedule
Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
Eagles
Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
Titans
Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
Rams
Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
CARDINALS
Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
Jaguars
Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
Bears
Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
49ERS
Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
DOLPHINS
Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
Seahawks
Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
Vikings
Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM
BEARS
Recent Topics
9h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

9h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

13h / GameDay Threads / bboystyle

18h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

20h / Random Babble / beast

24-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

23-Dec / Random Babble / Martha Careful

22-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / packerfanoutwest

19-Dec / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

18-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

17-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

17-Dec / Featured Content / Zero2Cool

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

Headlines
Copyright Β© 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.comβ„’. All Rights Reserved.