Last years playoff game, and this year. The TEAM gave the game away. 3 turnovers resulting in 21 points. Both times either offense or ST gave the 49ers momentum. Defense is by default at a disadvantage to begin with, the other two phases of the team helping the other team doesn't do our defense any favors. In reality in both of those matchups the defense played well enough to keep us in the game even with those errors. Take them away and it is likely we win both of them.

Originally Posted by: PackFanWithTwins 

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/201301120sfo.htm

I'm sorry but last year we had two turnovers and even if you completely disregard the two San Francisco scores following the turnovers, our defense gave up 31 points on 5 drives, three of which started at the San Francisco 20 and two of which started at the San Francisco 7. I don't care how you cut it, that's utter shit. They gave up a record number of rushing yards to a quarterback for crying out loud.

Originally Posted by: mi_keys 

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/201301120sfo.htm

I'm sorry but last year we had two turnovers and even if you completely disregard the two San Francisco scores following the turnovers, our defense gave up 31 points on 5 drives, three of which started at the San Francisco 20 and two of which started at the San Francisco 7. I don't care how you cut it, that's utter shit. They gave up a record number of rushing yards to a quarterback for crying out loud.

Originally Posted by: mi_keys 

And last year the 2 turnover resulted in 14 points, the defense also scored on Shields pick 6. Turnovers kill. Sure the defense should and needs to play better, but the offense and special teams need to as well.

Originally Posted by: PackFanWithTwins 

I'm not saying the offense or special teams should get a pass for the interception and fumble respectively. They don't get a pass for their incompetence once they fell behind; but, the defense doesn't get a pass either. I'm so sick of the constant excuses for one unit based on the shortcomings of another. You win and lose as a team but you take responsibility for your side of the ball.

I don't want to hear about time of possession or field position when the defense is letting the other team convert 66% of third downs (or whatever insanely high conversion rate it is) from wherever the opposing team starts and whatever point in the game it is. We've been eliminated in 3 of the past 4 seasons in part by allowing 51, 37 and 45 points. That is un-fucking-acceptable. Period. That ends this weekend.

Originally Posted by: mi_keys 

How many defensive coordinators wouldn't look good with great talent across the board on defense? Dom's had enough talent the past few years to coach a better defense, and he has failed. Others would do worse, but others would also have done and would do better, imo.

Originally Posted by: DoddPower 

I would say right now, which is what matters, it will take all of Dom's or any coordinators best to get a consistently good defensive effort.

They don't have very good DB's. Mathews and Jolly are out, Perry and Neal are banged up, and Raji is just not playing good football.

This puts a lot of B team players, as in backups, pushed into a system that takes a high level of communication and cohesive effort to work effectively.

So at the moment I would question whether Dom has enough experienced quality players to run his D. This is why we get what I thought was a great effort in the first half of the Bears game and then not so good in the second half. Inconsistency is the trademark of a team where 11 guys are not all on the same page when the ball is snapped.

This is why you see a Matt Forte run across the field into the flat and there's nobody within 30 yards of the guy. It's not the scheme or even the inability of a given player. The communication and continuity of the entire D knowing what and where they are supposed to do and be is just not always there.

When you have like 11 different starting lineups and three or four different players in key roles out there it's going to happen.

Originally Posted by: warhawk 

Why does only right now matter? I prefer to use the entire sample size in my evaluation, both for the good and the bad. One season, or especially one-half season doesn't tell the whole story, and really wouldn't be fair to any coach or player.

Injuries and multiple different starting lineups is the reality of today's NFL. Good coaches will find ways to adapt even given those circumstances, while others will struggle. Using the excuse of "Well, if the coach just had all of his starting players and some upgrades at other positions . . . " doesn't do much for me. I don't think there's a single NFL coach that wouldn't do better with all of their players and upgrades to their starters. I would want to find a coach that could maximize the talent he has available, even if it's not the best. I don't think Dom has been doing that the past couple years. I just don't think average or worse with colossal failures in the playoffs is acceptable, but perhaps I'm just a hard-ass. It's worth the risk to strive for an improvement in any way, and I really can't imagine there not being a better coach out there . . . somewhere. Worst case scenario, the Packers defense would probably be just about the same, so as far as I'm concerned it's really a risk worth taking.

Originally Posted by: DoddPower