In watching the games this season there is definitely a trend. The offenses are outperforming defenses and the margin doesn't seem to be narrowing. I'm starting to feel the Packers just ran into teams at the right time and they aren't as offensively prolific as the numbers might make them out to be.

I wouldn't be surprised if the Packers start dropping games we would expect them to win.

---

I dont know. Rodgers is getting the ball out much quicker which I think speaks to his comfort with the new offense. His progressions are more in sync with when the receivers are open.

---

I think when the Packers are fully healthy, they have a DAMN good system, with a great QB and they worked extremely hard to match the plays up, to add maximum confusion for the defenses.

That being said, they have also caught some lucky breaks...

As with exception of the Vikings, all the teams were missing a healthy star WR (Julio wasn't healthy), and even with the Vikings, they had a rookie star 1st round pick playing this first NFL game.... who didn't hear up until week 3.

All the teams we've faced so far have been missing an important DL.

The Saints were missing any DBs, but the rest had DB problems, as Vikings were forced to play rookie DBs in their first NFL game ever, against Rodgers and that was taking candy from a baby for Adams, Lions were missing a starting CB and had a rookie in his first NFL game ever as well, though as the #3 overall pick, I think he looked better than the average rookie...

The biggest surprise to me to me, is that the Falcons and Packers were missing so many DBs by the second half and neither team did better than they did...


That being said, if the Packers struggle, I think it's more likely to be due to injuries and lack of depth... as the Packers need a couple of good WRs, with only one of their top 6 DBs the Falcons seemed to be able to take away the Packers WRs with Adams, Lazard, St. Brown, and Funchess, for one reason or another out...


This scheme puts a hell lot of pressure on the defense, and this scheme has taken a post prime Peyton Manning, Matt Ryan, Jared Goff and Jimmy Garoppolo and to the Superbowl... so it's not surprising that Rodgers can look great in it, if he has the right pieces.

Though I do think we lost an important piece in TE Deguara, no one has looked half as good of a move blocker as he did, of course, he looked damn amazing against the Vikings. And we lost an important piece in Lazard, physical, large, smart, great body control and hands, that DBs sleep on because he's not fast and they think they know his route, but when he catches them sleeping he audibles and big play happens...

---

One of the reasons offenses are doing better is holding penalties are down significantly. In the past GB hasn't been one of the more culpable teams but they had their share of them.

---

This kind of adds to the success the Packers are having in my view. When the opponents offense is struggling that has to make it less pressure on your offense.

---

haters gonna hate.

---

He gets it out faster when he's not running play action. Play action actually requires holding it longer than he used to, but it's in a context where it helps guys get upon.

Definitely seems like Aaron is buying in.

I would also note that the offense has pergormed at a high level even as we have lost players to injury.

---

Honestly packers have always live and died by their offense and QBs since Favre. Yes our two SBs from Favre and Rodgers had top defenses but Packers were never considered a defensive team. As long as our QB and offense are rilling, we will always be in SB contention. That does not mean our defense doesnt or shouldnt matter. What it means is that if we can field a decent defense,we can win it all. But if we field the same crap that we have been for years and allowing record breaking yards, then our team will be null and voided of any championship.

I dont expect us to go undefeated so a loss to TB may happen. But what matters is how we lose. Look at 2010, all games were close that we loss. Look at 1996, all games were close that we loss except the cowboys game that was a 15 point loss.

A loss can tell the story of a team as much as a win does.

When I read this the first time, I thought it was inferring we lost lots of games and I was thinking WTF thought we lost like 3 or 4, lol. Then I thought it was that every game was close which is what made me look at the schedule because I remember that season feeling like we blew out nearly every team. Maybe not a blow out, but around 2nd quarter I was feeling confident we had it sealed.

As for your final point that is in this quote. 100% agree. McCarthy used to say winning can be harder than losing because when you lose you have that urgency to get better.

 image.png You have insufficient rights to see the content.

---

I think most of the games the Packers opponent has been missing a starting WR, CB and DL... or a rookie starting CB, which had to go up against Adams/Rodgers.

But I also think it's hugely this offensive scheme, and the players playing well in it.

The defense doesn't look as good, but I predicted that, and they've been without Clark. But we need Clark and the CBs to stay healthy, or we're in huge trouble, probably Z and Gary as well.

---