My Packer Grades· Page 5

alharrisdude31
Registered

15 years ago

charles woodson you overlooked, he was a great player but i do admit he doesnt have the speed he needs, but hes older- and hes done enough for the packers

I ride quads.
Youtube-kawimojave
Main channel

Rios39
Member

15 years ago

#42

"C"

Statistically GB got out played in nearly every category yet still won the game.
The offensive could not consistently convert the turnovers into points.
226 total yards (150 yards passing) is poor to say the least. Yes the Bears have a tough defense but still. poor outing overall. Toomnay dropped passes.

Defense, while getting 4 TO's still gave up a lot of yards. (352) The front 7 did a solid job but there were problems in the secondary. Missed assignments. Poor tackling, bad pursuit angles. receivers left wide open.
Tough game. escaped with the W. move on to the next game.


Team Stat Comparison
 	Chicago 	GB
1st Downs	18	12
Passing 1st downs
	12	8
Rushing 1st downs
	4	4
1st downs from Penalties
	2	0
3rd down efficiency
	4-15	4-14
4th down efficiency
	1-3	0-0
Total Plays	69	54
Total Yards	352	226
Passing	266	150
Comp-Att
	17-36	17-28
Yards per pass
	7.4	5.4
Rushing	86	76
Rushing Attempts
	31	22
Yards per rush
	2.8	3.5
Red Zone (Made-Att)	0-3	1-2
Penalties	3-25	6-45
Turnovers	4	0
Fumbles lost
	0	0
Interceptions thrown
	4	0
Defensive / Special Teams TDs	0	0
Possession	33:03	26:57

"wpr" wrote:

I think saying the D was only average is a bit absurd. The secondary had 4 turn overs. In a 3-4 you are going to give up some big plays, it's just how it is. Baltimore will do it, Pittsburgh. Any decent QB will hit some plays.

Having said that though the D completely killed the Bears run game. Which was a HUGE problem last year. How many stuffs did we have? I'm thinking a ton.

The 2 big plays was on one where Collins slipped, another one he cramped up.

blank

cheeseheads123
Member

15 years ago

#43

charles woodson you overlooked, he was a great player but i do admit he doesnt have the speed he needs, but hes older- and hes done enough for the packers

"alharrisdude31" wrote:

If you basing that on last nights game. You gotta remember they were blitzing a lot leaving woodson 1 on 1. Not too mention the bears have speed at the receiver position.

wpr
Preferred Member

15 years ago

#44


Team Stat Comparison
 	Chicago 	GB
1st Downs	18	12
Passing 1st downs
	12	8
Rushing 1st downs
	4	4
1st downs from Penalties
	2	0
3rd down efficiency
	4-15	4-14
4th down efficiency
	1-3	0-0
Total Plays	69	54
Total Yards	352	226
Passing	266	150
Comp-Att
	17-36	17-28
Yards per pass
	7.4	5.4
Rushing	86	76
Rushing Attempts
	31	22
Yards per rush
	2.8	3.5
Red Zone (Made-Att)	0-3	1-2
Penalties	3-25	6-45
Turnovers	4	0
Fumbles lost
	0	0
Interceptions thrown
	4	0
Defensive / Special Teams TDs	0	0
Possession	33:03	26:57

"Rios39" wrote:

"wpr" wrote:

Either you misunderstood what I said or I was not clear enuf.

The C is for the whole team. I am not breaking down player by player or O vs D.

With that said. I don't think you give high grades to a team that gave up that many yards based solely on the 4 TO's. throw in the 2 sacks as well. The did play well at times and they had problems in coverage other times. Certainly it is going to happen to any team any game. You can chose to say well Collins had a cramp. I know that. But the team gets an F for that play. Life isn't fair. I won't over look a big play TD and pretend it didn't happen. There were poor coverage routes last night. There were missed tackles.
Now the TO's. Of the 4 int's at least 2 of them were Offensive mistakes and not excellent defensive coverage. The receivers ran the wrong routes. Cutler threw to the wrong area. Some of that was DL pressure some of it was 1st game jitters.

As a whole, the Defense was somewhere between a B and C+. The team as a whole C. As a whole the Offense was somewhere around a C-. They didn't make the turnover mistake. But isn't that a minimum standard for the offense? That is what I expect from them. That is C to C+ in my book. Less than 100 yards rushing. Less than 200 yards passing. That is D material no matter how you look at it.

That is MY opinion. I don't ask for you to like it.

I will say that if everything stayed the same EXCEPT that the Bears won. (That prob means only 3 ints instead of 4 for that to happen. Which is a BIG IF.) I don't think we would see as many A's and B's from the Packer faithful. I simply choose not not get overly excited b/c they caught a few breaks and pulled out a game that statistically they lost.

porky88
Veteran Member

15 years ago

#45

I don't care how much yardage a defense gives up. Bend, but don't break is good enough to win in the NFL. Looking at stats never gives you an indication of how well someone or something is. Watch the team and this was a much better defense.

The two areas that hurt the Packers most a year ago was the pass rush and run defense.

Matt Forte had 25 carries for 55 yards.

Cutler was sacked twice and pressured all day long.

The long ball is going to happen when you blitz that much. That's the type of risk you take when you pressure the QB.

To talk down the defense because it's not as good as say Pittsburgh or Tennessee is ridiculous. There is no such thing as the perfect team. Even the 72 Dolphins weren't perfect, lucky yes, but not perfect.

Tennessee gave up 300-plus yards to Ben Roethlisberger, but the stat that matters most is they held Pittsburgh to 13 points. That's encouraging going forward as is Green Bay giving up 15 points and only one touchdown. The team gave up field goals instead of touchdowns and that's what matters most.

The defense won this game. I know Rodgers will get the credit in the end for the big throw, but the D won this game for Green Bay.

http://www.row12.com/

wpr
Preferred Member

15 years ago

#46

I don't care how much yardage a defense gives up.

"porky88" wrote:

True to a point, but not completely. give up 500 yards and only 17-21 points would be more fortuitous than solid D.

Bend, but don't break is good enough to win in the NFL.

"porky88" wrote:

I can live with this statement. But are we talking about "good enough" or "dominate"? Big difference. Good enough is C to C+. Dominate is B+ to A.

Looking at stats never gives you an indication of how well someone or something is. Watch the team and this was a much better defense.

The two areas that hurt the Packers most a year ago was the pass rush and run defense.

"porky88" wrote:

AGREED! I never said it was not.

Matt Forte had 25 carries for 55 yards.

Cutler was sacked twice and pressured all day long.

"porky88" wrote:

these are stats. YOU can't use them. If I can't use the yards accumulated. :tongue3:

The long ball is going to happen when you blitz that much. That's the type of risk you take when you pressure the QB.

"porky88" wrote:

I understand and agree. Nevertheless You dont give a pass and say it doesn't matter. It is a gamble defense. You look for more "plus" plays than "minus" plays. The plays I am speaking about were minus. receivers wide open due to the attempt at pressuring the QB. It happens.
I scored those down.

To talk down the defense because it's not as good as say Pittsburgh or Tennessee is ridiculous. There is no such thing as the perfect team. Even the 72 Dolphins weren't perfect, lucky yes, but not perfect.

Tennessee gave up 300-plus yards to Ben Roethlisberger, but the stat that matters most is they held Pittsburgh to 13 points. That's encouraging going forward as is Green Bay giving up 15 points and only one touchdown. The team gave up field goals instead of touchdowns and that's what matters most.

"porky88" wrote:

I did not talk down the defense. I was pleased with the overall effort. I gave them a B maybe C+. There is no doubt that they have the ability to improve. An A or B+ effort means there is little or no need for improve.

The defense won this game. I know Rodgers will get the credit in the end for the big throw, but the D won this game for Green Bay.

"porky88" wrote:

Agreed.
I rated the D higher than the O. My C was for the overall team effort.

LambeauEast
Rookie

15 years ago

#47

Offense - D

Defense - A

Overall - what's that average out to, C+/B-?

Packers_Finland
Registered Topic Starter

15 years ago

#48

There weren't any As offensively. If there was one, Josh Sitton for manhandling Tommie Harris all game long would be the best candidate.

"porky88" wrote:

I agree with the fact that there should be no offensive As, but Sitton manhandling Harris? I remember seeing two replays where Harris only had to push Sitton a little, then then Sitton was out of the play. Luckily those plays were outside runs, but still, manhandling is not the right word. Keeping him in check mostly would be a better phrase.

This is a placeholder

Important Information:

The PACKERSHOME uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More Details Close

Fan Shout

dfosterf (22h) : Make sure to send my props to him! A plus move!

Zero2Cool (23h) : My cousin, yes.

dfosterf (3-Jul) : That was your brother the GB press gazette referenced with the red cross draft props thing, yes?

Zero2Cool (2-Jul) : Packers gonna unveil new throwback helmet in few weeks.

Mucky Tundra (2-Jul) : I know it's Kleiman but this stuff writes itself

Mucky Tundra (2-Jul) : "Make sure she signs the NDA before asking for a Happy Ending!"

Mucky Tundra (2-Jul) : @NFL_DovKleiman Powerful: Deshaun Watson is taking Shedeur Sanders 'under his wing' as a mentor to the Browns QBs

Zero2Cool (30-Jun) : Dolphins get (back) Minkah Fitzpatrick in trade

Zero2Cool (30-Jun) : Steelers land Jalen Ramsey via Trade

dfosterf (26-Jun) : I think it would be great to have someone like Tom Grossi or Andy Herman on the Board of Directors so he/they could inform us

dfosterf (26-Jun) : Fair enough, WPR. Thing is, I have been a long time advocate to at least have some inkling of the dynamics within the board.

wpr (26-Jun) : 1st world owners/stockholders problems dfosterf.

Martha Careful (25-Jun) : I would have otherwise admirably served

dfosterf (25-Jun) : Also, no more provision for a write-in candidate, so Martha is off the table at least for this year

dfosterf (25-Jun) : You do have to interpret the boring fine print, but all stockholders all see he is on the ballot

dfosterf (25-Jun) : It also says he is subject to another ballot in 2028. I recall nothing of this nature with Murphy

dfosterf (25-Jun) : Ed Policy is on my ballot subject to me penciling him in as a no.

dfosterf (25-Jun) : I thought it used to be we voted for the whatever they called the 45, and then they voted for the seven, and then they voted for Mark Murphy

dfosterf (25-Jun) : Because I was too lazy to change my address, I haven't voted fot years until this year

dfosterf (25-Jun) : of the folks that run this team. I do not recall Mark Murphy being subject to our vote.

dfosterf (25-Jun) : Ed Policy yay or nay is on the pre-approved ballot that we always approve because we are uninformed and lazy, along with all the rest

dfosterf (25-Jun) : Weird question. Very esoteric. For stockholders. Also lengthy. Sorry. Offseason.

Zero2Cool (25-Jun) : Maybe wicked wind chill made it worse?

Mucky Tundra (25-Jun) : And then he signs with Cleveland in the offseason

Mucky Tundra (25-Jun) : @SharpFootball WR Diontae Johnson just admitted he refused to enter a game in 41° weather last year in Baltimore because he felt “ice cold”

Zero2Cool (24-Jun) : Yawn. Rodgers says he is "pretty sure" this be final season.

Zero2Cool (23-Jun) : PFT claims Packers are having extension talks with Zach Tom, Quay Walker.

Mucky Tundra (20-Jun) : GB-Minnesota 2004 Wild Card game popped up on my YouTube page....UGH

beast (20-Jun) : Hmm 🤔 re-signing Walker before Tom? Sounds highly questionable to me.

Mucky Tundra (19-Jun) : One person on Twitter=cannon law

Zero2Cool (19-Jun) : Well, to ONE person on Tweeter

Zero2Cool (19-Jun) : According to Tweeter

Zero2Cool (19-Jun) : Packers are working on extension for LT Walker they hope to have done before camp

dfosterf (18-Jun) : E4B landed at Andrews last night

dfosterf (18-Jun) : 101 in a 60

dfosterf (18-Jun) : FAFO

Zero2Cool (18-Jun) : one year $4m with incentives to make it up to $6m

dfosterf (18-Jun) : Or Lions

dfosterf (18-Jun) : Beats the hell out of a Vikings signing

Zero2Cool (18-Jun) : Baltimore Ravens now have signed former Packers CB Jaire Alexander.

dfosterf (14-Jun) : TWO magnificent strikes for touchdowns. Lose the pennstate semigeezer non nfl backup

dfosterf (14-Jun) : There was minicamp Thursday. My man Taylor Engersma threw

dfosterf (11-Jun) : There will be a mini camp practice Thursday.

Zero2Cool (11-Jun) : He's been sporting a ring for a while now. It's probably Madonna.

Martha Careful (10-Jun) : We only do the tea before whoopee, it relaxes me.

wpr (10-Jun) : That's awesome Martha.

Mucky Tundra (10-Jun) : How's the ayahuasca tea he makes, Martha?

Martha Careful (10-Jun) : Turns out he like older women

Martha Careful (10-Jun) : I wasn't supposed to say anything, but yes the word is out and we are happy 😂😂😂

Mucky Tundra (10-Jun) : I might be late on this but Aaron Rodgers is now married

Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2025 Packers Schedule

Sunday, Sep 7 @ 3:25 PM

LIONS

Thursday, Sep 11 @ 7:15 PM

COMMANDERS

Sunday, Sep 21 @ 12:00 PM

Browns

Sunday, Sep 28 @ 7:20 PM

Cowboys

Sunday, Oct 12 @ 3:25 PM

BENGALS

Sunday, Oct 19 @ 3:25 PM

Cardinals

Sunday, Oct 26 @ 7:20 PM

Steelers

Sunday, Nov 2 @ 12:00 PM

PANTHERS

Monday, Nov 10 @ 7:15 PM

EAGLES

Sunday, Nov 16 @ 12:00 PM

Giants

Sunday, Nov 23 @ 12:00 PM

VIKINGS

Thursday, Nov 27 @ 12:00 PM

Lions

Sunday, Dec 7 @ 12:00 PM

BEARS

Sunday, Dec 14 @ 3:25 PM

Broncos

Friday, Dec 19 @ 11:00 PM

Bears

Friday, Dec 26 @ 11:00 PM

RAVENS

Saturday, Jan 3 @ 11:00 PM

Vikings