I'd be ready to give up on Wynn if we had another capable pass-blocking back who can do a little in space. He's been dropping passes and hasn't been pass-blocking all that well this year either. I really hope we target a back this offseason if Jackson takes no strides later this year.

---

Here is my take on your points.

Wynn for Grant. I am not sure Wynn would be more effective in this scheme. He is more of a bruiser. If we can get to more straight ahead running, then I am all for it. If they continue to string out runs with the ZBS then Wynn is not as good.

Oline: College staying at Tackle. No arguement from me. Right now, I am thinking College to the bench. I don't think Wells was better than Spitz, just different. I think Spitz is more physical. I would like to keep Spitz,Wells,Sitton in the center. Keep some continuity and concentrate on the Tackles.

In real games, I haven't seen anything from Bishop that would show he is better than Barnett. Barnett also hasn't shown anything. If anything, i would play Chillar more than either. Also according to MM presser. Bishop is beat up right now.

Blackmon is history now. IR and I doubt that he will make the team next year just for returns. Jordy is nice on KR. He doesn't mess around, just heads up field. Punt returns is up for grabs.

Blitz: 100% agreement. I would rather lose being aggressive, than passive.

Rodgers: I only looked at the 5 sacks Allen was on, but all of them were 3 second sacks. Not much Rodgers really could have done. Not sure about the others. He might be holding a little long now and then, but I am not really to upset about that. To me it looks bad because of the combination of the sacks that he has nothing he could really do anything about.

We need Bigby back. Martin is now injured also. by the way, what the hell is a neck contusion. Sounds like a hicky.

---

Throat contusion.
Bishop hasn't been given much chance, but he's been fairly solid when he was in against the Rams. More time, more evaluation. Barnett has been slacking. He has been getting lots of tackles though. He had the most for us yesterday.
You're stop watch needs fixing on the sacks. :)
The Wynn for Grant idea, well, as I've said it might be best to wait for our OL to be more consistent before changing the RB. We need a RB that has the trust in the staff to get the ball 20 plus times a game. Catches, runs, whatever. Get the RB the ball near two dozen times.

---

With what we have, that RB is Jackson. He has the best mix of the skills to run and catch/run and block.

---

I find this thread a tad reactionary. We were sacked a half-million times last night, but the passing game still accounted for almost 400 yards of offense. It was ABSOLUTELY the most effective way for us to move the ball. The Vikes can sit back with only 7 in the box and still hammer away on your run game. Why would you want to give Grant the ball 20 times in a game where we were consistently moving the ball, even in SPITE of the 8 sacks.

Over the course of last night's game we sucked in pass protection, and I agree, Rodgers needs to get rid of the ball faster. But don't throw away the fact that MANY of the sacks this year have come against four man pass rushes. That's 7 guys in coverage. AND take into account that we've left in either a RB or TE to help on many occasions. That leaves four passing options against seven defenders.

Sure, there are instances when he needs to get rid of the ball ... but the pressure gets there quick with only four guys and the defense has the prohibitive advantage in a Tampa 2 type defense.

---

Reactionary? Yep. Because I want to see a damn improvement instead of the same bullshit over and over again.

I know the facts, I watched the games and I also made a thread about needing to let the OL fend for themselves to leave more passing options for Rodgers to throw the ball too. Covered that one already.

Bottom line, I want the coach to be accountable for this and to do something about it. Is he trying, I bet my ass he is as hard as he can. But I can't help feel he's being too stubborn on some things and its hurting us.

LT
LG
C
RG
RT

LT goes down, we drop our C to LG, and our LG to LT... that weakens the entire left side. Why? Put Lang in there and let the kid prove his worth.

Anyhow, you've said what I've said already, just not in this thread so ... yeah.

---

Zero, I'm just saying that it isn't as simple sometimes as "get rid of the ball faster!" My evidence, as stated, was that on many of the sacks the defense has more defenders than the Packers do options.

Just because you've mentioned it in other threads doesn't mean I can't bring it up in this thread, silly pants (and I don't mean "Silly Pants" as in you're an idiot and I'm being snide -- I mean it in a truly endearing way, like you'd say to your brother when your talking about football ... only if you were talking to your brother about football you probably wouldn't say "silly pants" and if you did it would be in a pejorative sense and he'd probably be within his rights to either smack you in the face or laugh at the fact that that's the best name you could come up with).

All things considered, I agree, Rodgers needs to get rid of the ball. I just want to take into account that in many instances the four man pressure is getting in too quickly and the outnumbered passing options make it difficult.

As for the offensive line shuffling, I'm with you most of the way. Colledge got schooled, so in hindsight your point holds up. But going into the game against Minny I can't say that I'd do it differently, were I McCarthy. You'd really throw a rookie tackle out against Allen? I mean, Colledge isn't a great option but he's an option with at least SOME experience playing tackle at the pro-level.

I just hope we get a healthy, productive Cliffy back and that Tauscher becomes a viable option. I'm not sure how much longer Rodgers can survive.

---

You can only blitz if you've got players that are assignment sure. Especially your Safties - they must know (and get to) their assigned areas.

That is where this team fails. Say what you want about Bigby - but you hardly ever heard his name being called out for not being in the right spot doing his job. The fact that he was half a step behind the player is not as important as the fact that he knew where he was supposed to provide help, and he would get to that area before the ball was thrown.

That sure as hell didn't happen last night, and hasn't since the Bears game. Rouse wasn't assignment sure, Martin wasn't assignment sure, and our next option was Jarret Bush. Need I say more?


Looking back at the play where Brett threw the TD pass to Berrian - look at Al before the snap. He's facing Martin, pointing out what Martin should be doing. As soon as Al turns around, Berrian is running past him and (surprise, surprise) Martin is not where he should have been - over top of Al.

That's not something that should be happening in Week 4. That's inexcusable. And THAT is happening to our starting SS.


I believe it was Capers who said that his scheme has holes that can be exploited, but the key is to bring pressure home and prohibit the QB from having enough time to either recognize the hole, or actually have a receiver settle into the hole. When all the players aren't assignment sure, you end up having many more holes the QB can attack in a short period of time.


My point is simple: there is a reason Capers went away from the blitz. It's because our Safties (after Collins) are not starting caliber players - they are missing assignments and leaving gaps in the field that someone like Brett will (and did) exploit oh so easily.


That above provides a context for Woodson's comments questioning the cutting of Smith today. Smith, despite his style of play, knew his responsibilities in this scheme. Martin, for all his talents, does not even know them, let alone capable of doing them.


This is also the reason why Capers and his Defensive staff (not MM) might be keeping Bishop out. In fire-zone, you need LBs that carry out their assignments to make the thing work. We have seen that while Bishop may be great in run support, he has glaring mistakes that lead to big plays in pass defense.

Barnett, in that context, is getting more reps becuase he has shown to be more assignment sure than Bishop. It may not make a world of difference when facing a team with only one real weapon like the Rams and their RB Jackson, but a team that was thriving on the pass last night... well it could have been a touch worse (not much, though) with Bishop in there.

---

Changes? Why should we change anything? Everything is working just fine.

Anyone know when Bigby is back?

---