Zero2Cool
15 years ago

What are you missing? A special teams tackle when we needed to hold them to bad field position in the 4th quarter.

"Greg C." wrote:



Yes, that was nice. He also got down there on a punt near the goal line, but unfortunately Kapinos landed it in the end zone

"MassPackersFan" wrote:



Some of his punts landed before the end zone, if we had some gunners that could catch the damn ball or knock it back they would have been in the 10 yard line easily. It's annoying how poor we are on that and then everyone just blames the punter because he didn't kick the ball 50 yards and have it stop on a dime.




The punter stands 10-15 yards behind the line of scrimmage.
At first landing, a 45 yard punt has traveled nearly 55-60 yards.
Most gunners can run sub 4.5 40 yard dashes.
Add in the 1.4 seconds it takes to punt the ball and there's no reason at all that we shouldn't have some men down there PROVIDED there is a hang time of 4 seconds or more.

This relates to Bush as he's one of the gunners.
UserPostedImage
Greg C.
15 years ago

What are you missing? A special teams tackle when we needed to hold them to bad field position in the 4th quarter.

"Zero2Cool" wrote:



Yes, that was nice. He also got down there on a punt near the goal line, but unfortunately Kapinos landed it in the end zone

"Greg C." wrote:



Some of his punts landed before the end zone, if we had some gunners that could catch the damn ball or knock it back they would have been in the 10 yard line easily. It's annoying how poor we are on that and then everyone just blames the punter because he didn't kick the ball 50 yards and have it stop on a dime.




The punter stands 10-15 yards behind the line of scrimmage.
At first landing, a 45 yard punt has traveled nearly 55-60 yards.
Most gunners can run sub 4.5 40 yard dashes.
Add in the 1.4 seconds it takes to punt the ball and there's no reason at all that we shouldn't have some men down there PROVIDED there is a hang time of 4 seconds or more.

This relates to Bush as he's one of the gunners.

"MassPackersFan" wrote:



There was at least one that landed inside the five yard line, and nobody was there. I'm not sure if there was a second.

The problem with your math is that you are failing to take into account the fact that the gunners and generally double-teamed and pretty much mugged all the way down the field. They are not just running a 50-yard dash. Not on most plays, anyway. I agree that the Packers could do better in that area, though.
blank
Zero2Cool
15 years ago
How is my my math wrong? If one does not incorporate a variable, it does not mean the math is wrong. It means a variable was not accounted for.

Why must people have to use such hurtful words. My feelings have been shattered. I'm going to take my balls and go home!!!! :P




There was at least two times the ball could have been stopped if our gunners DID THERE JOB! I see other team's gunners doing it every weekend, why can't ours?

I'm tired of the excuses (from whomever) and the blame always put on the punter. And SOME of the blame must fall on him, especially if he's hitting sub 4 second hang time punts.

If our gunners are routinely getting dominated by double team stoppers, change the gunners! There's also the safety valve dude (usually a FB or TE right?) in the back field. He could be replaced with someone faster. Hell, remember Rob Davis? There were times he'd get down there before most others. He was the one snapping the ball.


My point is this ... the amount of touchbacks does not fall solely on the punters behalf. It's a team game and the team needs to step up. Again, if he's routinely hitting 4 or sub 4 second hang times on punts then the majority of it falls on him.

One of the problems with Jon Ryan was (aside from inconsistent) he would out punt the coverage unit with low deep keeps. Kapinos doesn't have half the leg Ryan does (exaggeration) so that shouldn't be a problem.

Bush and Underwood (or whomever the other gunners are rotating in) need to do a better job of getting under the ball and downing it inside the 20 than has been shown this year.
UserPostedImage
Greg C.
15 years ago
I agree, zero, that our gunners could do a better job of fighting off those blocks. I'm not sure how much Bush is at fault for that, though. I don't even know who our other gunner is. Maybe Bush is getting double-teamed and the other guy is not, so it's the other guy who should be making more plays. I just don't know. It's hard to see those guys on TV. I have to admit that I don't have much patience for watching what happens away from the ball.
blank
IronMan
15 years ago
:lurk:
Lynn_Dickey
15 years ago
The point of this thread was that I believed that other teams think Bush is weak, and soon as he is on the field they go after him. I also think he is weak. The other point of this thread was that if we played a good QB with multiple receivers we would have trouble (Vikings, Saints, Cardinals). Post the Steelers, please explain why I am wrong. From JSOnline:

On this day, Bush was exposed for his poor play on the ball and lack of natural instincts playing corner. He gave up the 60-yard touchdown to Wallace, a 54-yard deep ball to receiver Hines Ward and a crucial 20-yard completion to tight end Heath Miller on the game-winning drive.

"One of the things you have to keep doing is coming back," Bush said. "No matter what happens, you have to do that. As a defense we have to have a short memory. They made the last play and that was the difference."

Bush's day got off to a horrible start when he looked back for the ball way too early as Wallace ran a go route down the right sideline. When he looked up, he slowed down and Wallace ran right past him for an easy touchdown.

"I tried to look for the ball," Bush said. "You can't get caught peeking. He's a decent receiver, but I've got to stick to the coverage and keep going."
blank
IronMan
15 years ago

The point of this thread was that I believed that other teams think Bush is weak, and soon as he is on the field they go after him. I also think he is weak. The other point of this thread was that if we played a good QB with multiple receivers we would have trouble (Vikings, Saints, Cardinals). Post the Steelers, please explain why I am wrong. From JSOnline:

On this day, Bush was exposed for his poor play on the ball and lack of natural instincts playing corner. He gave up the 60-yard touchdown to Wallace, a 54-yard deep ball to receiver Hines Ward and a crucial 20-yard completion to tight end Heath Miller on the game-winning drive.

"One of the things you have to keep doing is coming back," Bush said. "No matter what happens, you have to do that. As a defense we have to have a short memory. They made the last play and that was the difference."

Bush's day got off to a horrible start when he looked back for the ball way too early as Wallace ran a go route down the right sideline. When he looked up, he slowed down and Wallace ran right past him for an easy touchdown.

"I tried to look for the ball," Bush said. "You can't get caught peeking. He's a decent receiver, but I've got to stick to the coverage and keep going."

"Lynn_Dickey" wrote:


Lay off the guy already.

(sarcasm)
Lynn_Dickey
15 years ago
I don't mean to go after the guy, its just we have a serious problem if we intend to go anywhere in playoffs. (Besides the Crosby)
blank
Fan Shout
beast (15m) : Merry Christmas 🎄🎁
beast (8h) : Sounds like no serious injuries from the Saints game and Jacobs and Watson should play in the Vikings game
packerfanoutwest (13h) : both games Watson missed, Packers won
Martha Careful (14h) : 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
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I literally just said it.
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
24m / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

34m / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

4h / GameDay Threads / bboystyle

9h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

10h / Random Babble / beast

16h / 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 © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.