Content
X

Create Account

Or log in with Facebook

X

Log in

Or log in with Facebook

Gut Reactions: 2014 Week Eight vs The Saints

By Category

Gut Reactions: 2014 Week Eight vs The Saints

Saints receiver Brandin Cooks gets by Packers cornerback Tramon Williams for a touchdown by  Derick E. Hingle—USA TODAY Sports.

Saints receiver Brandin Cooks gets by Packers cornerback Tramon Williams for a touchdown by Derick E. Hingle—USA TODAY Sports.

  • Dear Father, I'm not a praying man, but if you're up there and you can hear me, please make Rodgers' hammy ok. 
  • And while you're at it, make TJ Lang's injury end up being much better than it looked with him standing there on crutches. 
  • The Packers seemed like a desperate team, with the pass to Peppers, the onside kick, going for it on their own 32. 
  • And this echoes the Week One matchup with the Seahawks, where Mike seemed scared to death at the thought of challenging Richard Sherman with Jordy Nelson. Mike - you have some really good players. They can win their matchups against other really good players if you will just help put them in a position to succeed. 
  • Case in point - I know we all got very excited when Julius Peppers ran back that interception for a touchdown vs the Vikings. But his drop in the endzone was the look of a man who has never played tight end in an NFL game. The ball got into his body like you see countless guys do in training camp before you cut them. It wouldn't be so frustrating if this team wasn't loaded with a bevy of offensive skill position players who are trained and compensated handsomely to make that catch. 
  • Guion and Pennel did work on that 4th down stop. 
  • Lane Taylor and the offensive line did not when the Saints returned the favor and stopped the Packers 4th down attempt.
  • Davante Adams has to keep crossing on the route where Rodgers tried to hit him on the run and that ended in an interception. 
  • Bryan Bulaga was really streaky tonight. There were plays where he was beaten off the ball and manhandled and then there was a stretch where he was pitching a shutout. 
  • I don't think having Shields and Burnett would have necessarily made a huge difference, but it was clear the Saints wanted to run the ball and then take advantage of House and Hyde with play action. 
  • That offensive PI call on Adams was an absolute joke. 
  • It's hard to get too much out of the second half after Rodgers was hurt. I get he wants to stay out there, but Mike left him in one series too long for my liking. 
  • Judging by my Twitter feed, I can already tell that Packers fans are completely freaking out. As QB1 said so well - relax. The Packers played the Saints tough for a half and then the wheels fell off. Penalties. Bad bounces. It happens, especially in that building. There's a whole lot of season left.
  • Perfect timing for the bye week. Packers need to get guys like Datone Jones, Sam Shields, and Morgan Burnett back and hit the second half stretch of the season as healthy as possible. 
  • Oh, and again, if you're up there big guy, make Rodgers' hammy alright. 
  • Go Pack Go. 
  • Like Like
  • 0 points

Fan friendly comments only: off Comments (110) This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.

TommyG's picture

This is the team we have. We are capable of destroying average and below teams lead by average QBs. Against teams with a talented QB we don't have the defense to compensate.

Please let AR be okay.

Please let some bounces go our way

I hated the call to pass to peppers. MM is a fool for making that call.

Drew brees owns us. He just does.

In five weeks we will have forgotten about this game, just like the Seattle debacle.

When is the next let down?

PackerAaron's picture

Cam Newton is a talented QB.

KenEllis's picture

But I am pretty sure Cam played without any RBs against GB, no?

jeremyjjbrown's picture

Cam's game was also still limited by his ankle at the time.

Packer_Pete's picture

Usually agree with you. Not on this one. I am living down here in NC, and hence see a lot of the Panthers. Newton is a great athlete but not really a football player. And not more than an average QB. Carolina is a pretty decent running team when healthy, and Olson is a great TE, all that makes Newton's life easier. I think if you put him on a team that's not as good running then you see someone who is not accurate, does take too long to throw the ball, and get's happy feet once he gets a little pressure.

jbromusic's picture

drew brees owns us??? like on september 8, 2011 when we beat the saints 42-34 and on september 30, 2012 when we beat them 28-27. is that what you mean?

Klincker's picture

not to start a fight, but the graphic that NBC showed of the passing yards Brees has had in all of his games vs Packers, kinda tells an interesting story.

jbromusic's picture

the only story that really matters is the one told on the scoreboard at the end of the game and it looks pretty even to me

TommyG's picture

Yup, I said drew brees owns us. Look at his numbers even in our victories. That guy is scary good against us. Even when he played with San Diego he had fantastic numbers against us. Yes, the final scoreboard is what matters most. This shows how important our offense is to our success as our defense is historically useless against this QB.

Evan's picture

Drew Brees is scary good against pretty much everyone, especially at home.

4thand1's picture

Exactly Evan. Brees and the Saints are now 12-0 in prime time games at home.

barutanseijin's picture

Packers got their butts kicked. Saints were the better team on both sides of the ball and on the sidelines.

jbromusic's picture

i wouldn't say that. the first half was very even with both offenses rolling and both defenses giving up a massive amount of yards. the wheels came off when rodgers tweaked his hammy. it's like the entire team just gave up after his injury.

barutanseijin's picture

They lost by three touchdowns and got beat in the trenches. Rodgers' leg wasn't much of a factor. Subpar line play was.

And lots of crap teams hang on in the first half. That means nothing. The better teams keep going. The Packers couldn't.

jbromusic's picture

the game was much closer than the final score. you should re-watch it because it was neck and neck up until rodgers' injury.

HankScorpio's picture

"Rodgers' leg wasn't much of a factor. "
================================

We watched a different football game. I'm not sure if NBC beamed the fake game into my house or yours. But Rodgers hammy tweak was the absolute turning point in what was looking like a shootout that wouldn't be decided until very late.

At least on the game that progressed on my TV

Tundraboy's picture

Absolutely. Short of Rodgers immediately going out of game, the change in momentum was painfully immediate and obvious. And we all saw it it was like a car running out of gas going uphill.

barutanseijin's picture

The guy ran for a td with the supposedly crippling hamstring twinge. Not buying this excuse.

HankScorpio's picture

Barut,

Your buy-in is not required for something to be true.

Rodgers sure looked like he wasn't moving very well to me, even on that TD run--with the field so wide open that you or I could have ran that in. And just about everyone else I've heard comment on the matter said the same about Rodgers movement.

His throwing motion was off as he wasn't planting his feet like normal, either.

McCarthy admitted as much after the game that much of the playbook was thrown out after the injury. I don't think they went downfield once post-injury. Which is problematic when trying to erase a deficit.

Lastly, look at the numbers. 130+ QB rating before. 45 after.

It doesn't get much more obvious. Whether it was a factor or not is not so much in question...it's whether they should have just surrendered and gone with Flynn.

barutanseijin's picture

Lots of rationalizations and excuses here, but that's pretty much it.

Bohj's picture

Glass half empty:
- Wth bulaga. Are you still injured?
- Convert on 1st and goal please.
- 7.4 yards per carry. Run d still needs work.
Like......a ton of work.
- No going for it in our territory. Not ever with a QB that will make you pay. So upset at that.
- There weren't a ton of excuses like injuries and flags that you can throw at this one.........they beat us. By three tuddys. That's legit.

Glass half full:
- The league is wierd. Panthers who we spanked made the seahawks look pedestrian. Apparently rothlisburger is in Superbowl form? Arizona leading that division? Oh....and Brady has lost something. And so has manning. And so has brees. Only.......not.
- This is the least amount of injuries we've had at the halfway point by far in forever.
- I kinda like that we were humbled a bit. Make us work harder for the second half.
- Rookies making rookie mistakes. Haha linsley and Adams all had their share. Better now than when we're making our postseason run.
- Saints. Really gonna doubt them for the whole season? So many picked them to win the Superbowl before season start.
- One of the losses I chalked up before the season. Just thought we would be more competitive. Even predicted a win before this game off of last four game high. Humble pie is good for this team.
- Thankyou bye.
- I figured three losses by now. Totally OK with it. Still room to grow.
- Go pack

HankScorpio's picture

"- There weren't a ton of excuses like injuries and flags that you can throw at this one.........they beat us. By three tuddys. That's legit."

3 injured defensive starters (4 if you count Raji) and QB1 tweaking his hammy sounds like legit injury "excuses" to me. Once Rodgers started compensating for the injury on his throwing motion, the game was not the same. The replacements for Shields and Burnett should be seeking treatment for 3rd degree burns today....which was made almost inevitable by the complete lack of pressure on Drew Brees...which Jones might have been able to alter to some degree.

The PI on Davante Adams was duplicated by Jimmy Graham on his TD catch. One was called, one was not. I really don't think either was a foul. But call the game the same way on both sides. It could have meant 4 more for GB and 4 less for NO. Not a big deal given the final score but the game was all about momentum. And both calls gave momentum to NO.

The PI call on Davon House for Bradin Cooks running into House was atrocious and another huge momentum swing. Basically, House was flagged for playing defense the way everyone is taught from the very lowest level of football. Get good position and then use that leverage to ensure the ball hits the turf. The ref that threw that flag ought to be immediately dismissed from further part-time employment in the NFL.

Still, I agree the Saints were a better team on this day. But I don't think they are a better team. Put it this way...with a 10 game series in the Superdome and another in 10 game series in Lambeau, the Packers would win more in NO than NO would win in GB.

Idiot Fan's picture

Yeah, MM said after the game that a large chunk of the offensive game plan had to be removed after Rodgers hurt his hamstring.

Packer_Pete's picture

while the Adams PI and the House PI were both BS, Graham did absolutely nothing wrong. he did not extend his arms like Adams did. So it was not the same.
I would say the secondary was real bad yesterday. Williams was atrocious. He let anybody run by him and then tried to close the gap. So did House. HHCD couldn't tackle a tackling dummy yesterday. Hyde is too slow. I don't think Hayward made mistakes, but neither did he do anything noteworthy or positive. Just an overall bad day. Happens. Just clean yourself up and play on next game.

Nerd's picture

Definitely seemed to me the officials helped out the Saints quite a bit.

But we do this. We find ways to lose.

bratwursted's picture

Bye week is well timed. My liver thanks the NFL schedule makers.

Klincker's picture

I didnt mind the Peppers being on offense, but shouldve left him in the backfield. On-side kick in the first half, not surprising that he did that, but turned out to be another unnecessary gamble. Those two calls were early enough that you could recover, if they dont work out (and of course didnt). But, going for it on 4th down, was the biggest mistake. On your side of the 50, and still in the 3rd quarter. Reckless call. Simply punt it away, and give your defense a chance on THEIR side of the field, minimum at their 20 Make them drive 80 yards. You hadnt stopped them all game. And you are giving them a short field? Again, its MM out-thinking himself, and trying to make things happen. Patience, MM. Stay the course.

Nerd's picture

I was all for trying Peppers at TE, but don't get him started on his first play in a clutch situation like that.

Where was that bullshit last week when we were up by 30? Get him some reps man, he obviously was too tense to catch the ball comfortably there.

DrealynWilliams's picture

Let's not make excuses. That ball was catchable (is that a word)?

Packer_Pete's picture

exactly. At the same time, Quarless should've caught his ball as well as he should've shielded the ball with his body and prevented the S from punching it out. I was excited when Peppers lined up wide. He was much bigger than the defender.

DrealynWilliams's picture

"I was excited when Peppers lined up wide"

Whaaat!? Who are you telling!? I was pumped! I seen nothing wrong with that play.

TommyG's picture

Would you also be excited if Rodgers lined up at DL? The TE rodgers that is. I liked it when I saw Peppers in the backfield. I think having a powerful guy like that as a lead blocker is an outstandinig idea, and is one we have had a lot of success with in the past. Lacy running behind peppers may have worked all night.

DrealynWilliams's picture

"Would you also be excited if Rodgers lined up at DL? The TE rodgers that is."

I don't know if you're trying to be a d**k or are being serious.

Nerd's picture

Aaron was unable to step up or into those throws.

I felt like those throws were awkwardly timed and forced.

Tundraboy's picture

It was too strong a pass because it was the wrong play. A quick slant? Stupid waste of a down.

Tundraboy's picture

I agree. but I do not think he was tense, just a hard quick slant pass that is not easy even for a true receiver who does it more often. In the big picture though, NO scores a quick tying touchdown. Lacy runs his ass off to get it to the 3 . and it takes 3 plays to go nowhere. Too much momentum at stake to do anything but score the touchdown. That changed everything. Tells the other team that even when they can not stop us, we probably will do something stupid to help them.

Allan Murphy's picture

next the bears @ home ......

4thand1's picture

you suck skippy. Comparing you to skip bayless is an insult to skip bayless.

jmac34's picture

There are some games you hate to miss and there are some that you are glad you did. This is one of the latter

Mojo's picture

I knew it was going to be a bad day when the Falcons booted away a 21 point lead in the third quarter.

I'm not panicking, but man, is our run defense lousy. Gapping holes up the middle all day.

And if that wasn't bad enough, our pass defense was nearly as bad. People wide open all over the place. I'm not a fire Capers person, but something's not working. Minimal pass rush. Wide open running lanes and receivers open in the flats all night long. I've seen this too often over the past few years.

Hate to say it, but until something changes on D, this team will never make a long run in the playoffs.

HankScorpio's picture

"I'm not a fire Capers person, but something's not working. Minimal pass rush. Wide open running lanes and receivers open in the flats all night long. I've seen this too often over the past few years."
=========================================

We've all seen it too much over the last few years. But not so much this year, aside from tonight and the season opener.

This defense is better than the last few years, IMO. To be sure, it didn't show up so much last night. But even on a horrible night with no pressure and pass lanes galore, they held the Saints out of the end zone in the first half (mostly), which gave the offense a chance to make the game go differently. The offense could not convert their own red zone chances against a pretty porous defense in their own right.

I guess I'm saying the last 5 weeks have given the defense a little slack, in my book. I think they'll regroup, get healthy and play much better.

DrealynWilliams's picture

I Agree. This loss damn sure isn't on the defense. This game should have been put away some time in the 1st half. Rodgers and Co. was playing like Madden 99 overall players -- just couldn't score TDs.

HankScorpio's picture

"This loss damn sure isn't on the defense. "

I would add the word "alone" to that sentence. Because the defense sure wasn't leading the way to a big road win. But 28-16 at half looks a whole lot different than 16-16 at the half. Even 24-16 means the Saints are the ones that might start to press a little.

And we saw how things can go downhill when you start to press. Unfortunately, it was the Packers doing the pressing.

DrealynWilliams's picture

I think it's unfair to expect the defense we had that night to play that good for all 4 quarters against an offense like that.

Wenis's picture

Martyball strikes again. Just think of the utter destruction that Brady will bring down on this team. I can just see the deer in the headlights look that we have been so accustomed to. :)

Nerd's picture

Definitely seemed that Mike was playing scared. Again.

4thand1's picture

maybe they'll bench him again, you suck

briank029's picture

There is absolutely no reason to freak out right now. Every team has bad games. The defense is a little suspect, but they have shown that they can be very solid at times. This defense has a lot of new faces this year and there is still a lot of time to grow. If they are still giving up 500 yards a game in December, then it is time to panic. Make the playoffs with a healthy team. That is the key. Last year, half the defense was hurt, including Clay Matthews, and they still only lost by a last second field goal to a top notch 49ers team. This is the NFL. There are no guarantees.

Idiot Fan's picture

The D had a bad game, no doubt about it. But we had a lot of little things go wrong at exactly the wrong times, whereas they didnt. Their receiver pops the ball up in the air, and it falls into his arms on the ground, ours does the same thing (twice) and it ends up as INT. Adams gets called for OPI, Graham does not. Costly penalties in the red zone kill drives. Hoch does a BS spot review. Hoch does a hideous DPI call for 40+ yards. It all added up and the game got out of hand.

All year I've been concerned about the run D, and I definitely still am. Otherwise, I don't think there's anything new to freak out about. Except maybe injuries.

Nerd's picture

Capers WANTS teams to run against us. He wants to have a bad Dline, to bait teams into running.

That's the new experiment on D. "It's a passing league. You win by throwing the ball."

HankScorpio's picture

". and that they, again, showed that they can't beat high-level teams."

As your definition of "high-level team" seems to hinge in large part on whether the Packers won or lost to a particular team, I'm not so concerned about this.

Carolina is in a virtual tie for first in the NFC South with NO---after beating NO for the South crown last year. According to you, Carolina is not a high-level team and the Saints are. I see no logic to that assessment beyond it being used as a tool for your chicken little routine.

aj's picture

I think it's important to keep things in perspective. This game only counts as a single loss ina 16 game schedule. We'll be ok guys! Rodgers was visibly uncomfortable after that run. Sometimes, you sacrifice the battle to win the war. The ultimate goal is to get into the playoffs healthy, ready to make a deep playoff run. I really wanted Rodgers pulled right after he pulled up limp. It would have been awesome to win this game, but not at the price of putting Rodgers in a compromising position. The Saints got us today, but we shot ourselves in the foot multiple times. We're a talented team that still has as good a shot as any team to bring home the Lombardi when healthy. GPG!

Nerd's picture

"It's only one loss." That's what people say every time we find ways to lose, despite being the better team.

Mojo's picture

If Lang is out for awhile, I wouldn't hesitate putting Tretter in at guard. Taylor was awful. In time, Tretter will be one of our best o-lineman.

The performance of the D makes it impossible to put a positive spin on this game. NO had 495 yards. These type of games have occurred far to often in recent years to think the D has turned a corner. And it's not the Brees type QB's, but the run-option Qb's too. Teams move down the field way to easily against this team. We've made mediocre RB's seem like all pros. Tired of it.

Samson's picture

"The performance of the D makes it impossible to put a positive spin on this game."

You're right. Worse part is that I can't see who on the D is going to step up the rest of the season to drastically improve the defense. Both Perry & D. Jones were suppose to be a big part of a good D by this time. --- Neither are worthy of their draft status.

DrealynWilliams's picture

So, those red zone stops weren't impressive? If we scored just once or twice when we were supposed to you can forget about the Saints rushing game.

We beat ourselves more than the Saints beat us. That's how I'm looking at it.

Benjamin Peterson's picture

Regardless if they beat us, or we beat ourselves, the Pack didn't consistently put themselves in a position to come away w/ a victory. Yes, the defense forced field goals in the first half, but at some point a defense has to dictate tempo and put pressure on an opposing offense, unfortunately that didn't happen last ni and the result was a Packer offense that had to be perfect, and was far from it.

HankScorpio's picture

"Worse part is that I can't see who on the D is going to step up the rest of the season to drastically improve the defense"

I would argue the defense does not need "drastic" improvement if you look beyond this one game and look at all 8 games (so far).

As far as stepping up, here is a list: Datone Jones, Letroy Guion, Mike Daniels, Julius Peppers, Clay Matthews, Nick Perry, Mike Neal, Morgan Burnett, Ha-Ha Clinton Dix, Micah Hyde, Tramon Williams, Sam Shields, Davon House & Casey Hayward. Each and every one has shown themselves capable of making big plays. Game altering plays. That none did yesterday is not the end of the world.

It's just one game out of 16.

Samson's picture

It's been 'one game out of sixteen' now since season 2010.

You're just tossing out the 'old' excuses again.
The D sucks & will again come playoff time. Unfortunately, that'll mean another one & done. ---- Same problems 4 years running.

Tundraboy's picture

Right attitude. All things considered not end of world. No Shields, just goes to show this team always gets out of sync when they lose a player before they right themselves. Frustrating reality because they are not deep enough to lose a player and play every game with the need of several players having to step up, I looked at NO and how their O line played and they are consistent. We have our moments and are not.

tm_inter's picture

I understand Tretter can be activated after week 8. The Packers should do that. Tretter can help at all positions on the offensive line.

jbromusic's picture

i just hope tretter can play guard because lane taylor can't

ballark's picture

> It never sits well with me when the Packers get pushed around, and tonight they were manhandled. Paging Mike Daniels.
> Zero pass rush. You give Brees all day, you lose.
> Zero run defense. Again, manhandled.
> Bad game for Bahktiari. A couple tough penalties and a lot of getting beat.
> Richard Rodgers made some grabs but I still miss Finley.
> Great game from Eddie Lacy. Did not go down easy.
> Lacy's contributions came via the pass, in space. Packers still can't impose will in the run game. Especially inside the 10.
> Rest up, a desperate Chicago team in 2 weeks who will be playing for their lives.

Nerd's picture

Lacy hasn't been on this team very long, so he still shows up for a full 60 every week.

Richard Rodgers is way, way WAY better than Finley was at this point in his career. He's gonna be very good.

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

I've written a couple of times that if Tretter can back up at guard, then maybe we can jettison the flotsam that is Lane Taylor and Gerhart. Actually, Taylor played better than I thought he would. His pass pro wasn't terrible.

I have to agree that House and Tramon had rough nights, but really, only 3 QB hits and 2 sacks on Brees is insufficient. Brees had all day. (Rodgers had good protection for the most part). And with NO's backs averaging 7.2 yards, it is not surprising if the LBs and secondary bit on too many play actions (that is hard to see just watching on TV). I am not surprised that the run D was bad, but I did think GB would get consistent pressure on Brees. Looked like NO was ready for the Nascar defense.

PackerAaron's picture

"Like I've said a million times..."

You've said a lot of things a million times. Hence why most of what you say is dismissed as more often than not you've been proven incorrect.

I love how you have to twist yourself in knots to justify your nonsense. "Last time they won a game against a team that ended with a winning record" - never mind that the Saints currently don't have one. It was this particular matchup on this particular day that did the Packers in - not some mythical "better team" that you've concocted in your head to justify your enduring pessimism.

The Giants got blown out in prime time in that building a few years ago and went on to win the Super Bowl. This was one game. What matters is getting healthy and playing better football in December.

But as usual, you will continue your Chicken Little nonsense after every loss and pull your lack of accountability after every win.

Idiot Fan's picture

That's the thing about always saying that we're not good enough to win the Superbowl - most years you will be right because it's really hard to win a Superbowl, so you feel smart. But when you're wrong nobody cares because we just won the Superbowl.

dullgeek's picture

Cow has been very good at predicting 8 of the 3 losses.

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

"Cow has been very good at predicting 8 of the 3 losses." Dullgeek

Dullgeek - excellent writing. Simple, concise, hilarious and devastating.

murphy's picture

"Face it - this team is one Lang fumble recovery away from being 4-4."

Or 1 Rodgers unharmed hammy/Peppers catch/Quarless deflection down/Ed Hochuli not doing his best "Tripplette impression" away from being 6-2. If you get to cherry-pick, so do we.

The turning point in this game was an injury to #12. Until then, the game was a field goal track meet.

murphy's picture

Is it more comical than your cherry-picking of particular occurrences that support your position, while conveniently ignoring any that don't?

There were many reasons for the loss. The Saints being a "far superior team" is not among them. Are they better than their record suggests?

Probably, but the simple fact is that this game was tight and both defenses were getting steamrolled between the goal lines until Rodgers came up gimpy and half of the offensive playbook was set on fire. Suddenly the Packers' offense was sputtering while the Saints' kept on going.

Would the Pack have come out on top with four quarters of a healthy Rodgers? They absolutely could have, and if you can't see it I don't know what to tell you.

Tundraboy's picture

Thats right. Cuts both ways

4thand1's picture

if if if skippy. If the pilgrams shot a cat on thanksgiving, we'd all be eating -ussy instead of turkey.

TommyG's picture

I'm using this at work today!

RCPackerFan's picture

I'm not surprised they lost. Going into the SuperDome and winning is not easy. Teams have to be pretty flawless to go in and win and the Packers weren't.

I really think what killed the defense last night was playing without 3 starters. Jones, Shields, and Burnett. I'm not sure which hurt worse between Shields or Burnett, but the way Burnett has played and how the defense got ran on, I would say losing Burnett was a bigger loss. And are we overrating Hyde? Is he a role player only?

The 2 injuries that changed the game though were to Rodgers and Lang.

The refs did the Packers no favors. I won't say they cost the Packers the game, but there was a number of missed calls and wrong calls. 2 penalties that could have changed the outlook is the PI on Adams, and the PI on House. Both IMO were horrible calls. Also how many times was our pass rushers being held?

The scheduling gods are doing us a favor this year again. The bye week couldn't have come at a better time.

barutanseijin's picture

Hyde plays hard, but the results are so-so. He always seems a step slower than he needs to be.

MarkinMadison's picture

As a life-long Hawkeye fan I can safely say that it is rare that a true physical talent slips by the big boys in the recruiting process these days. Probably most every Big Ten team can say the same thing. Daniels has the heart of a lion, but he is the runt of the litter. Hyde is great, but he is a step too slow to play cornerback at the NFL level. Again, he was tried at safety a bit at Iowa and did not naturally take to the position. Hopefully with NFL coaching he can become a good NFL safety, but he'll never be a pro bowl contender.

DrealynWilliams's picture

I want to say Shields was a bigger loss than Burnett. Shields is a playmaker. The 1-2 chances House had a chance for a pick I think Shields would have came away with since he's much quicker and faster. Those bomb attempts damn sure wouldn't have been so easy for sure.

Burnett would have for sure helped in the run defense,but the running defense only became a problem when WE didn't handle business in the red zone.

Pack12's picture

Believe it or not the sky is not falling. The Saints are very tough at home just like the Seahawks. I have seen them make both Brady and Manning look pretty bad in New Orleans. What I am concern about is McCarthy's game calling. Onside kicks and overall desperate play calling. The good news is that the bye week is here which will help get a lot of players healthy. The other good news is that both the Saints and the Seahawks will probably not have home field advantage in the playoffs. If the Packers do play them again it will be at Lambeau Field.

Idiot Fan's picture

I thought the same thing at first, but then I realized that if they make the playoffs, it will likely be as division winner. If lions take the north and the packers take a WC, we could be playing there again. Perhaps with Hoch as ref.

Pack12's picture

Packers have two tough games left and both are at home. The Eagles on November 16 and the Patriots on November 30. These could go either way or a split. The Lions play at Lambeau on the last day of the season. I am counting on the Lions to lose a couple. They also have not won in Green Bay since 1991. I am counting on the Packers to win the division.

Pack12's picture

You're brilliant. LOL!

JimTaylor31's picture

No reason to push the panic button at all. Just the way the league is. There are no dominate teams and it will all come down to who gets hot in December & January. We have known for a long time that the defense can be spotty and has a huge hole at ILB. The better OCs and QBs will take advantage of our weaknesses and Capers "schemes" to try to cover those weaknesses. If we get most everybody back after the bye we'll be fine. Just have to get on a roll at the right time and we have a shot.

DrealynWilliams's picture

Not being able to tackle showed up again.

House

HHCD

Tramon

Benjamin Peterson's picture

Coming into this game, I didn't expect a victory, due to a number if factors (already mentioned in other posts), but the way in which they lost bothers me. I hate when Packer games become arena league games because the defense can't be counted on to make a stop. I understand MM's decision to onside because he's trying to break serve. The way the defense played, who cares if the Saints get the ball atthe 20 or the 40. On the flip side, the arena scenario puts pressure on the offense to score every possession and too many red zone mistakes screwed the pooch. This was an all-around team effort in loss.
- Peppers in at the goal line?
- Receivers cutting off routes leading to tipped INT
- Taylor getting completely pushed off the line on 4th down
- gashed line play (Ingram? Really?)
-more missed tackles
-Lacy running out of shotgun at the goal line week after week. What's wrong with a fullback with also a play action or roll out mixed in?
- play calling isn't predictable, per se, but the formations are
- that quick slant to Cobb in first half has been missing from the offense for awhile, great to see it back- now use it more!
- defense has got to harass an opposing QB and ours doesn't. - can't beat quality QBs w/out it

But... I'll take 5-3 with the hope of getting hot going into playoffs. Unfortunately the level of play last night seemed repetitive of what Packer fans have seen the past 3 years. I hope it corrects itself going forward.

Bearmeat's picture

Look: We had 2 very unlucky INTs, 2 or 3 VERY bad PI calls, a failed 4th and short on our own 40 and a bad/unnecessary onside kick. I'm not saying those things weren't GBs fault, but it's not likely that all those breaks are going to go the opposition's way every time. If we play these guys in Lambeau in the playoffs, the outcome will be different.

We'll still win the division. We might even get a bye.

That said, the breakdowns on run D are VERY concerning. Unlike the things above, that IS repeatable. And I'm starting to think that is going to be the reason this edition of the Green Bay Packers will get bounced by a good running team (SEA/SF/DAL) in the playoffs.

Benjamin Peterson's picture

This may not be a popular thought, and we're spoiled, but winning divisions isn't enough anymore. I don't want to be the Braves of the 90s/early 2000s (14 straight division titles, one WS win). With Rodgers at the healm, I want at least one more Super Bowl, but that won't happen with how this team/defense is currently constructed. Same issues the last few years...

Evan's picture

Raises hand.

Benjamin Peterson's picture

I'll raise my hand!

murphy's picture

Hand raised.

Bohj's picture

You can have your "dominant team" opinion all you want. The best roster and best team doesn't always win it all. That's why the league is awesome. You think watching Alabama win college every year is fun? I don't. Let's assess the last 6 Superbowls.

2014 seahawks.....maybe best roster.
2013 49ers best roster.......lost
2012 patriots best roster.....lost to a scrappy giants
2011 Atlanta/pittsburgh best rosters....lost to wildcard packers
2010 Colts best roster.....lost
2009 Pittsburgh best roster....won
2008 Patriots best roster (nearly undefeated) ...lost to a wildcard team

I personally like having a chance and being scrappy at the end. Its better drama. Its a better story. The dominant team always winning.....is in all honesty ....boring. And apparently the underdog seems to win more superbowls in the salary cap era. Good!! Hope the pack gets to steal the division at the end and get hot in the playoffs. That would be ideal... and worse for all of our collective blood pressures. But exciting.

Packer_Pete's picture

hold on - you are predicting 8-8. So they'd have to lose 5 more games. Those 5 above should be for sure losses. Otherwise please enlighten us which game they'll win but which one they'd lose instead...

In any way, I assume that as above list doesn't list all remaining games, that you consider Falcons, Vikings, and Bucs wins already. Alright, that makes 8 wins with the 5 they have already. So if they win against BUF and CHI then they'd end up 10-6, in most years this is enough to end up in the playoffs. If they sneak another one out of the PHI, NE, or DET games, then they'll be 11-5, and that almost certainly means a spot in the playoffs...

But even if not, the Lions will screw up at some point.
@NE
@ARZ
Bears twice
@GB
MIA at home
That means at least 4 losses, if not 5...

Tundraboy's picture

Then see you next year or the draft

HankScorpio's picture

Bohj,

And that's the obvious truth that seems to escape the constant cater-wailing crowd. In the end, what happens in this game or that one during the regular season is irrelevant.

In 2014, the NFL is about parity. It's about making the postseason show and playing well for 3 or 4 weeks once you're in. 2 years ago, I was convinced the Ravens were not even going to make the playoffs in Dec. They ended up with the cool trophy. 2 years before that, everyone said the same about the Packers after they lost at NE with Flynn at the helm for a concussed Rodgers. Not only did they make the playoffs, they won the cool trophy, 3 years before that, the greatest team in history (NE), with the greatest coach (Belichek) and the greatest QB (Brady) lost a chance for the cool trophy and the 2nd undefeated season in SB-ear to a team they had beaten cleanly a few weeks earlier and barely qualified for the postseason.

The Packers don't have to prove anything heading into the playoffs. They just need to win 3 or 4 once they do. If you've been watching how teams win titles lately, you'll know that only one thing matters in the regular season--winning enough games to make the tournament. People that get their underwear in a bunch over regular season games are missing that simple, proven truism.

Get this Packer team, with their passing game playmakers on offense and defense, in to the playoffs and I'll like their chances.

Imma Fubared's picture

I've picked the SB winner every year but one. Not the team name, the team composition that must exist to win: passing game way above average, running game solid, pass defense very good, special teams solid, kicking solid, pass rush way above average.

Only one team, the Ravens have won the SB and did not have all this in place. No passing game to speak of but the defense was so good it over came it.

Right now you have one team that fits the above: Denver.
The Packers are so lacking in the above they will not even make the playoffs.

Bohj's picture

I get your point about rosterism. And I see that denver is a clear favorite based on their level of play. I'm sure you've even picked several winners. But some pieces you're missing in your assessment. You picked the winner of the SB when? Before the game? Before the season? At the halfway point?

Isn't it possible the team can be defined at the end of the season the way they are playing just prior to playoffs? Based on growth. Injury. Everything coming together. Luck. Emergence of young players or replacements.

We may not be good at some of these things now. But there is room for improvement every year. We have the same oline and running back we did last year. Things will gel differently as we head to December. Run game can improve. We have some of the best secondary in the league as a unit....especially when healthy. It will improve with shields and Burnett. Run game d.....yeah....that will take a miracle to help. But I see that as our biggest weakness. If we score early and often like we have been.....running game won't matter nearly as much. Ala 2011.

Our remaining schedule is favorable for a playoff push. That's all that matters. We could grow by then. Or....we may not....but the possibility remains. Its more fun as a fan to have optimism that we will rather than dismiss the season and say its a bust. If its so predetermined....then why watch?

HankScorpio's picture

"I've picked the SB winner every year but one. Not the team name, the team composition that must exist to win: passing game way above average, running game solid, pass defense very good, special teams solid, kicking solid, pass rush way above average.

Only one team, the Ravens have won the SB and did not have all this in place. No passing game to speak of but the defense was so good it over came it."

=====================================
My what great prognosticating abilities you have to pick the SB winner every year but one with such keen insight that might elude a kindergarten child. Pure geenyus.

Of course, you "picked it right" the year you thought you got it wrong, too. Joe Flacco was all world QB for that playoff run. By playing so far above his head he got a nose bleed, the Ravens got a Lombardi and a ridiculously over-priced QB. But for those 4 weeks anyways, the Ravens passing attack took a back seat to nobody.

Other times that you "got it right", I'd say there would have been plenty of disagreement about the eventual SB winner meeting all of those individual criteria in full as November turned into December and on to January.

That's the point. You don't have to show those things all year. You just have to show them in January/February. For the regular season, you just have to show enough to make the tourney.

BTW..what is "solid"? Is it just a mechanism that is vague enough that you can hammer whatever you wish into meeting it while denying whatever else you wish to not be "solid"? Based on your final sentence ("The Packers are so lacking in the above they will not even make the playoffs."), I'm going with the mechanism thing. Because from where I sit and applying your awesome prognostificational criteria, the Packers have every chance of making a run this season. Passing game playmakers on both sides of the ball can take you a long way in this league.

HankScorpio's picture

if they beat PHI or NE i'll shut up..." I SERIOUSLY doubt that.
===============================================

You're not the only skeptic on that.

Packer_Pete's picture

well you thought the Vikings would run all over the Packers D. You also thought that a mobile QB such as Cam Newton would totally shred the Packers D. Why can't we think that the team will beat either the Eagles or Pats or both? The Eagles do not have an elite QB. The Pats may have an elite QB but not an elite D. In fact, that team is not as good as its 6-2 record indicates. I remember a year when Sherman was coach and Matt Bowen and Marques Anderson were the starting safeties, and the Packers went to Boston and beat the living daylight out of the Pats.

HankScorpio's picture

I remember a year when Sherman was coach and Matt Bowen and Marques Anderson were the starting safeties, and the Packers went to Boston and beat the living daylight out of the Pats.
========================================

Yeah, that was the Bryant Westbrook game. They were so beat up at DB, they signed Westbrook off the street despite him being finished two years earlier. And threw him right into the fire. Everyone was bracing for true ugliness.

And somehow, the great Tom Brady was unable to solve the riddle of the patchwork of crappy DBs.

Crazy stuff happens in the NFL.

TommyG's picture

No way Redskins beat Cowboys.

No.
Way.

Come on, Cow, the nfl is drunk this year (especially the NFC side). While I normally would say "no way" to those two match-ups, this season anything is possible.

4thand1's picture

Both my hands are up along with my 2 middle fingers. you suck.

Bohj's picture

For all of the complaining I've seen about the pack not running enough screens and using our backs in the passing option........let's give that part of our game yesterday some major props. Lacy all purpose yards.......yeah.....let's do more of that. I see that part of our game getting stronger as the year goes on. Those were some nice unscouted looks we gave them.

I know McCarthy had some desperate calls in this one....but I do like that we're seeing some new features in the offense every week.

Couple other points.
Good job by the saints offense for having max protect against our pass rushers. Their run ng backs and tight ends did a nice job there. I saw at one point that almost every one of our four rushers were double teamed.

Props to Rob Ryan. He didn't go blitz heavy at all. Must've learned a thing or two about Rodgers over the years. We got our yards but they did tighten things up in their red zone. Two tipped ints didn't help us any though.

Benjamin Peterson's picture

I think MM has gone away from screens and slants the past few years, as his offense has gone more vertical, but still think there's a place for them and it showed last night. Screens were productive and so was a quick slant to Cobb in the first half that went for 30 yards or so. Why not throw more of the slant patterns into the offense? I'd like to see it. I'd also like to see more variety of formations down at the 10 or so. Line up as to give an impression of run OR pass. Shotgun formations are predictable in the play call.

Bohj's picture

A

Lphill's picture

ok COW we see you are in your glory, your Vikings got a lucky win and the Packers lost a game to a desperate team in their house, "move on people nothing to see here," after the bye the Packers will go on another nice winning streak, please to all t he actual Packers fans , stop feeding into the jealous haters here, and there are many. some bad play calling , some questionable flags, thats football. RELAX

Packer_Pete's picture

You are right. We all got sucked into it. There is no point. I believe the Packers will finish at least 10-6 if not 11-5. That should be enough to make the playoffs. Nothing else matters.
And yes, it's quite obvious how the frequency of the haters and fans of other teams suddenly increases once the Packers lose.

Now to the game - for me the actual turning point of the game was not #12's injury. It was when Quarless couldn't prevent the defender to punch the ball out that led to the first INT. The Packers D had stopped the first drive of the Saints after halftime, and the Packers were about to get a TD, or at least another Crosby FG. That's when I expect Quarless to put his body between the ball and a defender. Heaven knows he is big enough. That took the air out of the O, and after that all I saw from #12 was shaking his head.

However, here is what bothered me most about last night's game. Not the on-sides kick, not the Peppers as TE, no. It took the O forever to line up and snap the ball. The most egregious one came after they call a timeout deep in the Saints red zone and then get the snap off with 1 sec left after that TO. And the OL wasn't ready, so #12 took the sack and the O had to settle for a FG. It really ticked me off that they had to take a couple of TOs in the first half when they couldn't line up, and took another delay of game in the 2nd half. And sorry, the job of the QB is to watch the play clock. Clearly #12 needs to show more urgency. Maybe a little too relaxed there... At least in the past it was understandable, he had to constantly correct Finley on where to line up. Now he doesn't have that problem anymore. It's more the constantly switching the play, yet not having the clock in mind.

Lphill's picture

COW just go away , you are disrespectful to the Packers and their fans, stick to your Vikings.

4thand1's picture

No hamstrings hurt. There's a reason the Saints suck on the road and are nearly unbeatable at home. Every really good QB struggles and the team struggles when you can't audibilze in a place like KC, Seattle, and N.O. What happened to your great Colts? Bears? Seattle? Everyone expected a shootout and it was until Lang and Rodgers got hurt. So fuck off, you suck skippy.

Lphill's picture

yes COW the truth that you are a Vikings fan. I dont rag on my team, win or lose I love the Packers ,always have. sorry that your team never won the superbowl, having 4 is better than 0,

Log in to comment, upload your game day photos and more!

Not a member yet? Join free.

If you have already commented on Cheesehead TV in the past, we've created an account for you. Just verify your email, set a password and you're golden.

Or log in with Facebook

 
 
 

Quote

"I firmly believe that any man’s finest hour, the greatest fulfillment of all that he holds dear, is that moment when he has worked his heart out in a good cause and lies exhausted on the field of battle – victorious."
"The Bears still suck!"
"A school without football is in danger of deteriorating into a medieval study hall. "