Packers Podcast: It Could've Been Worse for Green Bay Secondary

If it weren't for some misfired passes and dropped footballs, the Packers secondary might have gotten torched.

On Monday I joined Bart Winkler of K107 in Fond du Lac for our weekly Green Bay Packers game review. We discussed the team's 24-21 victory over the Minnesota Vikings, including a great effort from Eddie Lacy on the ground, but also where the Packers need to improve, particularly in the secondary.

Listen in...

Streaming audio - Press play

Download Versions: Download Audio Podcast

Free Subscription Option

NFL Categories: 
0 points

Comments (29)

Fan-Friendly This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.
sonomaca's picture

November 24, 2014 at 10:04 am

Tom Brady isn't going to miss his targets like Bridgewater did early.

BTW: I want to see more Jay Elliott. He was getting pressure during his few plays at the end of the first half. He beat the left tackle at least twice with speed rushes. I wonder if he's got any other tricks up his sleeve?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
White92's picture

November 24, 2014 at 12:42 pm

I agree that he'll need another move or two, though I did like the pressures.

Maybe he could learn the hump move and become a real force

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Bearmeat's picture

November 24, 2014 at 11:24 am

If you're going to play that game, there were SEVERAL Teddy B passes that were almost picks too. And a penalty took away another one. IF Teddy were an elite QB, GB would have set up the defense differently. But he's not - so they didn't.

I'm not really worried that Teddy got 200 yards in the game.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
pooch's picture

November 24, 2014 at 05:35 pm

Exactly

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
sonomaca's picture

November 24, 2014 at 12:09 pm

I guess we'll find out next week. The only elite QB the Pack have faced this year, Brees, had no trouble.

The Pats are playing as well as any team right now, and Brady is doing a number on good teams.

I think this one will come down to scheme and coaching. Unfortunately, we might be on the short end of that stick.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
sonomaca's picture

November 24, 2014 at 12:23 pm

Now I know why everyone hates you.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
White92's picture

November 24, 2014 at 12:44 pm

Curious how Capers will attempt to stop Gronkowski.

Any thoughts?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
sonomaca's picture

November 24, 2014 at 01:02 pm

I'd like to see Matthews drop back and, if they try to put a pick on him like they did with Hawk yesterday, have Burnett or HHCD come up. Of course, that creates one-on-one downfield, so you're relying on the pass rush. That means that Daniels and the OLB's are going to have to have a great game.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
sonomaca's picture

November 24, 2014 at 01:36 pm

So, you're just going to let Gronk run across the middle unmolested and unguarded, or is your plan to put Hawk on him. I'll take an 80% Matthews with safety help vs. whatever you propose, which seems to be nothing.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
sonomaca's picture

November 24, 2014 at 01:53 pm

I'm going to say 38.

I'm thinking the Packers weren't showing everything yesterday. They gambled that they'd win the game without flashing all their cards, and it worked. No doubt they've been quietly scheming for this game.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

November 24, 2014 at 05:11 pm

Agree and I would like Richardson part of the safety mix

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
White92's picture

November 24, 2014 at 02:00 pm

Matthews might be the best option with similiar size/speed outside of height.

Someone will have to pick it up on the pass rush for sure.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
FITZCORE1252's picture

November 24, 2014 at 01:28 pm

You have to get contact on Gronk at the LOS, give him a free release and you're begging to get torched.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

November 24, 2014 at 01:40 pm

This Patriots game will be an all hands on deck game. We can't afford to miss Perry, and having Mathews playing less then usual especially on 3rd down. Anytime you have to bring Brad Jones in on 3rd downs, your defense is going to struggle some.

Also, I hope to see Hayward playing a lot more this week then he did last week.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Bearmeat's picture

November 24, 2014 at 04:30 pm

Heyward on Edelman is a great matchup for us. It's one that we should win.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Nick Perry's picture

November 24, 2014 at 07:49 pm

I agree Bearmeat. I saw very little of Hayward Sunday but I think he could do a great job on Elelman. No way will Hyde keep up with him.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
4thand1's picture

November 24, 2014 at 03:45 pm

Packers are so good right now, they can sit starters and still win a divisional game on the road. Brilliant coaching job, doing just enough to win and not sell out the real game plan for NE. MM would a great pool player. The hustle is on. NE won't know what hit em.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
NewNikeShoes's picture

November 24, 2014 at 08:57 pm

no one plans offseason for one game.
They really only start prepping in week 3 of the preseason.
Plus, the packers start off slow anyway.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
4thand1's picture

November 24, 2014 at 09:20 pm

lmao, the sucker took the bait.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
4thand1's picture

November 24, 2014 at 03:47 pm

The hype has begun. All the talk shows are calling this a SB preview. Packers 45 NE 42.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Bearmeat's picture

November 24, 2014 at 04:32 pm

I'm thinking that you are a turd. And that you need some professional help. Seriously. We'd all rest easier if you would go see a shrink.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
NewNikeShoes's picture

November 24, 2014 at 09:06 pm

I don't want to sound like a jerk because I haven't given up hope on you, even though the other intelligent folks have, for good reasons too.
Can you say one positive thing, like ever? For the packers?
Didn't you say the bears and the eagles were gonna blow us out, too?
Are u some kind of attention-hoar, like Madonna?
Honestly, the only team that blew us out was the seahawks. We are actually doing pretty well too, until bulaga got injured. We were beating the saints too, except rodgers got injured. It's a good thing that happened too, cause the packers need that kind of wake-up game. Every team does.
I don't know why you keep denying the talent the packers have. I could also argue they have the most, except for the seahawks, maybe the broncos.
As much as you may think otherwise, the packers are talented. You probably know that too, it's just that your head is so far up your own a** that you can't realize it.

I expect a close game, in which the packers beat the patriots 21-17. (Yes, I thinks it's gonna be a defensive game).

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
rjwh23's picture

November 24, 2014 at 07:27 pm

Would a better long-term outcome involve a New England route of the Packer's D? It seems the defense has been a smoke & mirrors exhibition since 2010 and needs a complete overhaul to complement what the offense can produce. Sometimes a significant step back -- in this case, a defensive embarrassment -- is needed to accept reality, make real changes and be able to advance. I want a GB win but hope this game either confirms they can stay the course on defense or finally realize it's time to start over.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Poppa San's picture

November 24, 2014 at 08:31 pm

You mean a rout like Brees and company laid down? I agree with the smoke and mirrors part. When Capers is forced to blitz against a decent QB, the hole usually seems to be exploited.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
4thand1's picture

November 24, 2014 at 09:25 pm

This is the exact test they need. Play the best and let the chips fall where they may. I expect an offensive shoot out. The nfl is geared for offense and this game is what they want. I see a lot of PI penalties in this one.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Imma Fubared's picture

November 28, 2014 at 09:24 pm

Ya would have helped a LOT if Perry and Datone (the bust brothers) has talent and could stay healthy. Two waisted picks as far as I'm concerned

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
rjwh23's picture

November 24, 2014 at 10:02 pm

Yes, Poppa San, the N.O. beat - down is an example on more levels than the score. It seems that people, sometimes including the coaches, identify failure of the defense but there's always a "but." In the case of the N.O. game "the defense was bad but we could have won if AR wasn't injured." Whatever happens on Sunday, it will be healthy if the outcome provides clear (no excuse) evidence on the improvements the Packers need to make to become legitimate SB contenders.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
sonomaca's picture

November 24, 2014 at 11:29 pm

Packers have been searching for Marshawn Lynch ever since they refused to give a 3rd Rd pick to Buffalo. I believe that failure cost them two Superbowls. However, they've finally got their Lynch in Lacy. Sunday was his most bruising performance. The Patriot brain trust have much to think about now.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Imma Fubared's picture

November 28, 2014 at 09:22 pm

I think Brady exposes the defensive backs lack of abilities in this one. Lets see our backs have faced Ponder, Bridgewater, Cutler twice, Emanuel. Really have had the luxury this year of bums.
It wont be pretty but should shore up the fact that the Pack can't win with just offense and running the ball to keep good offenses off the field.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0

Log in to comment 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.