Packers vs. Broncos: Game Balls & Lame Calls

The Green Bay Packers put up one of their worst efforts in recent memory in getting routed by the Denver Broncos, 29-10.  There wasn't much to enjoy nor celebrate in this one so let's cut to the chase!

Game Balls

Mason Crosby

Crosby hit a 56-yarder in the third quarter to bring the Packers within seven points.  The thinner air in Denver makes a kicker's job easier, but still give him credit for coming through when the Packers just needed something, anything good to happen.

Damarious Randall

Randall got his first interception of the season, and his career, after many close calls in previous games.  When the game was all but over, he played hard and earned a big play on one of the best quarterbacks of all time.  Randall has been a bright spot on this defense this season and almost missed this game with an ankle injury.  He looks to be improving week after week and the Packers need it.

Clay Matthews

Matthews had the emphatic stuff on the screen in the second half, but he makes this list for reasons other than his on-field play.  Matthews taped his ankle up after getting hurt and returned to a game that was already lost.  So many guys in his position would have just taken the rest of the night off but Matthews has played through many a bump and bruise throughout his career.  Good thing, as he always seems to have one.  Hopefully this one is minor and he can get back to 100% sooner than later.

Mike Daniels

Daniels, like Matthews, didn't make a lot of flashy plays tonight but he deserves to finally make this list.  He's one of the emotional leaders of the defense and tonight, he was one of VERY few who looked pissed off that his team was getting punched in the mouth.  After watching the demeanor of the Packers in this game, I dare say they are lacking in guys like this.  If this team wants to make a deep run, they either need bring more nasty to their game or they better play a perfect game every week.

Lame Calls

Everyone Else

Go ahead and call me lazy and complain in the comments that I took the easy way out here.  This team was awful tonight, from coaching all the way down to the 46th man in uniform.  They had two weeks to prepare for this game and got several guys back from injury, yet they looked like they just played a game yesterday and threw a bunch of guys off the street out there.  That includes Aaron Rodgers, who was uncomfortable all night long.  Rodgers had happy feet even when his line was giving him time.  Denver's secondary is very good and was very good tonight.  The receivers couldn't separate and get open and when they were, Rodgers was missing them badly.  No one wants to hear that Rodgers played poorly or could have done better, as he's the lifeblood of this team.  Tonight, he was nothing special at all.

The run game was benign, once again.  Eddie Lacy had a few nice runs, but the Lacy/James Starks rotation was ineffective and the Packers were forced to throw more because they were behind all night long.  The Packers have to find, repeat, have to find their run game as the season wears on.  This isn't going to be one of those "Rodgers carries the team" seasons, as in 2010.  It's just not the way this team is made up.  Many young guys on offense means growing pains all year long.  They can make some noise, but they miss Jordy Nelson.  Davante Adams needs to find himself or someone needs to find Davante Adams and fast.  

Defensively, Dom Capers had no answers for Denver's offense and while you can argue that the players have to execute, this is the same defense this team is rolling with all season long.  They aren't likely to turn into different guys from one week to the next.  They looked like they all just walked in after a Thanksgiving dinner.  Slow to react, slow period.  Denver's receivers could have sleepwalked through this game with the space they had to work with.  On more than one occasion, a receiver appeared surprised that there wasn't anyone around him to bring him down.  Casey Hayward, paging Casey Hayward!  A terrible night for #29 and he will be relied on heavily if the injury to Sam Shields is more on the major side (he was seen in a sling on the sideline at one point).  It was way too reminiscent of 2011 for my liking.  The defense has allowed 500 yards of offense in two straight games after establishing themselves as one of the better units in the league.  They can probably forget about setting records or being historically good.  At this point, they just need to be decent and hope the offense finds itself soon.

 

On to Carolina.

-------------------

Jason is a freelance writer on staff since 2012 and also co-hosts Cheesehead TV Live, Pulse of the Pack and Pack A Day podcasts.  You can follow him on Twitter here

0 points

Comments (44)

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

November 02, 2015 at 07:10 am

I'd write a good, long post complaining about laziness, but like the Packers last night, I'm just too lazy to do it.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

November 02, 2015 at 07:13 am

My first ever double post. Too lazy to edit/delete.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
JerseyAl's picture

November 02, 2015 at 08:02 am

I did it for you....

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
jasonperone's picture

November 02, 2015 at 10:11 am

You're always good with the commentary so you can sit this one out. . point taken, sir:)

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

November 03, 2015 at 10:08 am

Yeah, I was just busting your chops - I wasn't trying to make a point. [I should not admit that: plenty of folks already think my posts are pointless.] Actually, after writing you weren't going to dissect the bad, you went ahead and hit on some of my biggest concerns, including Rodgers' happy feet (especially in the 1st half when I thought his protection was actually rather decent). I'm heading back up to give the article a thumbs up. Thanks Al for the deletion.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

November 02, 2015 at 07:32 am

Lame Calls,

To be more specific.

Aaron Rodgers.
He had a number of WR's that were open and he either didn't pull the trigger or was off with his accuracy. If Rodgers his Cobb in stride on one play Cobb at least has a big gain if not TD. He has Rodgers running open, and throws the ball 3 yards in front of him. Was not a good night for himself.

Give props to Denver for their play on defense. But Rodgers was not good. Throwing for his least amount of yards ever in a game. To not have more then 100 yards passing, is really, really bad.

Offensive Line.
They simply were terrible. Didn't get much push in the running game, and gave Rodgers little time to do much. Simply not good enough for the unit that is supposed to be very good.

Play Callers.
This to me is the worst part in the game. The play callers on both offense and defense were horrendous. I hate blaming play calling during games, because usually its execution of the play call that makes a difference.
But in this game, they Play callers need to do more when what they are doing isn't working. They need to re evaluate what they do.
On offense the WR's were not getting open very easily and Rodgers was struggling. What they needed to do, is to do more schematically to get players open. Do more misdirection type of stuff, do trip sets of the WR's more, run more crossing routes or 'rub routes', or put more guys in motion to try and get guys open that way. When is the last time this team has ran a slant pass by the way?
Also when the 3 WR's 1 TE and 1 RB isn't working, why not try 4 WR's, 1 RB or 4 WR's 1 TE. I hate to keep banging the drum but they have 1 guy with pure speed that can impact the game, and they didn't use him. Which is Janis.

On defense have they figured out how to cover the middle of the field yet? How many deep posts and crossing patterns did the Broncos have first downs on? Also, do our CB's ever press anyone at the LOS? I think they might need to put Gunter in because he seems to be the only CB that actually jamb the WR at the LOS. If they can at least disrupt the WR's timing off the line that might allow the pass rush to get to the QB.
To me I blame the coaches for this. They need to get the players to do this.

A bad game. Hopefully this will be a wake up game for them.
At the end of the day though, as bad as I hate the way they played, this game wasn't as important as this coming week will be. Beating Carolina is way more important then beating Denver.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
LeagueObsrvr's picture

November 02, 2015 at 10:16 am

I agree with you about the play-calling. It is so frustrating to watch this coaching staff that is either unwilling or unable to make changes and adjustments on the fly when their original game plan clearly isn't working. And last night was the latest example. I would like to see them go back to their roots in the West Coast Offense when they used to carve up a defense with slants and crossers. What they do now seems so vanilla and predictable.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

November 02, 2015 at 11:55 am

I completely agree with you.

The other thing that frustrates me is how they just can't seem to maximize players strengths.
For example, Lacy is best at taking hand offs moving towards the LOS. Not stepping sideways or running horizontally. I understand they have to do it sometimes but why not run more Pistol where he can get hand offs running towards the LOS.
Another example. Janis. Whether anyone likes him or not, he is a play making type of player. He is one of the few players on the roster that can stretch the defense. He has the speed that no one else on the roster has. They can't find ways to get him involved in the offense? I am pretty sure if he was in New England they would find ways to use him.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
croatpackfan's picture

November 02, 2015 at 07:39 am

I think you forget to put Tim Masthay to the Game Ball category!
Second, I saw at least 4 times when Clay Matthews run by Broncos RBs not noticing they carry the ball that it was ridiculous to watch. Clay Matthews, despite his dedication should go with the rest of the team!
I was warning about Casey Hayward! He is not CB, and he never be... He is DB and should stay there...
All together, it was performance that reminded me on the 2014th Lions game (19-07), there was safety to! After that Packers went to 11-2 record! I will be OK with 13-3 record this season! Loss against Minnesota and Cardinals! All other wins. But only if the team finally decide to come to the game as team, and start to play at the game they showed themselves!

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
NickPerry's picture

November 02, 2015 at 07:49 am

Casey Hayward showed why Ted Thompson drafted not one but two CB in the past draft. Casey Hayward isn't ready and won't be for the big boys of the NFL. My God, could you imagine Julio Jones against Hayward?

Owen Daniels looked pretty good last night. Just think Ted, you could have signed him but you opted for that slow ass TE we have that always has that stupid smile on his face after he F's up. Trade for a TE before Tomorrow Ted. Go ahead, live a little and give up one of those picks that yield a Goodson or a Ringo and talk to Rams or 49ers about one of their TE's.

Tom Clements is just LAME. He's helped take a top ranked offense and turn into #28 overall. The Packers have beaten up on teams with Losing records and Rodgers is 0-5 on the Road against Teams with Top 10 Defenses since last season, and it's a UGLY 0-5.

I love our QB, I really do but this issue with "Trust" has gone beyond ridiculous. Good God Boy stop worrying about your precious TD to INT ratio and take a chance.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
KenEllis's picture

November 02, 2015 at 08:44 am

If Casey Hayward's play showed why TT drafted 2 CBs in the first 2 rounds of the 2015 draft last spring, what does that say about the CB TT traded up to draft in the 2nd round in 2012 (Casey Hayward)?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Dan Stodola's picture

November 02, 2015 at 10:08 am

It means Hayward is really good playing the position he was drafted to play. Slot CB, not outside CB. He doesn't have the athletic tools to play outside CB, but the athletic tools he does have, primarily outstanding quickness and instincts, are far more useful in the slot. Not outside. Hayward is playing out of position, even tho he's still playing CB. He's a slot CB, not an outside CB.

Been saying all offseason and early during the season... Very soon (and now would not be too soon) Randall should be starting outside. They haven't wanted to just throw him out there and have him get beat and lose confidence, but it needs to happen.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
KenEllis's picture

November 02, 2015 at 11:32 am

I completely agree with you that Hayward is playing out of position and should be in the slot and only in the slot at all times.

Now, is anyone responsible for playing Hayward out of position or golly shucks is it just bad luck?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
LASVEGAS-TOM's picture

November 02, 2015 at 03:30 pm

DS, Completely agree with you on Randall.

I only have 1 Game Ball to give out. It's going to my friend JAMES JONES, because there is no one else to give it to. They threw at him 3 times, only 1 was catchable, & he caught it.

The loss did not hurt GB. If we can meet them again, it will help us. I know, You don't believe that, that's ok. It will.

We cannot play with this Defensive Backfield.

I know you know Defenses. What type of cover 2 was Denver playing, that shut us down. They had something figured out right. LVT

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
TommyG's picture

November 03, 2015 at 12:56 pm

I was listening to the big show yesterday, and they talked about the Denver defensive set. This wasn't a cover2 (for most of the night). Normally we see a cover2 with a 4 man rush eat us alive. Wade Phillips brought out a 6-7 person rush with tight coverage. That means he had seen what we had been seeing for the last several weeks: AR is holding on to the ball too long, waiting for deep routes to develop. The fix would've been to run lacy more, and throw short passes (because the secondary had huge holes due to the extra rushers). Clements didn't bring those plays in. Whatever the Packers saw in the Denver defense on film is not what they brought out against us. Perhaps what was Wade Phillips saying "no way these guys are gonna cost me my job again". He put high pressure on AR and dared him to beat the insanely good Denver D. AR failed to do that.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

November 03, 2015 at 01:34 pm

And if that is true, Which I would believe it is knowing how much everyone loved the scheme they had planned for the game, it just irritates me how the Packers coaches weren't able to adjust to it.

They need to do a better job of in game adjustments, when things aren't working.

In previous games they seem to start out really hot then do nothing the rest of the game. So what that is telling me is they have a really good game plan, and when the other teams adjust to their game plan, they aren't figuring out how to adjust to their adjustments.

Game day management needs to be better.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Gforcetrivers's picture

November 02, 2015 at 08:13 am

Is Arod so afraid he might throw an interception that he is launching the ball 5-10 yards past the receivers?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
egbertsouse's picture

November 02, 2015 at 08:29 am

Great comments about the passing game. Clements and MM need to be locked in a room watching tape of the Patriots short game.

I would have to single out Nate Palmer for having a particularly crap game. He looked like a HS kid playing in his first game. Draft an ILB next year Teddy or, heaven forbid, open the wallet and sign a FA.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Packer_Pete's picture

November 02, 2015 at 08:47 am

I don't tend to overreact to one really bad loss. Sometimes that is good for a wake-up call. But, I am very worried about the trends that are emerging.

Before yesterday's game, the Packers have simply played bad or at best mediocre teams, as I've commented on last week. If not taking into account the games against the Packers, but if one takes the first 6 opponents into account, they have a combined record of 17-23 when not playing the Packers. Not good.

Now, the bright news is, I think the Packers will win the 4 home games and at least one on the road. They'll end up 11-5 then, and make the playoffs. Since no 2nd place NFC East or NFC West team will end up with less than 6 losses, it will easily be enough.

But, the longer term trend is, the Packers are starting to lose in the trenches. OL allows pressure up the middle, and DL cannot win even against opponents OLs which seem just put together and are injury riddled themselves. That is troubling. Hayward is purely a slot CB. Not an outside CB. It's painful to try and watch him play 15 yards off all the time.
The Packers can't run the ball and can't stop the run.

In the past, McC teams came out firing on all cylinders after the bye week. This was as sluggish a performance that I've ever seen. They started off slow, but came November, they started winning. I don't see that this year.

And in fairness, #12 is refusing to throw 5 yard passes, instead holding on for seeing whether anyone is getting open downfield. Peter King, as much as I dislike him, has a great piece about that in Si.com today.

Overall, I am not concerned about the team making the playoffs, and we know anything can happen then. But, I don't see this team getting better. In fact, their best games were beginning of the season, and the last 2 games were dismal... disturbing trend for a team that should used to be getting better come November...

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
DukeDivine's picture

November 02, 2015 at 08:48 am

Lame calls: #33 covering a crossing route. #29 covering anything. You could see the deficiencies with Hyde and Hayward all the way back to week one and now that the Pack run into 2 top 5 QBs the deficiencies stand out like a sore thumb. Hyde and Hayward will continue to get targeted and torched all season long if the pass rush can't get home very very quickly. Hope Shields and Rollins are OK. I'd rather see Randall and Gunter covering the oppositions number 1 WR instead of Hayward. If they play man to man coverage and 33 and 29 are asked to cover anyone rather than a zone on the field we can expect more 400+ passing days from the likes of Newton, Stafford, Palmer, Romo etc... The entire offense is a Lame call. HAppy feet in the pocket, little to know separation by WRS, and no holes opened by line in the run game. Abby in the slot and Kenard at TE might help create some separation but that wont happen unless there are injuries, Mashed Potato Mike can be too rigid to try new personel.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
D Ernesto's picture

November 02, 2015 at 09:32 am

You said it well.
Personally I've posted here previously that the teams we beat thus far were too late realizing what Manning new before the game started: you can pass pass pass against this team.
Everyone gets on that band wagon of how Ted gets these fine un-drafteds and late round picks. I say they were there for a reason and 3`1 other teams passed on them: played div ii, injury prone, smallish, short, poor tackling skills and frail bodies.
The Vikes has three dbacks that are bone crushing tacklers and we have none that come close to compare.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Paul Ott Carruth's picture

November 02, 2015 at 08:49 am

McCarthy and Co. do not run the WCO. It is exactly what is needed, now more than ever. Read the article. It is what I have been saying all along.

http://mmqb.si.com/mmqb/2015/11/02/aaron-rodgers-green-bay-packers-offen...

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Packer_Pete's picture

November 02, 2015 at 09:14 am

Paul,

I agree with you, but do you think they would even want to run it? I believe they have concepts in mind and think they have the team to run it, when in reality they don't, especially without Jordy. I don't think McC is stubborn enough to not change if he could win with a different way, but he seems to think the reason it doesn't work is simply due to poor execution. So I don't think he will change anything.
But what is just as important, do you think Aaron Rodgers is capable of running it? And I don't mean physically or playing in the WCO mentally. What I mean is, would he buy into it and would he want to run it? He seems to be the type of guy who wants to run the offense the exact way they are running it now...

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

November 02, 2015 at 09:43 am

They really need to get back to the basics of the WCO. The problem is they are to stubborn in what they do. That has been my biggest complaint.

My problem with the play calling is they need to adjust to what is happening in games. They however want to do what they do because its what they do even if it isn't working.

The offense hasn't been the same offense we are accustom to seeing. We don't have the players we have had in the past so we need to start doing more schematically to get players open. And they need to get the ball out quicker, so shorter plays, slants, posts, quick outs, whatnot need to be used more.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Dan Stodola's picture

November 02, 2015 at 10:20 am

This same offense looked great last year. Only difference is no deep threat to provide other receivers w/ more room. W/o Jordy's deep threat Cobb, Adams, Jones aren't able to get as much separation against the better CB they face, which would normally be on Jordy.

Its the same offense from last year minus one big missing piece.

Packers are consistently facing 8 in the box and as many as 10 defenders close to the LOS. If you throw all those short plays your throwing into the teeth of the Defense. How is that going to be better?

Opposite of '12 when teams played deep coverage against the Packers. THey had to find a running game to get teams out of cover 2 or 2 deep all the time. Only way to get teams out of the box w/ 10 men close to the LOS is to beat them deep.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

November 02, 2015 at 10:44 am

There are really 2 big changes to this team from last year. 1 we lost Nelson. 2 McCarthy isn't calling plays.

I don't know but how much does McCarthy work in the game plan for the offense now? I know he is focusing more on the whole team, but maybe the absence of him in the offense is hurting the offense some?

The problem I am seeing with the Packers offense right now is the WR's are not able to get open by themselves. They had that same problem last year as well at times. Safety's are dropping down in the box more which is true, but the WR's are not getting the separation when they are covered 1 on 1.

I think the coaches need to do a better job scheming players to get open. Run a trips set, crossing routes/rub routes, WR screens, whatever it takes.
I think the coaches need to pick up their game to make up for the loss of Nelson. They simply can't run the same offense they had with Nelson. Unless they are going to use Janis (who is the closest thing they have to Nelson), they don't have a guy with that skill set.

They need to find ways to utilize the players they do have better.
To me that's on the coaches.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Paul Ott Carruth's picture

November 02, 2015 at 02:27 pm

"Packers are consistently facing 8 in the box and as many as 10 defenders close to the LOS. If you throw all those short plays your throwing into the teeth of the Defense. How is that going to be better?"

You run man beaters like 2/3 Jet Flanker Drive. I've told you this before Dan....front does not dictate coverage type. I can run an 8 man front and run Cover 3 zone as well as Man Free. If I throw deep in to Cover 3 I'll have problems. The weak areas are in the intermediate seams and flats. Denver ran a healthy dose of Cover 0 and Man Free (Cover 1). You beat man by running crossers (shallows) to control underneath coverage in zone and run away from man coverage It's not as simple as saying, "run Jordy deep." I that were the case, why don't they just run Janis out there? The Packers needed to rely on YAC and the short passing game.

Read the article and learn.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Dan Stodola's picture

November 02, 2015 at 11:42 pm

Don't have the all 22 on my TV. Just going by what I saw last nite. Didn't say a damn thing about the actual coverage behind the front (on purpose mind you, to TRY to avoid your confrontation), but what I could see sure didn't look like cover 3. Just what was obvious on the TV screen. I do know I saw a lot of defenders on the LOS and in the box (doesn't indicate what the coverage was). I also know when teams are playing that many in the box, the short/intermediate areas and the run game are going to suffer. Which they ARE! Clearly if its cover 3, throwing deep isn't the way to attack, but then I don't think there was any cover 3.

Best way to change the heavy short coverage and 8 in the box is to hit some deep passes, which was a regular occurrence w/ Jordy in the lineup. Run all the man beaters you want, but at the end of the day, I think at some point the receiver still has to create some separation on his own.

Before you start puffing up your chest about how much you know And bitchin at me.

http://espn.go.com/blog/green-bay-packers/post/_/id/24464/aaron-rodgers-...

Guess I'm not the only one that thinks they have to get downfield! Still have to find a way to push the defenders back to get some space, assuming they aren't cover 2 or 3. For the life of me, I don't see any reason any D coordinator would play Cover 2 or 3 against the Packers right now. If they keep running man beaters, the Defense will recognize and take those away. And the problem still exists if you don't get downfield.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
D Ernesto's picture

November 02, 2015 at 09:38 am

If you saw the Vikes game (not a fan per se just an observer) when Teddy B -ya he is all of 22, saw a blitz he called the out. Rolled out, if no one open threw to the flat, all to avoid a sack and to get a couple of positive yards. They did this all day long versus the drop back Stafford getting sacked all day and Rogers looking like a deer in the headlights.

My point if something don't work, try something else. Doing the same thing over and over again expecting a different result is insanity.

Rogers is so worried about interceptions he is in a shell now afraid to not make the perfect pass.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
PaulRosik's picture

November 02, 2015 at 12:38 pm

Yeah? So we want Bridgewater instead of Rodgers? lol Go away!

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

November 02, 2015 at 12:59 pm

'My point if something don't work, try something else. Doing the same thing over and over again expecting a different result is insanity.'

I agree with that point.

But there is a major difference in playing the Broncos defense (#1 in the league) versus playing the Bears defense.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Brand New Hero's picture

November 02, 2015 at 10:03 am

Nailed it. The WR's aren't getting open. That's the crux of this situation. It can be attributed to execution (win your 1v1s) and game planning (mechanically open up the WRs). For some reason, GB refuses to do that and continues running ISO's. Therefore we have to watch with despair as the WR's get eaten up by the aggressive man coverage and Rodgers dances awhile before being sacked, scrambling, or throwing it away. Something needs to change. Some stacks, picks/rubs, or motion would go a LONG way to giving Aaron cleaner looks. It would also open up the running game. But for the life of me, I have no idea why we continue to stick with something that's not working. I really don't get it.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
jh9's picture

November 02, 2015 at 10:09 am

I was going to post the exact same article. Thanks, Paul. Every Packers fan (and coach) should read it.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Since'61's picture

November 02, 2015 at 09:09 am

I agree with a game ball for Crosby and maybe Masthay as well. After that I agree that every one else deserves a lame call. Very poor showing coming off of a bye week. There were 2 crucial points in this game when the Packers seemed poised to make a game of it. The first was after the Packers scored their only TD with about 3 1/2 minutes left in the 1st half. If they stop Denver after the KO and get the ball back they give Rodgers a chance to get at least an FG prior to the half. The second was after the Packers made it 17-10 on their first possession in the second half. Again they needed to stop Denver and get the ball back to Rodgers. They had Denver 3rd and 8 and they gave up a 20 yard pass and then a TD. It was 24-10, game over. It's one game against an AFC opponent. How they respond against Carolina is what is important now. Go Pack! Thanks, Since '61

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
thebeast431's picture

November 04, 2015 at 06:51 am

It was also Denver's bye week. The Broncos also had the extra time to prepare. Packers just so happend to get more injured during the bye week, which never occurs.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
EdsLaces's picture

November 02, 2015 at 09:14 am

I think Raji had a pretty decent push up the middle on a few occasions.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
D Ernesto's picture

November 02, 2015 at 09:23 am

Have to say I'm stunned. I truely thought Denver would put up 41 against the Packer non pass defense. Manning is the best at picking apart defenses and IMHO this is the worst pass defense in the league.
No name guys who are slow of foot, smallish, poor tacklers and that god awful prevent defense scheme Capers insist on.
I know one thing going forward the rest of the teams we face will pass pass pass first and run later.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
chaka's picture

November 02, 2015 at 10:21 am

Packers sure could have used TE Colt Lyerla last night. The TE's the Packers have are garbage. They should re-sign him today!!! Don't care about his past, there are packers with worse records on the team.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
BradHTX's picture

November 02, 2015 at 01:18 pm

Thank you for a laugh that we all really needed today! Well done.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
PaulRosik's picture

November 02, 2015 at 10:48 am

I avoided coming by here to hear how the sky is falling. It's one road loss and the same things we've seen all year. The Packers receivers struggle to get separation. And the defense is improved but not going to dominate.

I vacillate between oh well its just one road game and being really mad about this performance. This being after the bye week I expected more. I guess that's whats the most disappointing is that with two weeks to get ready the offense still just seemed to go back there line up and "do what we do" and see what happens. There appeared to be no real game plan adjustments for this excellent defense. Maybe this game will wake up the team to their deficiencies in the line and receivers and adjust the game plan more. The coaching staff still seems to really plan that their o line is going to control the game - and that's not happened this year.

On defense it was hard to see what Manning still had left since he had receivers with 5 yards or more clearance to throw to so often. Really a bad game all around.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Bohj's picture

November 02, 2015 at 11:36 am

It's like......we're 6-0. What seems to be the problem? It's working. You try to find your identity. And then you think you've found it. And then you try to impose it.

Newsflash Packers. The NFL adapts quickly to what you do. You better keep growing and reinventing if you want to keep up. Denver clearly did. They looked like a whole new refreshed team coming out of the bye.

Our self scouting was the worst. I hate to say this because we haven't really been this way til now, but we looked like the past Lions teams. The ones that seem unstoppable. An offensive weapon. But then D coordinators figure them out, and then they are crap the rest of the season.

I refuse to believe that will happen to this team. But.....that's what that game felt like. Better now than in December I guess.

As far as the D. Maybe our secondary can get a little older over the season. That would be a silver lining there.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

November 02, 2015 at 11:48 am

Awful game that I just want to erase from my memory. Im too sick to contribute anything anyway. Hope next week, somebody and something resembling our team comes to play.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Ibleedgreenmore's picture

November 02, 2015 at 04:27 pm

Might be the worst game I have seen in years, of course last years playoff game hurt a whole lot more.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
LASVEGAS-TOM's picture

November 02, 2015 at 09:47 pm

Just heard on MNF, that Cleveland is listening to trades for Joe Thomas. I personally think GB should at least take a look at him. Even if it took our 1 or 2 next year or both, I think it would be worth it. Our picks won't be that great. I still don't think we have a good enough left tackle. We lose AR, IT'S OVER, & it looked Bad on more than 1 occasion last night. At least find out what they want. LVT

+ 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.