Packers Week Six Snap Counts Versus Tampa Bay

There were some predictable changes in snap counts against Tampa Bay due to the injuries to David Bakhtiari, Lancaster and Kevin King being ruled out.  However, there were some surprises on defense.

There were some predictable changes in snap counts against Tampa Bay due to the injuries to David Bakhtiari and Lancaster.  However, there were some surprises on defense.

Name

Snaps

%

ST

Jenkins

63

100

2 - 7%

Patrick

63

100

2 - 7%

Turner

63

100

 

Bakh

40

63

 

Linsley

63

100

 

Runyan

0

 

2 - 7%

Nijman

0

0

2 - 7%

Wagner

23

37

2 - 7%

 

 

 

 

Rodgers

60

95

0 - 0

Boyle

3

5

0- 0

Lovett

5

8

20-67%

 

 

 

 

MVS

53

84

 
D. Adams 52 83  
ESB 11 17 6 - 20%

Shepherd

6

10

11-37%

Taylor

32

51

9 - 30%

 

 

 

 

Tonyan

37

59

 

Lewis 31 53  

Sternberger

20

32

2 - 7%

 

 

 

 

Jones

36

57

0 - 0

J. Williams

32

51

17 - 57%

Dillon

10

16

14 - 47%

22 played Off.

 

 

 

There were no real surprises on offense given the nature of the game.  Wagner filled in for Bakhtiari after he was injured in the third quarter.  The other preferred starting offensive linemen played every snap.  Boyle got a few snaps due to the blow out loss.  Taylor did continue to get most of the #3 wide receiver snaps over St. Brown and Shepherd.  Dillon got a few snaps in garbage time.

 

Name

Snaps

%

STs

Amos

65

100

6 - 20%

Jackson

65

100

10 - 23%

Alexander 60 92 3 - 10%

Sullivan

46

71

7 - 23%

Savage

43

66

6 - 20%
Greene

24

37

17 - 57%

Redmond

22

34

23 - 77%

Hollman

5

8

13 - 43%

Scott

 

 

13 - 43%

Nickerson

 

 

2 - 7%

 

 

 

 

Barnes 57 88 14 - 47%

Z. Smith

49

75

4 - 14%

P Smith

43

66

2  -  7%

Summers

22

34

25 - 83%

Gary

17

26

4 - 13%

Garvin

16

25

1 - 3%

Burks 14 22 25 - 83%

Ramsey

10

15

15- 50%

 

 

 

 

Lowry DE

43

66

2 - 7%

Clark

41

63

3 - 10%

Keke

37

57

8 - 27%

M Adams

28

43

8 - 27%

Lancaster

9

14

5 - 17%

23 played Def.

 

 

 

There was far more movement in the snap counts on defense.  Josh Jackson played every snap because Kevin King was inactive.  Yet, that was not a given, at least in my mind.  Hollman managed to snare five defensive snaps.  Sullivan played about his usual percentage of snaps with 71%.  In previous games, he played 69%, 73%, 72%.  Darnell Savage only played 66% of all possible snaps.  Savage usually plays close to all of the snaps.  Vernon Scott did not play any defensive snaps.  Both Greene and Redmond played significantly fewer snaps against Tampa Bay than in the Packers' last game.

Krys Barnes played 88% of the snaps.  Previously, he played 29%, 25%, 28% and 54%.  This seems to be a clear trend.  Ty Summers, on the other hand, played just 34% of the possible snaps even though he had played 72% and 74% of possible snaps after Kirksey was injured.  Rashan Gary played considerably fewer snaps than usual, as did Preston and Zadarius Smith. 

It might be that the Packers pulled some of their preferred players late in the game.

 



Inactive Players

Love, King, Ervin

Active/DNP

None

Name

Snaps

%

ST

Crosby

 

 

5 - 17%

Scott

 

 

9 - 30%

Bradley

 

 

9 - 30%

The Packers had only three players on the inactive list since the team chose not to sign enough players to the regular roster to reach 53.  If I am not mistaken, the Packers did not elevate any players from the practice squad.  Tonyan apparently has been relieved of playing special teams snaps. 

 

 

1 points

Comments (23)

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

October 19, 2020 at 06:44 am

I chose to use a photo of Krys Barnes, since he had a decent game in an otherwise nasty game. There aren't that many photos of Krys Barnes so I was obliged to use one in which he is not centered as well as I would like.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
joejetson's picture

October 19, 2020 at 07:09 am

I thought Dillon got a few snaps in the first half. That was a new development. He ran hard and broke a couple of tackles.

Josh Jaçkson fell back into his old habit of grabbing and holding receivers. They need him (or someone) for depth at CB.

The OL was a sieve up the middle. The pocket was collapsing around Rodgers nearly every play. Very reminiscent of the SF and SD debacles from last year. Bad trend- overpowered by good defensive lines.

+ REPLY
4 points
4
0
Archie's picture

October 19, 2020 at 07:46 am

TB's ILBs greatly contributed to debacle as well.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
Coldworld's picture

October 19, 2020 at 10:43 am

They are good, but we had no answer. Others will try it, particularly as the ILBs weren’t able to stop us scoring easily until they changed their tactics to focus on attacking Rodgers.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
bjkdad44's picture

October 19, 2020 at 01:53 pm

How did the bears beat Tampa Bay?

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

October 19, 2020 at 02:47 pm

The Bucs beat themselves with terrible penalties against the Bears. Thanks, Since ‘61

+ REPLY
-1 points
0
1
mrtundra's picture

October 19, 2020 at 08:39 am

Jackson made a couple of nice plays, today. He showed me what everyone in camp was talking about.

+ REPLY
-3 points
0
3
Coldworld's picture

October 19, 2020 at 10:42 am

Close to the line. He also showed why he is not able to be a perimeter corner. His time chance may have gone. He is a PI gift for any QB now. Hollman is less risk.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
jannes bjornson's picture

October 20, 2020 at 12:37 am

Hollman should have been in the starting spot. What is Jackson now? A gap safety playing the run? Can he cover a TE better than Amos?

+ REPLY
-1 points
0
1
Guam's picture

October 19, 2020 at 08:24 am

I think Jackson's performance certainly puts more pressure on resigning King. Jackson is just too grabby in coverage and does not seem able to unlearn that bad habit. Maybe Jerry Grey can get through to him with a full (and normal) offseason, but I have my doubts . I have been on the dump M. Adams bandwagon for awhile, but he actually flashed a few times in this game. I would like to see more before changing my mind, but maybe the light bulb is finally coming on. Krys Barnes is a find!

My biggest concern is our O-line where no one performed well. Every time the Packers face a stout D-line, the O-line simply does not measure up (SF twice last year, LAC last year, TB this year). While Rodgers did not play well, it is hard to be at your best when you are getting pressured on every play. Terry Bradshaw said it best during the pregame show - No QB plays well under pressure.

This is starting to look like a replay of last year......

+ REPLY
0 points
1
1
dobber's picture

October 19, 2020 at 10:09 am

...and it's not that teams with strong DL are just rushing 4 and playing coverage: they're sending pressure from all over. That's been TB's M.O. so far this season. They control the line and send extra guys from all over the place. One of the leading pressure teams in the league, and they distribute sacks everywhere. I don't think this was a surprise.

The Packers took advantage of the defense giving receivers clean releases and scored on their first two possessions. After that, TB adjusted, started disrupting routes, and took away the easy stuff. That left ARod vulnerable to the rush. The sad part is--just like the Chargers game a year ago--the Packers didn't seem to be able to adjust.

+ REPLY
1 points
2
1
Coldworld's picture

October 19, 2020 at 10:48 am

But a lot of the damage was up the middle. We had no strategy to counter and our TEs showed they were not up to helping much. Would have been a good game to have Deguara. Maybe time to consider a true blocking FB?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

October 19, 2020 at 12:00 pm

That overthrow of Lewis looms large. Sure, the guy can't run much anymore, but hit him in the hands and it's at least a FG--or maybe a TD--and it potentially swings the momentum back or at least settles things back down. It's a little much to say that play was the difference in the game, but it probably looks meaningfully different after that.

+ REPLY
1 points
3
2
Leatherhead's picture

October 19, 2020 at 11:29 am

In the second quarter, when the game got away from us, we called two runs. Two. On a day when we couldn’t protect our QB and he was having a bad day, we called two runs. Our 2nd quarter possessions were interception, interception, three and out, three and out, end of half.

IMO, under the circumstances, it wouldn’t have been a bad idea to settle things down with some runs after the second interception. Perhaps we could have ended the half down 21-10 instead of 28-10.

When the wheels come off, they come all the way off. I think we should have gone back to basics when we fell down 14-10. Instead, we abandoned the run and put more pressure on our line and our QB.

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

October 19, 2020 at 03:00 pm

Agree Leatherhead. I was expecting to see Dillon at that point in the game to give some punishment out to Tampa’s defenders. It was also the time to give our OL the chance to deliver some hits rather than sit back and taking the blows in pass protection.

We need to reset the game at that point rather than going for the quick strike to get the lead back. Our QB is not playing well. Let him settle down with some handoffs and take the pressure off him. We needed to get physical in that game and we didn’t do it.

11 weeks to go and we can expect nearly every team to play us physically going forward because they have seen that it works. Hopefully that 2nd quarter in Tampa will be our worst quarter of the season. We can’t afford any more.
Thanks, Since ‘61

+ REPLY
-1 points
0
1
jannes bjornson's picture

October 20, 2020 at 12:45 am

Who is the lead draw blocker? Lovette has not been used there. The Deguara injury hurts the power game as Coldworld stated. Tonyan and Sternberger have to show more aggression in their blocking. The second INT was still a PI call, blown call. The O line was just pushed around too much. LeFleur missed Lazard.

+ REPLY
-1 points
0
1
jannes bjornson's picture

October 20, 2020 at 12:39 am

Jackson should just be moved out.

+ REPLY
0 points
1
1
Lphill's picture

October 19, 2020 at 08:54 am

The Smiths were invisible , yet only 17 snaps for Gary?

+ REPLY
3 points
3
0
Coldworld's picture

October 19, 2020 at 10:48 am

Snap count? He looked effective.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
Guam's picture

October 19, 2020 at 11:41 am

Agreed CW. He was still on the "questionable" report before the game so I think the Packers had him on a snap count.

+ REPLY
0 points
1
1
arizonayahoo07@gmail.com's picture

October 19, 2020 at 10:39 am

It seemed kinda funny the TB guys got called for 48 penalties, leading up to yesterdays game. And they got very few penalties yesterday.. They cleaned their act up, or the refs. Made sure the Bucs won that game. To me there were hits on Rogers that would have been called other wise... Fox made sure Rashard Gary's face mask grab was put out there for the world to see... Any team that has Suh on it. Will tend to be very nasty.. If they did not have Brady to counter balance Suh... They would not be 4-2.. Lafleur and Rogers were smart to call quits. You could see Boyle was not comfortable being out there.. i could be wrong...

+ REPLY
0 points
2
2
dobber's picture

October 19, 2020 at 02:59 pm

"Fox made sure Rashard Gary's face mask grab was put out there for the world to see."

That was a legit call. I don't know why we're unhappy about it.

+ REPLY
1 points
2
1
flackcatcher's picture

October 20, 2020 at 02:29 pm

High temps can explain some of the snap counts. Positions that chase in Pettine's defense would need more of a break. Overall the entire team was sluggish. Exact same thing happened last year on west coast games. For some reason MLF plays to his weakness against speed rushing teams. ESB and Jackson, lots of rust. No preseason really hurt Jackson. ESB needs game snaps if the Packers can find some for him. Was next door to Troy and Buck pregame comments off air, a lot of folks wanted to have a long talk with those two after the game.

+ 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.