Straying from Balance was the Packers' Downfall

It's almost like the Packers were trying to do their best Georgia Dome impression by imploding in Atlanta on Sunday.

In what was a rocky start and an even rockier finish for Green Bay, it was a game that could be categorized by law enforcement as assault with a deadly weapon. Except that weapon was the arm of Falcons quarterback Matt Ryan, who, with Juilo Jones and the rest of their high-flying receiving corps, shredded the Packers struggling secondary. Ryan picked apart a group who has been without their No. 1 cornerback in Sam Shields since early September and had filled in its leaking crevices with undrafted talent.

The eight-game run engineered by Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers and Green Bay's own illustrious offensive display came to a skidding halt just four quarters shy of a road trip to Houston for Super Bowl LI. The lack of pass rush, a soft cushion on coverage and poor boundary play by the team's corners were major contributors, however, being shut out until the third quarter doesn't exactly help an argument to be made for the offense.

Rodgers missed throws, failed to lead his receivers and was even sacked by the shoestring of his cleats. All three of these phenomena were seldom seen in recent weeks - even months. Rodgers hadn't been associated with a questionable performance since the team was in the heart of their four-game losing skid in November.

But, as incredible as Rodgers is, expecting him to engineer a scoring drive on seven out of nine attempts just to keep pace with the soaring Falcons was irrational. Possible, but irrational. The play selection didn't help his case.

To keep up with the Falcons, you have to score points. The Packers haven't had any issues with putting up points since the end of November when the team first began their conquest to "run the table." Consequently, they've been straying far from offensive balance ever since.

The Packers ran the ball with running back Ty Montgomery just three times against the Falcons, and two of his carries were before they were even down by 10 points. Fellow tailback Christine Michael was a focal point in gaining reps, as he carried the ball six times but only mustered 11 yards. Rodgers was the team's leading rusher with four runs for 46 yards, including a well-chronicled facemask call that wasn't against Falcons cornerback Robert Alford, but Rodgers himself.

A chance to control the clock, bring safeties up into the box in an effort to open up the pass game and make play action calls that much more effective. Each resulting component that could've swayed Sunday's aerial assault rests with the lack of balance in the Packers' play-calling. Instead, playing-from-behind and throwing the ball 45 times was a benefiting factor that ultimately cost the Packers a Super Bowl rematch against either Pittsburgh or New England. 

Clock-control seems like an overrated concept when your team can strike as quickly as the Falcons, as well as when your team has an array of weaponry in their arsenal - like the Falcons. However, they dominated that aspect as well by converting 10 of their 13 third-down opportunities. The Packers didn't even have the ball for over 10 minutes by the time halftime approached.

It was the third week in a row that the Packers had thrown the ball over 40 times. Since week 16 against the Vikings, they've stuck with the non-balanced script.

- Week 16 vs Minnesota - 15 run, 39 pass 

- Week 17 at Detroit -  31 run, 39 pass 

- Wild Card vs New York - 25 run, 40 pass 

- Divisional at Dallas - 17 run, 43 pass 

- Conference Championship at Atlanta - 17 run, 45 pass

Since breaking out against the Bears in week 15, Montgomery has also been a non-factor via the rushing attack. Aside from motioning him out of the backfield and creating mismatches against the opposition, when being given - at the most - 11 carries, which the Packers did in back-to-back weeks, he averaged just 3.3 yards per touch. 

The Packers have also turned to fullback Aaron Ripkowski, who is the proprietor of an early fumble against the Falcons on Sunday. A mistake that sucked all of the life out of the Packers' sideline as they began forming momentum offensively.

Balance is vital to keeping a defense on their heels and to open up other facets of your play-calling sheet. Despite their wins when lacking said balance, the Packers proved as a one-dimensional football team to Falcons head coach Dan Quinn, who is now preparing to become a Super Bowl head coach in a spot that many thought was once reserved for the Packers.

__________________________

Zachary Jacobson is a staff writer/reporter for Cheesehead TV. He's the voice of The Leap on iTunes and can be heard on The Scoop KLGR 1490 AM every Saturday morning. He's also a contributor on the Pack-A-Day Podcast. He can be found on Twitter via @ZachAJacobson or contacted through email at [email protected].

NFL Categories: 
0 points

Comments (58)

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

January 26, 2017 at 05:32 am

I feel McCarthy would run the ball more if he could. Rogers could also audible to a run if he wanted to, but losing Eddie Lazy hurt, Montgomery is more or less a scat back, Michael is an ok runner but is a lousy blocker. I'm interested in drafting a first round running back in the draft. I'd love to get Christian McCaffery, Stanford, who broke Barry Sander's all-time rushing records, but he will probably be gone. We need to draft a RB somewhere.

0 points
0
0
The TKstinator's picture

January 26, 2017 at 06:18 am

Yes. Balance is nice when both the run and the pass are productive.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

January 26, 2017 at 07:28 am

Gameflow pretty much dictated play selection on Sunday. Any real game plan went out the window at 17-0...unless the game plan was to throw, throw, throw.

0 points
0
0
rdent's picture

January 26, 2017 at 08:25 am

Dobber,my thoughts exactly, it's hard to have balance when you're playing catch up, my buds and I all agreed ,against an opponent like Atlanta and a porous GB secondary that game was pretty much out of reach at 17-0

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

January 26, 2017 at 08:53 am

That Rip fumble on the goal line was the killer. The Packers hang onto that ball and punch it in, and it's 10-7 and the game feels manageable even with the missed FG. You shift pressure back onto the Falcons. Rip fumbles, Atlanta goes down the field and puts up 7 to go up 17-0, and it's doubly demoralizing...all the pressure was on the Packers from that point on.

0 points
0
0
MarkinMadison's picture

January 26, 2017 at 08:19 am

If Montgomery is only a scat back then I'm not sure what McCaffery will be at the NFL level. At about 200 lbs. and with poor pass blocking technique, I just do not see him as anything other than a gimmick in this offense. There are other places to go in the first round even if McCaffery is available at #29.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

January 26, 2017 at 09:04 am

Couldn't agree more. If the Packers go RB in round 1, it will have to be because they addressed glaring needs on the defense through free agency. McCaffrey is in some ways like a bigger Tyreek Hill. He's a guy who isn't a true NFL WR or a true NFL RB. Still, a creative OC will find ways to get him the ball in space and let him create.

I wish Joe Mixon didn't have the character issues he does...I'd love to see him in GB, and his issues might push him late into day 2 of the draft if the Packers are willing to roll the dice on him.

0 points
0
0
packerbackerjim's picture

January 26, 2017 at 02:48 pm

What I like about McCaffrey is his vision and ability to take full of his blockers. He is an absolute mismatch for defenses and a better version of Sproles. I do not think he willl last until the 29th pick.

0 points
0
0
4zone's picture

January 26, 2017 at 03:13 pm

McCaffrey is a duplicate Montgomery. Would prefer another pounder like D'Onta Foreman.

0 points
0
0
Since'61's picture

January 26, 2017 at 06:34 am

Once the Packers were down 17-0 they knew they needed to try to score quickly if they were going to catch up with and keep pace with the Falcons. Capers strategy of exhausting the Falcons by allowing them to run all over the field and score uncontested obviously wasn't working. Even after allowing Julio Jones to run for a 75 yard TD the Falcons still had the strength to score 2 more TDs. So much for the no tackle defense and the genius of Dom Capers. Thanks, Since '61

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

January 26, 2017 at 07:15 am

What cost this game was mistakes made. The fumble pretty much changed the game. Even after the fumble they could have tried to crawl back into it and they blew every opportunity they had. WR's had to many dropped passes. Rodgers missed some throws. And the defense failed at least 3 times to get turnovers.

The Falcons scored on 7 of 9 possessions. However at least 2 of those drives could/should have resulted in turnovers. If the Packers didn't fumble the ball away and they get a couple of those turnovers who knows what would have happened. This game could have been completely different.

One of the problems on offense was that Montgomery got hurt. That limited some of the stuff the offense could do. Especially when 3 of our top 4 WR's were playing injured.

I hope to see the offense regain some balance next year. To do so they have to improve the RB position. If it were me, I'd bring back Lacy who gives us the pounding RB we lacked. Keep Montgomery as a RB/WR type of player. And then draft a RB in the top 4 rounds. They have to have 3 pure RB's on the roster that can be counted on.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

January 26, 2017 at 07:27 am

"What cost this game was mistakes made. The fumble pretty much changed the game. Even after the fumble they could have tried to crawl back into it and they blew every opportunity they had."

Was chatting with friend at that point -- 17-0 -- and said that the only way the Packers could get back in the game was if the Falcons handed the ball to them. As soon as I said that, the Falcons dropped that direct snap to Gabriel and gave the Packers a golden opportunity to narrow the gap...but Ryan had the gimme pickup squirt out of his hands. The terribly thrown bomb that Evans dropped on the 5 yard line...the tipped pass in the endzone that got away from a CB (I can't remember who) and turned into that sideline TD on the next play. None of those plays went the Packers way on Sunday. When you need breaks to try to get back into a game, you need to capitalize on them when they happen. Packers didn't do that.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

January 26, 2017 at 07:56 am

Exactly right.

The Packers had their opportunities to try and stay in this game, but they didn't capitalize. And if they make 1-2 of those plays who knows what happens.
IMO, 3 of the first 4 drives really came down to 1 play that changed the game for them in a negative way.
The opening drive 3rd and 6, the Falcons came about 1/2-1 yard short of the first down. Falcons got a very generous spot, and the Packers didn't challenge. Would have been 4th down.
The Packers first drive they moved the ball well. it stalls and Crosby misses a 41 yard FG.
The Packers next offensive drive they were moving the ball well again and Ripkowski fumbles the ball away.

If the Packers get the Falcons to either punt of kick a FG on that first possession (I don't remember the spot on the field) it changes momentum. If they make the FG they don't fumble. Who knows what happens the rest of that game.

0 points
0
0
croatpackfan's picture

January 26, 2017 at 08:03 am

No, dobber, no... There was no mistakes on offense. Offense played perfectly (at least by SInce ?61). Only Dom Capers ruined Packers chances to win against Atlanta. If there was another DC they will make Gunter to be shutdown corner, another DC will remove injuries from Micah Hyde, Damarious Randall and Quinten Rollins. Burnett would play healthy, as well as Clay Matthews. So, please, there was not players mistakes or, God forbid, some influence from injuries on the players. We all know how experienced is Evans, who had to play over injured Brice or so...
Please, that Dom Capers ruined offense by bad game plan on D. Because of Dom Capers Aaron Rodgers was not able to throw the ball to his WR and TE. Well we have to admitt that WR played badly injured, and that is excuse we have to take in consideration...
I can imagine how another DC would take that fumbled ball instead of Ryan, or how he would catch those few opportunities and made at least 2 if not 3 interceptions. One will come after new DC would first make pressure on Ryan and then run down the field to make interception. Can you imagine Jeff Fisher or Rex Ryan doing that. I can and that is wonderful picture..
But that D! Shamefull...

0 points
0
0
rdent's picture

January 26, 2017 at 08:30 am

Since 2010 GB could write a book on how to blow big playoff games.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

January 26, 2017 at 09:05 am

By definition, isn't every playoff game a big playoff game? ;)

0 points
0
0
rdent's picture

January 27, 2017 at 12:13 pm

I stand corrected. Retitle the book,"101 ways to lose a NFL playoff game. "

0 points
0
0
pacman's picture

January 26, 2017 at 03:37 pm

Yes, there something unlucky or wrong to have so many games blow up on you. It only takes a few plays to change a game - like 2014 in Seattle. It's part of the game.

But the loss to Atlanta made the Packers look REALLY bad. Someone posted about how the Patriots have never allowed that many points. Some say we should be happy with MM and the Packers overall performance for the last 6 years.

I say @#!$(&@#% to that! Any coach/management with AR and this team would have an almost equally good record. We need management that can get us another SB ring.

0 points
0
0
Since'61's picture

January 26, 2017 at 02:17 pm

Dobber - good post. Not only did the Packers not make the fumble recovery or the interception but the Falcons kept the ball and converted those drives into TDs. Even if we had made the early FG and scored on the drive of RIP's fumble I'm not sure that we could have kept up with the Falcons. The defense had no answers all game and as you accurately point out could not make the plays even when the Falcons made mistakes. If you look it we lost 10 points with 2 offensive mistakes (missed FG and Rip fumble) and we gave 14 points by failing to secure two turnovers (fumble and interception). Now you have Atlanta with 30 points and the Packers with 31 or 32. Makes this game very similar to the first. However, when you are 4 plays away in a championship game you're not likely to win and so the Pack goes home, Atlanta advances and we get another season of Dom Capers and his no tackle defense. Thanks, Since '61

0 points
0
0
Finwiz's picture

January 26, 2017 at 03:05 pm

Correct - the defense never had any answers anytime they played an above average offense all season. You win championships with great defense. The only time the Packers had a great defense was when they had Chuck Wood and Matthews + Nick Collins playing like a stud, where they lived off turnovers, They still gave up major yards that year, although they kept teams out of the end zone. This defense couldn't stop anyone in 2016 except the really lousy offenses, and even some of them didn't look bad against GB. The damn Bears almost beat us for Gods sake. ATL could have scored 50+ if they did have such a large lead and played a little conservative for awhile. This defense is a joke, and by their standards you aren't fixing this in one draft. I predict we will never see another championship with this HC, because he's too stubborn to make changes. It will come down to TT making the change for him, and that would mean his head, but that won't happen either. Rodgers will be 38 before this defense is retooled.

0 points
0
0
NickPerry's picture

January 26, 2017 at 08:05 am

One stat I couldn't believe when I looked at the Game Summary was Atlanta on 3rd down. The Falcons were 10 of 13 on 3rd down, 76% to go with the 30 first downs they had for the game. When an offense is converting 3rd downs at that rate I'm not so sure a fumble recovery or INT. makes that much difference. I guess anything can happen if the Packers scored here or didn't fumble there, but Atlanta had their way with the Packers in every way possible. They were up 31-0 before the Packers finally scored and they turned around and went right down the field, 8 plays, 75 yards, and 5:08 later it was back to a 31 point lead.

Not making an excuse but I really think after playing being in "Playoff Mode Football" for the last 8 weeks the Packers were drained. They played 17 straight weeks of Football since the bye and it showed on the injury report and the field.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

January 26, 2017 at 09:06 am

I haven't seen the average yards to go on 3rd down for Atlanta in that game, but it really didn't matter. They were converting "3rd and anything" that game. This was what ARod was doing to teams, and the Packers got a dose of their own medicine.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

January 26, 2017 at 09:16 am

Yeah. All I'm really trying to say is who knows how different the game plays out if 3 of the first 4 drives turns out different. If the Packers score 10 points on those first 2 drives and are down 17-10, that's a huge difference. It puts a lot more pressure on Atlanta. And if they do come away with 1 or 2 of those turnovers who knows what happens.

Basically the game got away from them right away.

Oh definitely the injuries were huge in this game. Losing Brice, then Hyde and then we have Evans playing Safety. I honestly don't know if he played a down all season on defense. If Evans isn't playing and another Safety is there, do they make that interception?

0 points
0
0
Ferrari Driver's picture

January 26, 2017 at 09:41 am

Spot on.

Good post

0 points
0
0
Ferrari Driver's picture

January 26, 2017 at 09:42 am

I wasn't clear. I'm talking about Nick Perry's post:

Not making an excuse but I really think after playing being in "Playoff Mode Football" for the last 8 weeks the Packers were drained. They played 17 straight weeks of Football since the bye and it showed on the injury report and the field.

Spot on.

0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

January 26, 2017 at 10:47 am

Since the infamous Terrell Owens catch, Packers have a welll deserved rep for allowing 3rd and long, and 4th and long conversions. Its ridiculous. Unless its 3 and 35 or more, I'm biting my nails.

0 points
0
0
Since'61's picture

January 26, 2017 at 02:00 pm

Tundra - I'm not even sure this defense could hold 3rd and 35. Against Atlanta they never got off the field until they allowed a score. Thanks, Since '61

0 points
0
0
Finwiz's picture

January 26, 2017 at 03:09 pm

Since '61, us old times have a different perspective of defensive football, vs. the younger generation. There's lack of appreciation for, and recognition of, really good defense. When you've never seen it in recent times, you don't know what you're missing. I can't believe this isn't obvious, but apparently times have passed me by. I have never felt worse about a defense than the one we have now, and I have no expectation that we are going to a championship next season. No pass rush + no corners = no championships.

0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

January 27, 2017 at 08:20 am

Painfully true, LOL

0 points
0
0
Since'61's picture

January 26, 2017 at 01:58 pm

Nick - absolutely correct about the Packers having nothing left after playing the equivalent of an entire NFL season without a bye. That definitely contributed to the collapse, along with injuries, early mistakes (missed FGs and Rip fumble), bad defense and let's face it a sizzling hot Atlanta offense. The problem is, as you well know, we reach this point every season since 2010 except every season we have a different reason for failing in the playoffs. We have run a lot of players (good and bad) through Green Bay since 2010 and we still have the same leadership, the same questions and the same results. The money keeps rolling in and soon the Packers will have a new source of revenue once they open PackerWorld so there is no sense of urgency to change the on-field results. Therefore the beat goes on and we'll see more of Capers because allowing 44 points in a championship game is fine as long as the seats are filled and you have a year round entertainment venue win or lose. Thanks, Since '61

0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

January 26, 2017 at 10:40 am

Amen to that.

0 points
0
0
Handsback's picture

January 26, 2017 at 07:21 am

The Packers had the upper hand in offensive production in all of the games mentioned above, weeks 16 through the Dallas game. That was because of Rodger’s implementing a pass first offense. The pass actually set-up the run and they used it to perfection.
As Since '61 says, the Falcons weren't slowing down and it put the Packers in a bind that they had to score every time they had the ball. The drive where Rip fumbled was an effective drive and runs were called at opportune times. The fumble followed by Falcon TD followed by a 3 and out was the dagger at least mentally to kill the Packer chances.
So my thoughts aren't that the balance killed the Packers as much as the defense wasn't able to stop the Falcons putting the Packers into a situation of catch-up.

0 points
0
0
Lphill's picture

January 26, 2017 at 07:22 am

I think we need Lacy back , Lacy , Montgomery and Ripkowski is a pretty good backfield.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

January 26, 2017 at 07:58 am

I like that. I would still like to see them draft a RB fairly high. I love Montgomery, but he hasn't proved that he can make it a full 16 games. And Lacy takes a pounding. Having 3 good RB's I think would be a really good thing.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

January 26, 2017 at 09:09 am

I mentioned Joe Mixon from Oklahoma. Guy has character issues that could be a lightning rod for any team that drafts him, but he's awesome. He's going to slide (like Thomas Rawls). Some compare him to Matt Forte...I think there's some Leveon Bell in him. Either way, he's great on the field.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

January 26, 2017 at 09:19 am

There are a lot of guys that could come in and play really well.

With the direction that the offense went in the 2nd half of the season with Ty Montgomery at RB, I wonder if a guy like Wayne Gallman might be a good fit in the offense. A guy that could be effective as a RB out of the spread.

0 points
0
0
TarynsEyes's picture

January 26, 2017 at 08:31 am

The loss of Shields in week 1 has little to no bearing on what happened vs Atl as like Nelson last season.
Does everyone fail to see how many times Montgomery comes off the field hurt in some manner and you think he is a 16 game rb.
This team went on a run against lesser at the right time, survived Dallas comeback and got trounced via a total defensive failure.
The turnovers by the Packers were unfortunate but no way was this team stopping Atl even if the score was tied or 3 pts difference at half.
One must forget easily and usually the case just how easy Atl went down the field after the Rip fumble and likely would have done so again even had we scored.
No excuses. We got ass kicked by the much, much better team and deservedly so.
The better thing for this team would to not have gone on a win run, which merely covered up its disfunction on defense, at the cost of better draft position and enabling again the crying list of excuses made via ' if only ' where the only if is having better than grade C players on average on defense.
Can't tackle
Can't cover
Can't pass rush
But we can over emphasize garbage time defensive plays to justify retention of garbage.
Another year gone and the defense unless accepting it's flawed players and changes, will in essence, be pushing Rodgers out the door as he ages and becomes openly dismayed.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

January 26, 2017 at 09:16 am

"The better thing for this team would to not have gone on a win run, which merely covered up its disfunction on defense, at the cost of better draft position..."

I understand that perspective. But I would rather see them play hard and win rather than lay down for draft positioning. If your position is that they should have played hard--and to win--but still lost, I'm not getting your point.

It's one thing to say, "let's ride with younger players we like and want to see get reps, and let the chips fall in W/L". But in this case, they were pretty much doing that anyway out of necessity...and winning football games.

0 points
0
0
TarynsEyes's picture

January 26, 2017 at 09:46 am

I'm not saying I wanted them to lay down but simply it would have been more beneficial had we not won. I enjoyed the streak but also lamented what we were losing with every win as wins would be used as the thickest cover to deep flaws.

Perry, with all the issues on defense, is being touted as the must sign. It doesn't get more diluted than that when he is not a game changer and game changers are must signs.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

January 26, 2017 at 10:20 am

Which game did you not want to win? Dallas?

The Packers are drafting 1 spot behind Dallas this year.

IMO, I resign Perry only if its at a good price. Can't over pay him.

0 points
0
0
TarynsEyes's picture

January 26, 2017 at 10:37 am

I honestly would have accepted losing more when 4-6 than going on the fruitless win streak that has, as I felt then, would end without a title. Leaving us again drafting at the bottom and enabling the cry that bottom first rd picks aren't day 1 starters and we yet again have to wait, 3 years for learning in a position of extreme value to scheme, with hopes that we can repeat playoff entry and ouster via having no game changing players....even after the 3,4,5 year wait that square pegs will fit eventually....hence the false reasoning if certain player (s) are must keeps with one even if had for cheap.

0 points
0
0
SpudRapids's picture

January 26, 2017 at 11:58 am

You're a sh$&#%y fan then... wishing for them to lose for draft position, that's ridiculous and the only reason you can say that is because you have the benefit of hindsight. Guess what? Superbowls aren't guaranteed and we are not entitled to them because we have Aaron Rodgers.

Your war on Nick Perry is unwarranted... just because you called him a bust from day one doesn't mean you get continually berate him and ignore his success. He has 7 sacks in 8 playoff games... how is that not being a game changer? Having 6 sacks with a club on your hand.. how is that not being a game changer?

What you fail to ignore is how to replace Perry. If they don't sign him who takes over at starting OLB?

0 points
0
0
TarynsEyes's picture

January 26, 2017 at 12:50 pm

I didn't wish for them to lose but it would have been better if they had from a benefit view point.
As for Perry, I can berate any player that I called out 5 years running even if he has a sack total that may induce hero worship by others who ignore his majority of sacks were not via his play but another.
How many game changing plays did he really contribute. How is any player a game changer on defense when your offense needs to score 30+ weekly to feel safe.

0 points
0
0
SpudRapids's picture

January 26, 2017 at 01:14 pm

Majority of his sacks were cause other players???? what does that even mean... if he is in position to make the sack then that's a lost escape route for the QB, if he is not there then the QB might get away.

0 points
0
0
TarynsEyes's picture

January 26, 2017 at 02:26 pm

I get escape route for the QB if he wasn't there but it's more like the INT that is deflected into your hands. You didn't aquire it via contested battle with the WR, the other guy created that. Perry rarely created his sacks but by more of the product of another. Each gets the notch on the numbers sheet but is wrongly touted as playmaker. Being in the right place is great, whether consciously or not but it doesn't make you the player you're not.

0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

January 26, 2017 at 10:37 am

You had me when we were 4 and 6,but once we won division a few more draft slots wont make a difference. We need some veterans for immediate help next year and MUST unfortunately find a gem or two in later rounds. Good luck Ted.

0 points
0
0
TarynsEyes's picture

January 26, 2017 at 10:41 am

Drafting 29 and 15, depending on number of more losses had we done so, is half the round and a much better place to draft, deal etc.

0 points
0
0
egbertsouse's picture

January 26, 2017 at 08:43 am

I see that TT is at the Senior Bowl looking for draft picks. I wonder how many CBs who run 4.69, undersized DEs that he can convert to lumbering OLBs, 220 lb ILBs, and injury prone RBs he can find?

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

January 26, 2017 at 09:10 am

All of them?

0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

January 26, 2017 at 10:32 am

Rip's fumble sucked the wind out of everyone including McCarthy. I knew he wouldnt use Rip much afterwards but he should have. He was a monster on that run and fumble was not out of carelessness but MM will punish a player even if it means cutting off your nose to spite your face. The lost opportunities afterwards on potential interceptions was the proverbial nail.

0 points
0
0
Big_Mel_75's picture

January 26, 2017 at 11:14 am

It is TT's job to keep the roster stacked. He went into this season with Lacy and Starks as RB that backfired badly when TT decided to not bring up another RB for the Dallas game after Starks was hurt and Lacy was hurt in game before that. TT failed to provide enough quality players for MM and DC for the playoffs.

0 points
0
0
SpudRapids's picture

January 26, 2017 at 12:05 pm

These guys don't have crystal balls... you can say that they should be able to deal with injuries but you fail to recognize that the injuries were stocked in a few positions... All the running backs outside of Rip on the opening day roster were lost... every single one. You tell me how TT can do something different to prevent that. In fact, he singed both Knile Davis and Christine Michael midseason in trying to address those injuries.

In term of Cornerback, you had the top 4 get injured in Shields, Randall, Rollins, Goodson resulting in guys like Gunter, Hawkins, Dorleant seeing playing time. In addition, Rollins and Randall never had a chance to get healthy.

If you want criticize the way this organization handled injuries look no further than what happen to the Vikings when the injuries on the O-line piled up. Their season tanked, whereas we turned it around with 2 position groups decimated.

0 points
0
0
al bundy's picture

January 26, 2017 at 01:15 pm

The Packers were kicked by a defense that have 4 rookies and 4 second year players on it .WOw how could that be. Are they supposed to take three to four years Ted to DEVELOP. Apparently Atlanta drafted guys who did not need to develop because they sure ate up our run and passing game and put pressure on Rogers all day.
I saw one obvious diff, Ted doesnt draft speed. These Falcons had speed.

0 points
0
0
al bundy's picture

January 26, 2017 at 01:20 pm

Lets hope Ted either drafts a highly rated pass rusher and goes 4 3 D or a top Corner. Running backs galore in this draft and many good ones will still be there in the second and third accorging to analyst.
All I know is Datone went missing and Joe Thomas is a bust. The D needs a hell of a lot and the draft alone wont fix it, they need some free agents, good ones.

0 points
0
0
pacman's picture

January 26, 2017 at 03:39 pm

There something unlucky or wrong to have so many games blow up on you. It only takes a few plays to change a game - like 2014 in Seattle. It's part of the game.

But the loss to Atlanta made the Packers look REALLY bad. Someone posted about how the Patriots have never allowed that many points. Some say we should be happy with MM and the Packers overall performance for the last 6 years.

I say @#!$(&@#% to that! Any coach/management with AR and this team would have an almost equally good record. We need management that can get us another SB ring.

0 points
0
0
al bundy's picture

January 26, 2017 at 10:07 pm

Atlanta jst played there game. GB made themselves look bad. Atl had 4 people on the injury list. Atlanta used 4 rookies and 4 second year players on D to shut down the packers offense. N dract and devel going on there.

Atlanta pass attack was effective against guys who are not very good. 325 yards in the first half is insultng. Ted dd a poor job drafting. These new guys are njury prone. They are never available when you need them.

Last year we had this discussion, oh when these guys heel they will be much bstter next year. Ya im tired of that one. Its been three years.

0 points
0
0
4zone's picture

January 26, 2017 at 03:41 pm

The NFL is a game if inches. A game where a single play can dictate the outcome. Luck, weather, opponent makeup, strength vs weakness. So many factors to account for.

Our 'simple' solutions as fans are laughable.

Having said that, as an analyst, one of the most important resources in evaluating a project is the end user. (That's us folks). Oddly enough, we have a unique perspective anyone involved with the Packers does not have. We have the 'outsider's perspective'.

There is a ton of great insights that are presented here and other fan web chat sites. Unfortunately, you have to sift through a few tons of cow manure to find the real stuff.

Bare bones: We need a Gilbert Brown NT and a Rod Woodson CB. One by FA, one by moving up in the 1st round in the draft.

Assumptions:
1. Randall will improve after healing in off season, but no better than a #2.

2. Martinez takes that next step.

3. All top tier team FA's are resigned. We have more than enough money to get this done.

4. It will take our #1, #2 and probably #2 next year to do this. Opinion, we have enough guys on this team, we need more pro bowlers and they will cost but the price will be worth it.

0 points
0
0
al bundy's picture

January 26, 2017 at 09:55 pm

Ok your fhe new d coach. Which 5'10 190 lb corner who lacks cover speed and tackles so so do you put on julio, bennet, gronk. Bv fzt wide receivers. Gunter runs a 4.7 40, he aint keeping up with anyone.
The problem isnt Capers its the tools he has to work with.
Mathews would have made a great middle lb but they wasted his talents and tried to save money not having to pony up for a top de who can rush. This team no ass rush.

0 points
0
0