I was going to post about being slightly dissappointed in the Packer defense so far so I went to Football Outsiders and see they have the Packers at 14th. Which is about what I thought, I expected a much better unit this year.

Anyway what really shocked me it the ranking for the Packers vs #1, #2 and "other" WRs.

30th...19th...28th respectively.

It seems to me that Woodson, Harris and Bigby, at least, are doing fine jobs, but the Packers pass defense is ranked 15th out of 32 teams. Not what I expected.

The Redskins are ranked 4th overall.

Yep, the D is playing no where near what I thought they would. Not sure I'm sold on Sanders nor Shotts just yet. I feel the players talent is at a higher level than the results.

The Packers D gave up a 79 yard winning td drive in the last few minutes of the Bears game, that shouldn't happen against the Bears pop-gun offense.

Good link, thanks FS. The blog about our game was terrific.

quote:

The Packers’ one weakness, pass defense against multiple-receiver sets, is likely one that will not be exploited in the coming weeks. They face a series of teams in the coming weeks that normally excel on the ground. Washington, Denver, Kansas City, Minnesota, and Carolina would all prefer to run the ball, and the Packers should win at least three of those games. At that point, they should be 7-3 and able to coast into the NFC playoffs. Chicago showed that the NFC North would not be a runaway. Their comeback the rest of the season, however, will be even more difficult then the rally they staged on Sunday.

We have to disguise a way to protect our liabilities at SSLB, SS, and nickel CB.

quote:

Originally posted by CS Pack:
We have to disguise a way to protect our liabilities at SSLB, SS, and nickel CB.

Bigby is listed as the SS, Collins is the FS. IMO, Collins is the one who needs to show rapid improvement. Bigby has been a pleasant surprise, considering he was a two-time cast off.

Cool, thought Bigby was the FS, my bad. Either way, I was referring to Collins, and I agree he needs to get better.

He can run and hit. The other stuff, man...

I have been wondering if it's time to give Rouse or Peprah a look at FS and move Collins to the nickel CB. No one doubts Collins physical abilities, but he seems to have trouble staying focused on his assignment and diagnosing the play. At nickel CB he will usually have a very specific assignment and wouldn't have to think to much. Rouse and Peprah are inexperieinced, but they both appear to be good tacklers and that would be at least some improvement at FS

Note the Broncos are 27th. Yet I'm sure some will still sing the praises of Jim Bates and how great he is.

I don't know how great Sanders is, but our defense is better under him than it was under Jim Bates. Our personnel has changed somewhat, but the facts are that we've gone from a defense that couldn't stop the run and was poor in forcing turnovers and getting sacks to one that's ranked 10th against the run and does a good job of forcing turnovers and recording sacks. And is a large part of the reason why we're 4-1.

quote:

Originally posted by GBnative:
I have been wondering if it's time to give Rouse or Peprah a look at FS and move Collins to the nickel CB. No one doubts Collins physical abilities, but he seems to have trouble staying focused on his assignment and diagnosing the play. At nickel CB he will usually have a very specific assignment and wouldn't have to think to much. Rouse and Peprah are inexperieinced, but they both appear to be good tacklers and that would be at least some improvement at FS

Collins' biggest weakness is in coverage. I wouldn't want him as our nickelback. I was really surprised by the Rouse selection in April. We needed a Free Safety, not another Strong. Rouse is a big hitter, but he can't cover any better than Collins does.

quote:

Originally posted by Since69:
We needed a Free Safety, not another Strong. Rouse is a big hitter, but he can't cover any better than Collins does.

Rouse was the BPA.

According to NFL.com


Scoring Defense: 12
Rushing Defense: 14
Passing Defense: 23

Here's where the 5 offenses we've played rank at this point:

Philadelphia: #14
New York: #16
San Diego: #18
Minnesota: #20
Chicago: #30


The defense has not been what I expected. They can tweek a few things and get better, like hiding Poppinga and Collins. Was hoping Blackmon would replace Bush, too bad that won't happen cause Bush has been brutal. Teams are looking for him on 3rd down....hopefully Frank Walker can step up.

Agree on Collins, the guy has no awareness for the ball nor can he anticipate a route. Third year guy...losing faith. Hope I'm wrong.


Tweak a few things and we are a top 10 defense.

quote:

Originally posted by Goalline:

quote:

Originally posted by Since69:
We needed a Free Safety, not another Strong. Rouse is a big hitter, but he can't cover any better than Collins does.

Rouse was the BPA.

Agree. But how much better would we be if we'd tabbed Michael Griffin, Reggie Nelson or Brandon Merriweather in the first instead of Harrell?

Yeah, yeah. I know. Monday Morning QB, 20-20 hindsight, coulda-shoulda-woulda, yada yada yada...

30th against #1 WRs
19th against #2 WRs
28th against #3 WRs

That is not all on Poppinga and Collins.

quote:

Originally posted by Since69:

quote:

Originally posted by GBnative:
I have been wondering if it's time to give Rouse or Peprah a look at FS and move Collins to the nickel CB. No one doubts Collins physical abilities, but he seems to have trouble staying focused on his assignment and diagnosing the play. At nickel CB he will usually have a very specific assignment and wouldn't have to think to much. Rouse and Peprah are inexperieinced, but they both appear to be good tacklers and that would be at least some improvement at FS

Collins' biggest weakness is in coverage. I wouldn't want him as our nickelback. I was really surprised by the Rouse selection in April. We needed a Free Safety, not another Strong. Rouse is a big hitter, but he can't cover any better than Collins does.

Is Collins' problem an inability to cover or knowing who to cover? Remember the game against the saints last year when he was assigned to spy Bush. Collins did an excellant job. Bush did nothing because Collins was on him. Collins knew who he was supposed to focus on and he did it. When he knows his assignment and follows it he has the physically ability, he just seems to usually be all over the field rather than concentrating on his assignment. At some point the Packers are going to have to admit the guy is not making it at FS and try something different.

quote:

Originally posted by FreeSafety:
30th against #1 WRs

I don't get this. Here are the stats from the first five games:

Team/WR1/Catches/Yards/TDs

PHI/Reggie Brown/1/14/0
NYG/Plaxico Burress/2/32/1
SD/Vincent Jackson/6/98/1
MIN/Bobby Wade/5/83/0
CHI/Bernard Berrian/1/10/0

TOTAL: 15 catches, 237 yards, 2 touchdowns
AVERAGE: 3 catches, 47 yards, 0 TD

How does that get you ranked #30 against WR1s???

quote:

Originally posted by Goalline:

quote:

Originally posted by Since69:
We needed a Free Safety, not another Strong. Rouse is a big hitter, but he can't cover any better than Collins does.

Rouse was the BPA.

Is he really BPA if there's no place for him?

quote:

Originally posted by Since69:

quote:

Originally posted by Goalline:

quote:

Originally posted by Since69:
We needed a Free Safety, not another Strong. Rouse is a big hitter, but he can't cover any better than Collins does.

Rouse was the BPA.

Agree. But how much better would we be if we'd tabbed Michael Griffin, Reggie Nelson or Brandon Merriweather in the first instead of Harrell?

Yeah, yeah. I know. Monday Morning QB, 20-20 hindsight, coulda-shoulda-woulda, yada yada yada...

Merriweather was a guy I really liked, and they could have traded back and still got him.

quote:

Originally posted by scoop:

quote:

Originally posted by FreeSafety:
30th against #1 WRs

I don't get this. Here are the stats from the first five games:

Team/WR1/Catches/Yards/TDs

PHI/Reggie Brown/1/14/0
NYG/Plaxico Burress/2/32/1
SD/Vincent Jackson/6/98/1
MIN/Bobby Wade/5/83/0
CHI/Bernard Berrian/1/10/0

TOTAL: 15 catches, 237 yards, 2 touchdowns
AVERAGE: 3 catches, 47 yards, 0 TD

How does that get you ranked #30 against WR1s???

It's a flaw in their point system. 15 catches netted something like 10 1st downs and 2 TD's. They do not factor in that the #1 only averaged 3 catches per game. They do not take into account that these #1 WRs could and likely should have more passes thrown their way. They just figure the 1st down and TD opportunities based on the catches. So, while these #1 WRs have not caught many passes against Harris and Woodson, when they have the result was considered a positive (1st down or TD).

There was a lot of woofing about our D over the offseason and preseason and I posted several times "Why all the hype after beating 4 lousy teams last year?" but didn't get any replies. Maybe they're starting slow and will pick things up after the bye but that loss to the Bears with their sisters of the poor offense is really disconcerting, turnovers included.

quote:

Originally posted by Hungry5:

quote:

Originally posted by scoop:

quote:

Originally posted by FreeSafety:
30th against #1 WRs

I don't get this. Here are the stats from the first five games:

Team/WR1/Catches/Yards/TDs

PHI/Reggie Brown/1/14/0
NYG/Plaxico Burress/2/32/1
SD/Vincent Jackson/6/98/1
MIN/Bobby Wade/5/83/0
CHI/Bernard Berrian/1/10/0

TOTAL: 15 catches, 237 yards, 2 touchdowns
AVERAGE: 3 catches, 47 yards, 0 TD

How does that get you ranked #30 against WR1s???

It's a flaw in their point system. 15 catches netted something like 10 1st downs and 2 TD's. They do not factor in that the #1 only averaged 3 catches per game. They do not take into account that these #1 WRs could and likely should have more passes thrown their way. They just figure the 1st down and TD opportunities based on the catches. So, while these #1 WRs have not caught many passes against Harris and Woodson, when they have the result was considered a positive (1st down or TD).

These mathematical "rankings" in sports stats are the most overvalued garbage on the planet. What matters, and all that matters, is how many points did they score on us and what's our record? We're 5th in the NFC. 2nd best record in the NFC (a Greg Jennings away from the BEST record in the NFC).

It's like QB rating: a BS stat. Announcers and analysts always make mention of how silly the QB rating is unless they're trying to back up their own point. "Tony Romo is GOD... just look at this QB rating!" or "Brett Favre stinks, look at how his QB RATING declined!" Nerds in suits. Nerds in suits.

quote:

Originally posted by DH13:
There was a lot of woofing about our D over the offseason and preseason and I posted several times "Why all the hype after beating 4 lousy teams last year?" but didn't get any replies. Maybe they're starting slow and will pick things up after the bye but that loss to the Bears with their sisters of the poor offense is really disconcerting, turnovers included.

Our DEFENSE is amazing. We turned the ball over one millions times against the BEARS and the D kept the game in the hands of Brett and Co., but for some reason the O didn't get the job done. We didn't start slow. We're pressuring the QB and eliminating WRs and RBs. The most points we have up came from the last week when we gave the BEARS a short field ALL DAY long and kept handing the ball back.

You jerks should stop looking at the "stat column" like a bunch of nerds and watch the games with your eyes. It's a sport not academia.

"LOOK OUT, BMR'S HAVING A BAD DAY!"

quote:

Originally posted by Hungry5:
It's a flaw in their point system. 15 catches netted something like 10 1st downs and 2 TD's. They do not factor in that the #1 only averaged 3 catches per game. They do not take into account that these #1 WRs could and likely should have more passes thrown their way. They just figure the 1st down and TD opportunities based on the catches. So, while these #1 WRs have not caught many passes against Harris and Woodson, when they have the result was considered a positive (1st down or TD).

I don't know if it a flaw or not. It places value on production, in an attempt to lessen the value of garbage time stats. You can't really say how many catches a #1 WR "should" have. Running teams are not going to throw much and passing teams are going to at least attempt to get the ball to their top WR.

I know they take into account who the intended receiver is on incomplete passes. So basically they are putting a value on the production gained when passes are thrown at the #1 WR.

If they throw 10 times at the WR and Al Harris bats down 9 passes but gives up 1 TD, I think that shows up as a much higher ranking than when the WR gets 1 pass thrown at him and he takes it in for a TD.

The only real flaw I see is when a play is designed to go to the #1 WR but he is covered and the QB checks down to a RB. Most of us would consider that a "win" for the defense against the #1 WR but I am not sure how the stats deal with that.

I think SOMETHING is clearly wrong when a team that gives up an average of 3 catches and a total of 2 TDs in five games to the other team's top receiver is ranked 30th out of 32 teams in defending WR1.

This is a case where stats conceal rather than reveal.

I think there are at least 3 possible flaws:

1) As you say, a check down from a covered receiver

2) The extent to which a team game plans away from certain defenders and/or targets others - is this accounted for?

3) Are penalties factored in? Going against Woodson and Harris might be the extent to which they give up first downs for illegal contact or other PI calls.

quote:

Originally posted by FreeSafety:

You can't really say how many catches a #1 WR "should" have.

I don't think they have to be arbitrary with that measure. A simple comparison to the rest of the league will show whether 3 catches a game is a good result or otherwise.