GBU Correction December 10, 2008
Posted by PCastleberg in : Bad, Good, Packershow, Ugly , trackback
In the Good Bad and Ugly this week I screwed up (read didn’t check my facts before opening my mouth) and said that the 549 yards was the most a Packer defense had EVER surrendered. I should have known that was not true. Greg Bedard of the JSO posted in the post game chat the following:
The 549 yards the Texans rolled up on the Packers weren’t just the most in franchise history for the young team. It was 114 yards more than the previous high. As Jeremy Kapinos said after the game, “That was sombering.”
That led me to believe that “the 549 yards the Texans rolled up on the Packers” was the most in franchise history. How I could have deducted that from the quote above I have no idea.
The true facts about the most yards given up by a Packer D are these:
The Packers allowed 549 yards, their highest total since allowing 552 in the Washington game in 1983. In the last 25 years, they yielded 500 or more five other times: 539 at Detroit in 1984, 545 against Minnesota in 1998, 514 at Denver in 1999, 524 at the New York Giants in 2001 and 542 at Philadelphia in 2004. Green Bay’s three highest yields were 611 at the Los Angeles Rams in 1956, 599 at the Rams in 1957 and 594 at Chicago in 1980.
Just figured I should get that correction out there ahead of time. I certainly have some thoughts about the defensive performance. Not the least of which is that our DC and his scheme need to go. I don’t think the Scheme is championship caliber and I don’t think Sanders has the creativity to modify it to be so.
I’ll leave the rest of the commentary to the actual podcast.
Comments»
I’ve come to the conclusion that Sanders is actively screwing up the defense. My read is that he and McCarthy are at odds and this abysmal performance by the defense is a direct result of the conflict between the two coaches. It’s hard to be focused when there’s a lot of wrangling taking place around you.
Of course the official line, and the public statements by Mike McCarthy, laud Sanders and profess respect for his ability. However the press is very persistent in questioning both Sanders’ competence and McCarthy’s faith in it (good for them!). At best this is a distraction, but in reality, this non-resolution of the conflict caused by Sanders’ performance (whether is is simply boneheaded or deliberately destructive) is a show stopper. Right now the defense is mired and the defensive coordinator has to go to break the impasse.
Whoops! Sorry I didn’t read your comment at the end of Ross’ posting. Even though I disagree with you, you were more realistic about the potential record at the beginning of the season, so I’ll have to back off a bit on my ’sabotage’ conspiracy theory.
I just find it hard to believe that a defense can sag so badly just from poor alignments. Obviously opposing offensive coordinators can ‘read’ the scheme that Sanders puts out there, and I find it hard to believe that his response or adjustments can be so pathetic (especially after last year’s performance). Or simply put, I don’t think he’s that dumb.
I thought it was interesting that according to the McCarthy press conference yesterday, there was a single linebacker on the last series, and Hawk wasn’t in. I didn’t get a chance to see the play since I was listening to the radio. Can you or Ross and Wes dissect that last series here on the website?
Well this defensive scheme had the same struggles last year so I would submit that its “sagging” is due more to being missing 3 of its top play makers from last year and having multiple other guys dinged up.
This D was marginal before and its marginality (is that a word) is being exposed in droves as its talented starters go down to injury.
Well last year I know there were some issues with the mid-level pass defense. Tight ends used to (and still do) rip off huge gains. I would guess the biggest issue is the line. With no front four pressure to speak of it’s hard to contain any offense. I’m still perplexed by the run defense issues though. It’s not enough to say we don’t have the same personnel as last year. I’m more of a fan of a Giants-type defense though, which means big and fast bodies are needed.
John, its not that we “don’t have the same personnel as last year. Its that we did have the same personnel as last year, they were our starters and they got injured. We came into this season counting on Jenkins, KGB, Bigby, Barnett etc…Now we are so beat up that not only didn’t we are playing our 3-4 string safeties, our 3rd string LBs our 3rd-4th string Defensive Ends….
When any team is doing that much shuffling there are going to be issues.
My biggest problem is that I don’t think this scheme adjusts very well to losing your starting talent. You see a team like the Giants running the scheme they are running and they are able to mask some weaknesses because they have a scheme that is flexible enough to shift the burden to other areas of the defense without creating as big of holes and problems.
They have the flexibility to blitz more or bring pressure from different areas to compensate.
With the scheme that Sanders is running either he doesn’t have the knowledge to adjust or the scheme is not flexible enough to make it “easy” to do without creating other problems.
Thats why I think we need a new DC who will bring with him a new scheme.