Packers Defense so far, post-season...aweful

BIG disparity compared to the other teams.

http://www.nfl.com/stats/categoryst...gory=RUSHING&d-447263-s=RUSHING_AVERAGE_YARDS

http://www.nfl.com/stats/categoryst...tatisticCategory=TEAM_PASSING&qualified=false

http://www.nfl.com/stats/categoryst...tatisticCategory=TEAM_PASSING&qualified=false

You could also argue that the Colts might hang with/upset the Pats.

Fair enough, let's compare. First, I acknowledge the Seahawks defense is probably in the Top 3 of defenses I've ever seen. But you're trying to say GB has a horrible defense based on one game against Dallas. Dallas has a pretty fine offense. Let's see how the Seahawks and Packers defenses did against that same Dallas offense (Dallas on the road for both).

Against GB ------------ Against SEA
First downs: 21 ----------- 23
Total plays 51 ----------- 69
Total yards 315 ----------- 401
Passing 170 ------------ 239
Rushing 145 ------------ 162
Possession 30:39 ---------- 37:39
Points allowed 21 ---------------- 30

We could also compare how GB's defense compared to Carolina as well if you'd like.

Just as Green Bay was different in September, so was Seattle's defense.

No Bobby Wagner, no healthy Kam Chancellor, KJ Wright playing out of position...big difference.

ptisme":1kbjfnep said:

We could also compare how GB's defense compared to Carolina as well if you'd like.

Click to expand...

Or, we could talk about how the last time the Pack beat a good defense on the road was week 6 of last season (at Baltimore).

MontanaHawk05":2q2573g4 said:

Just as Green Bay was different in September, so was Seattle's defense.

No Bobby Wagner, no healthy Kam Chancellor, KJ Wright playing out of position...big difference.

Click to expand...

This thread is regarding the Packers defense. I only used the Dallas game to suggest the one game sample size was bad because it was against Dallas.

nanomoz":3p7dtkiq said:

ptisme":3p7dtkiq said:

We could also compare how GB's defense compared to Carolina as well if you'd like.

Click to expand...

Or, we could talk about how the last time the Pack beat a good defense on the road was week 6 of last season (at Baltimore).

Click to expand...

Right but the OP was about GB's defense, not their offense...

The playoff rankings are too small a sample size IMO, but we can certainly go by GB's regular season defensive ranking to see that they're a pretty average defense......especially on the road. 15th overall and middle of the pack in just about ever defensive category.

They play much better at home cause the Packers offense usually gets out to a big lead and forces other teams to be one dimensional. That ain't happening Sunday.

ptisme":7w8dgbq3 said:

MontanaHawk05":7w8dgbq3 said:

Just as Green Bay was different in September, so was Seattle's defense.

No Bobby Wagner, no healthy Kam Chancellor, KJ Wright playing out of position...big difference.

Click to expand...

This thread is regarding the Packers defense. I only used the Dallas game to suggest the one game sample size was bad because it was against Dallas.

Click to expand...

Those injuries were for the Dallas game...the stats would be dramatically different if the Cowboys had to come in and play a healthy Seahawks team.

Sgt. Largent":husj5bwk said:

The playoff rankings are too small a sample size IMO, but we can certainly go by GB's regular season defensive ranking to see that they're a pretty average defense......especially on the road. 15th overall and middle of the pack in just about ever defensive category.

They play much better at home cause the Packers offense usually gets out to a big lead and forces other teams to be one dimensional. That ain't happening Sunday.

Click to expand...

Your right, it won't happen Sunday... Also, if you want to look at GB's defense you need to look at their numbers after the bye. They cut down the playing time of both ILB's Brad Jones and AJ Hawk. Barrington and Matthews are much more effective in the middle and that also allowed them to get Nick Perry on the field at ROLB. Also, Ha Ha is much more assignment sure now... Not saying they are going to skunk Seattle or anything but the first 7 games really skewed their defensive numbers. Tom Brady really struggled against this defense....

andyh64000":3d73ffq1 said:

ptisme":3d73ffq1 said:

MontanaHawk05":3d73ffq1 said:

Just as Green Bay was different in September, so was Seattle's defense.

No Bobby Wagner, no healthy Kam Chancellor, KJ Wright playing out of position...big difference.

Click to expand...

This thread is regarding the Packers defense. I only used the Dallas game to suggest the one game sample size was bad because it was against Dallas.

Click to expand...

Those injuries were for the Dallas game...the stats would be dramatically different if the Cowboys had to come in and play a healthy Seahawks team.

Click to expand...

Probably but you weren't chopped liver either....

ptisme":26vh6b5s said:

Sgt. Largent":26vh6b5s said:

The playoff rankings are too small a sample size IMO, but we can certainly go by GB's regular season defensive ranking to see that they're a pretty average defense......especially on the road. 15th overall and middle of the pack in just about ever defensive category.

They play much better at home cause the Packers offense usually gets out to a big lead and forces other teams to be one dimensional. That ain't happening Sunday.

Click to expand...

Your right, it won't happen Sunday... Also, if you want to look at GB's defense you need to look at their numbers after the bye. They cut down the playing time of both ILB's Brad Jones and AJ Hawk. Barrington and Matthews are much more effective in the middle and that also allowed them to get Nick Perry on the field at ROLB. Also, Ha Ha is much more assignment sure now... Not saying they are going to skunk Seattle or anything but the first 7 games really skewed their defensive numbers. Tom Brady really struggled against this defense....

Click to expand...

I agree they've played better as of late, although giving up 21 to the Cowboys at home and allowing Murray to run for 130 yards doesn't bode well for you...............but the Hawks D has played even better, historically dominant better.

If the Packers can get Lacy going even a little to keep Bennett and Avril off of Rodgers and convert some 3rd downs for the first half? Then the game should be closer than people are saying...........but the only RB's that have given the Hawks trouble are quicker slashing type runners like Murray and Charles. Big pounding backs like Lacy get destroyed by the big physical and fast as hell Hawks D.

SGT. Largent: Giving up 21 to the Cowboys was actually not bad considering how wonderfully balanced that offense is... You're injured defense faired much worse.

I expect Lacy to be able to run but I think in the third quarter the Hawks will start to make their own breaks and pull away....

And that Seattle was able to shut down that offense when it was being led by a healthy, mobile Rogers.

ptisme":15m995hc said:

Fair enough, let's compare. First, I acknowledge the Seahawks defense is probably in the Top 3 of defenses I've ever seen. But you're trying to say GB has a horrible defense based on one game against Dallas. Dallas has a pretty fine offense. Let's see how the Seahawks and Packers defenses did against that same Dallas offense (Dallas on the road for both).

Against GB ------------ Against SEA
First downs: 21 ----------- 23
Total plays 51 ----------- 69
Total yards 315 ----------- 401
Passing 170 ------------ 239
Rushing 145 ------------ 162
Possession 30:39 ---------- 37:39
Points allowed 21 ---------------- 30

Click to expand...

I can't imagine a reason why the Cowboys would not play as well in 8 degrees as they did in 70 degree weather.

ptisme":30mlnccw said:

andyh64000":30mlnccw said:

ptisme":30mlnccw said:

MontanaHawk05":30mlnccw said:

Just as Green Bay was different in September, so was Seattle's defense.

No Bobby Wagner, no healthy Kam Chancellor, KJ Wright playing out of position...big difference.

Click to expand...

This thread is regarding the Packers defense. I only used the Dallas game to suggest the one game sample size was bad because it was against Dallas.

Click to expand...

Those injuries were for the Dallas game...the stats would be dramatically different if the Cowboys had to come in and play a healthy Seahawks team.

Click to expand...

Probably but you weren't chopped liver either....

Click to expand...

Maxwell was out early also, Harvins pouting had the offense in fits.

Yet it took a 3rd and 20 miracle catch for the Cowboys to win the game.

Talk about bad comparisons.

The first Game of the season is a far and away better indicator of what will happen. But since Packers fans say, "we are a different team now", we have seem to given them a pass. Yet the Dallas vs Hawks game where the Hawks offense was in complete disarray and the defense without several key players is somehow more relevant? Complete Hogwash.

rideaducati":3anffp77 said:

ptisme":3anffp77 said:

Fair enough, let's compare. First, I acknowledge the Seahawks defense is probably in the Top 3 of defenses I've ever seen. But you're trying to say GB has a horrible defense based on one game against Dallas. Dallas has a pretty fine offense. Let's see how the Seahawks and Packers defenses did against that same Dallas offense (Dallas on the road for both).

Against GB ------------ Against SEA
First downs: 21 ----------- 23
Total plays 51 ----------- 69
Total yards 315 ----------- 401
Passing 170 ------------ 239
Rushing 145 ------------ 162
Possession 30:39 ---------- 37:39
Points allowed 21 ---------------- 30

Click to expand...

I can't imagine a reason why the Cowboys would not play as well in 8 degrees as they did in 70 degree weather.

Click to expand...

Wasn't 8. Was 28 with no wind... Whether wasn't a factor at all... Did you watch the game?

Jacknut 16:
Green Bay is a different team. I doubt it will make a difference but you never know... I remember a few years ago we went out to the Giants in week one and had our way with them. Back home for the NFCCG no one gave the Giants a shot... Enter a hot quarterback and a defense that found its way. Giants were a different team than week one... Things change rapidly in the NFL. How many teams set the world on fire the first month and are no longer in the discussion by December....

ptisme":1ou8k7je said:

SGT. Largent: Giving up 21 to the Cowboys was actually not bad considering how wonderfully balanced that offense is... You're injured defense faired much worse.

I expect Lacy to be able to run but I think in the third quarter the Hawks will start to make their own breaks and pull away....

Click to expand...

The Cowboys didnt score 35+ because of a fumble (that you wont get from Lynch), and a lucky break on the Dez play.

Not to mention missed FGs which also probably cost the game for the Cowboys.

Why the Cowboys started throwing the ball and taking sacks in that game was beyond me. They were controlling that game on the ground, and it didnt seem fair. At times I found myself cringing for GB fans at the way Dallas was getting chunks every play.

GB defending Lynch and Wilson on the run? How? With whom? On Field turf? PFFFT.... no way
-For one they dont even have the horses to match up with the Hawks against the run, plus the intensity of the game is going to favor the physical team.
-Two, the only a team like last seasons 49ers really would have a chance in Seattle this sunday. A massive, strong defense with great linebackers, powerfull DTs, and Aldon rushing the QB.

I simply dont think GB can match the intensity needed physically to win this game.

Jacknut16:
"The Cowboys didnt score 35+ because of a fumble (that you wont get from Lynch), and a lucky break on the Dez play."

We also had a fumble and there were breaks the Cowboys got as well. Your game was close at the end but you also got 7 points off a special teams play correct?