Packers defense comes under fire

I will say this...the Packers Rush defense is VASTLY improved this year from last. The only thing I can find that the Packers don't do well is get after the QB...only 12 sacks all year.

Remember, when looking at Packer defensive stats for this season 3 of those 7 games were against the Rams, Lions, and Browns - and a 4th against the Bears when Cutler had a horrible game - comparatively look at the defensive stats against the Bengals and the 2 Viking games.

Pack will be back.... I think this defense will pick up and make plays down the stretch

The so called improvement couldn't have anything to do with the weak teams they have played could it? Detroit, Cleveland and St.Louis. Not actually Super bowl contenders. And this week they get that Tampa Bay powerhouse. When they play a decent team IE: Minnesota, they don't look so improved. Numbers can't be misleading!
Second half of the season they will be playing some better teams, then we'll see how much they actually have improved.

Just read this from Tom Silverstein of the Milw. Journal Sentinel:

"Yes, the Packers rank tied for fourth in total defense (283.4 yards per game allowed), but if you took away performances against the horrible Detroit Lions and Cleveland Browns, the Packers would rank 21st (338 per game)."

That is one rank less than 2008.

Man, is every Packer fan on the ledge or what? I guess Detroit and Cleveland don't count, huh? You still have to show up and take care of business.... that is what playoff teams do.

Or is this season over because Favre beat you twice? Who cares, move on... Still have nine games to play. You guys sound like the players in the locker room after the Minny beat down.

so what if the Packers played the Rams, Lions and Browns? So did the Vikings. And the Packers shut them down better than the Vikings did.

The Packers defense has some work to do. But they are obviously much improved and one of the top overall units in the NFL right now. Every team in the NFL has played a few cupcake games and a few tough ones.

Give Capers a full year and another offseason to get the defense shaped and ready and you'll start seeing some huge returns. Remember that we've been building the defense for the 4-3 for years. May take a bit to find a few more 3-4 pieces.

The Lions scored 27 on the Saints, 24 on the Bear, and 20 against the Steelers.

matt bowen comment earlier in Summer: "Cubs are going to the series DC." Niiiiiice.


with regards to my pack, we shall see how the D does for the rest of the season. You get your schedule, and you have to make the best of it. Both the offense and defense love playing bad teams and excel at it. I expect a Maddenesque game from Rodgers this weekend as he loves bad defenses but can't win against good ones.

Rodgers is 10-13 as a starter, and packer fans, please defend him because I am losing confidence that he can ever win the big game. As bad as the D was on Sunday and it was bad, the Pack still had a chance to win the game down by 4 at the Vikes 35, and Rodgers just falls short...time and time and time again

Dan, I'd give Rodgers another year to work that out. Part of it is the lack of pass blocking, part of it is the lack of running game. Rodgers does need to improve his decision making. But in the grand scheme of things, he's still a young QB.

I think he will improve more next season. And get him a decent LT and a running back capable of putting up yards the first half of the game and you'll see different results. Rodgers has the tools and the smarts to put it together. I think he just needs to settle down and have more confidence in himself.

I agree that much of this is frustration after losing to the Vikings twice, but there are some key players on this defense who don't seem to be a good fit for the 3-4. Cullen Jenkins is one of them. His pass-rushing skills are not being utilized in this defense. In a recent story in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel there was this quote from an NFL personnel man: "You're using a horse to do a mule's job. He's a good football player in the 3-4 and he's a very good football player in the 4-3." Mike McCarthy recently called Jenkins the best football player on the team, but they're not putting him in position to maximize his potential, in my opinion. The same holds true for Aaron Kampman. They're giving him more opportunities to rush with his hand down, but he still looks like a bad fit as a 3-4 OLB. Finally, they've used BJ Raji as a 3-4 end when he looks more like a pure 3-4 NT. I know his ankle has been a problem all year and Ryan Pickett has played well, but I'm guessing the Packers drafted Raji #9 overall to be a force in the middle, a la Casey Hampton, and will look for him to fill that role next year. I think the Packers still have work to do in finding the right pieces for the 3-4, and will make some more moves in the offseason.

They've got the talent and the scheme is fine. They should get better and better as the season moves along.

My concern is how this team fails to show up in games they need to win. There hasn't been a single "statement game" win in McCarthy's tenure. He's a good teacher, and he's designed a good offensive scheme, but he either needs to grow as a leader (and soon), or I'd be fine with firing him. Some people are better suited as coordinators than head coaches. There's no shame in that.

Look, I've always liked McCarthy, but I've lost faith that this team will ever show up when the lights are bright and the going gets tough. McCarthy's teams always, always come out soft and un-prepared in big games. I'm getting to the point where I've just seen enough.

HAHAHAHAHAHA.... 4th ranked defense??? PLEASE!!!

They played a Rams team without their starting QB- Bulger.

They played a Lions team without their starting QB- Stafford and their best player/WR C Johnson.

They then played a browns team decimated with illness and who has just traded it's best receiver.

When they played a team with a good QB and HB (Bengals and Vikings), they looked awful.... Woodson knows this, he said it himself.

Stats can be skewed anyway you want them to look. The only true stat is wins/losses.

I can't help but feel that the Packers' performance is directly related to lack of discipline. The absolutely stupid personal fouls show that they aren't playing under control and must stop. Missed assignments in all aspects of the game can also be attributed to lack of discipline.

As far as for the defensive schemes, I kinda was hoping to see all the big bodies on the DL. But that comes from someone who's uneducated in what exactly happened behind the scenes.

I do not pretend to be the most knowledgeable person when I comes to football....I have played it, watched it and have even one time coached it. It was great fun and experience.

With the Green Bay Packers, I feel the only major problem with the defense last year is the injuries to the various individuals. Everyone in the secondary was out at one time or another...sometimes several of them where out. Jenkins also missed a lot of the season. When your strongest players are out and you also lose some of your leadership, the defense is going to suffer as it did last year.

I have felt since the hiring of Capers, that the Packer organization panicked about the abilities of the defense and should have stayed with the 4-3. With a lot of the defensive leaders avoiding major injuries (Harris, Jenkins, Barnett) and the addition of Clay Mathews, I feel the 4-3 defense would have not only held up, but allowed Kampman to turn on the rush again. The Packers are built for a 4-3 defense and if they were going to switch as they did, they needed to hit free agency and some trades to get some key players so the can switch to the 3-4 easier.

I know it is fantasy, but I had hoped that during the buy week, they would have switched back to the 4-3. I really feel the defense would have performed better against the Vikings. I do not feel that a St. Louis, Detroit or Cleveland is a good gage as too where this defense stands. We will see when they play the Cowboys and a few of the tougher games in the future.

How can you put any stock in someone saying the Packers would rank 21st if you took away their stats against weak teams?

Everybody has played weak teams, take away the stats every team has put up against weak teams and the Packers are far better than 21st.

@Daniel

Last time I checked, the players don't get to make the schedule. You play them as they come. Like one poster already said, Vikes have already played Rams and Bucs as well--and gave up a boatload of points to A Rod in their two meetings?

Does their defense suck too? Get real.

The Pack's defense looked awesome in the first half in their first game against the Bears. Guys were flying around (Chillar especially) and watching that game I thought that Favre would literally have a career ending injury or throw 5 picks against them. What happened to the defense from that game? Are the Bears that bad or the Vikes that good? Seriously - someone with more knowledge about football than the casual fan like me please offer up an explanation.

I don't think it's the scheme that is the problem in Green Bay. The difference in numbers from a season ago demonstrates that much (though how much of that is helped by playing offensively-challenged teams is debatable). I think the bigger issue is the inability to make in-game adjustments. How long did it take Capers to bring pressure on Sunday after Favre picked them apart facing no pressure on a 3 to 4 man rush?

Matt, if you discount the games against the Browns, Lions and Rams, the Packers would be 22nd in defense. Lets see what they do against the Cowboys in two weeks, after facing Tampa Bay (another NFL weakling) on Sunday. Feasting on bottom feeders is expected. But an elite team also beats other elite teams. The Packers have yet to accomplish that.

How goofy to have stats that say the Packers have improved in this area or that....NO THE HAVE NOT. They are still losing games. The won against teams that are not wining & that's suppose to be a big thing? Come on!!!

It's starts @ the top...poor gm, poor coaching. They didn't seek to put the best players out on the field that they could get to win games. Their vision is flawed.
They have been "rebuilding" for years. The only position which covered up the poor coaching was the QB they traded. After the Vikings game...it's obvious the view McCarthy had during "the meeting before the trade"...showed McCarthy was wrong. This guy does want to play. He does want to win. He still can play & he still is a major factor & leader.
It all plays out on the field. Padding stats means nothing...ONLY THE WINS are important.

Another year of soul searching for the Packers....
Oh well....it will be over in a few weeks....

I was not one to drink the pre-season kool aid. Everyone who watched the defense blitz and cause multiply turnovers was mislead. There is a transition period involved people. You are asking guys that have been in a 4-3 defense their entire playing career to learn a new system. Results will take time. This defense is a mirage.

The rankings come against a fairly weak schedule. The 2nd city bums don't have a running game, but they still marched it up and down the field on the Pack. The Browns are junk. The Lions were missing two offensive studs. In the 1st meeting with the vile-queens, the Pack did keep All Day in check, but old fart 4 carved them up. Not to mention that Cedric "The drunk boating captin" Benson tore up that defense. S. Jax, with no help on offense, ran thru that defense also.

Let me throw out a scenario also. Before Capers was hired, didn't the Pack interview a guy by the name of Mike Nolan. How is that guy doing in his new job? To a man, the Bronc-girls defense is not more talented than the Packers defense. I might be bias on the last statement being a Packer backer.

Finally, to the lack of talent on the defense. Idiot boy Teddy has not improved this team at all. The secondary has no quality back-ups. The linebackers are average in talent. The d-line has guys playing out of place(Raji is a nt but playing de?).

FIRE TIGHTWAD TED THOMPSON AND PIG MAC MIKE MCCARTHY!

P.S. - Hey BrettNJ, Dump, and Smack, where you at? Why are you losers in hiding? Come out and defend your boy Teddy now. You three punks were talking all your trash in the spring. The season is here now girls. The Pack don't look too good to me. They have 3 winnable games left on the schedule and 2 that can go either way. That would leave the Pack with a final record of 7-9 or 8-8. That still puts your boy teddy's record at one winning season as GM of the Pack. Defend your lord and savior now B!TCHES. NUFF SAID!

Two things: Its interesting how people are quick to point out the weak schedule of the Packers. They took care of business and played well. You same people would be harping on them had the Browns or Lions come close to beating them, so really, its impossible to quell your opinions of the Packers, so why try?
Secondly, so much is made of a 3-4 vs a 4-3 scheme and in all reality, the Packers have played in their base 3-4 about 20% of snaps this season. They're usually in their nickel which, with Kampman in a 3 point stance, is actually a 4-3 alignment. What the Packers problem comes down to is that they have guys who were premiere guys last year on a lousy defense that couldn't stop the run, who moved to role positions that require them to sacrifice stats for overall team defense. Its pure and simple player selfishness at this point.

Rogue420
Take a Valium dude, it's just a game.
Also, Cederic Benson has been outstanding this year. he's surprised everyone, you can't blame the Pack D for his breakout year.
I wouldn't call 117 yards rushing "running through" a defense. Especially for a top 5 running back. I'd call that average to below average.
Mike Nolan is on a completely different team with totally different players and playing different teams. Don't make stupid general comments like that, it's ridiculous.
Finally, Tramon Williams could start for 3/4 of the teams out there, our linebackers are top notch (although I don't see Kampman fitting the system in years to come), and Raji was picked up because Pickett's contract is up soon and he most likely won't come back for the $ they will offer. Until then, they are playing the veteran player without any injuries, and he's playing well.
TEd Thompson had the balls to make the right call and can an aging quarterback who wasn't fully committed to the team for a young, gifted quarterback who's only problem was that he didn't have any playing time to improve his skills. His one failing is that he hasn't found good O-lineman who can protect the quarterback. And some of that needs to be lain at the feet of James Campen and Mike McCarthy who were supposed to coach these guys into high caliber talent.

"Yes, the Packers rank tied for fourth in total defense (283.4 yards per game allowed), but if you took away performances against the horrible Detroit Lions and Cleveland Browns, the Packers would rank 21st (338 per game)."

Here is my problem with this statistic. If you are removing the Packers cupcake games, then you would have to remove every other team's cupcake games. If you did that, Green Bay would not be ranked 21st. There are plenty of teams ranked in the top 20 that also played bad teams. Everyone would drop in rank and Green Bay wouldn't fall so far. So that isn't an honest statistic.

Who has Minnesota beaten that's any good besides Green Bay twice? They've played almost the same teams GB has. Baltimore and SF are the only two quality opponets (and SF is arguable at that) and Minnesota barely farted out wins over both of them.

Also, Favre has been perfect against Green Bay, but the defense did force turnovers against the Bengals and really should have beaten them. They were in position to take over that game went Grant fumbled and lost the game, and even then, Rodgers nearly led them to OT at the end.

Green Bay isn't that bad. It's not panic time. This is a team capable of winning 10 games and making the playoffs. Everyone needs to breathe a little bit, methinks.

For those whining about the teams played against, get a friggen clue. There are basically ten "weak sister" teams in the NFL and every team in the league has played at least one game against one of them, most teams have had two or three games against them and some have actually had four. Should #1 Denver's games against Cleveland and Oakland not count? Should the #3 Giants games against Washington, Tampa Bay, Kansas City, and Oakland not count? Or how about the vaunted Steelers D at #8 - should the Tennessee, Detroit and Cleveland games be taken out?

Any accurate comparison has to apply the same rules to everyone - so unless someone is going to re-rank every team taking out all games against Tampa, Oakland, KC, Detroit, Tennessee, Washington, St Louis, Seattle, Cleveland and Buffalo, then you all need to just stop.

Great article. All you have to do is remember last year, and you'll be happy with the defense. The biggest problem has been giving up big plays, but the d has been improving each game.
In terms of McCarthy, that's a different story. I just dont think he's good enought to be a Packer coach. His teams are unprepared and undisciplined, albeit talented, which is the frustrating part. He knows his X's and O's, but that's par for the course. He instituted zone blocking, then has a novice coach try and teach it. After four years it hasn't done anything for anybody. When LT Clifton went down, he tryed an insane game of musical chairs which weakened three positions. He has obviously overestimated his talent at OL, unless TT working in a vacuum. His teams are the most penalized in the league. Finally, his press conferences are horrid. You could die from cliches and non-answers. Packer fans, being a cut above the rest, need answers, lol.

Reading these blogs, I have the overwhelming feeling that too many fans really get caught up in statistics. Stats are a tool, and a good one, BUT, the real issue is what causes those stats. The Packer defense is much improved. The problem behind the stats is that they give up too many big plays, which is indicative of periodic breakdowns, not scheme failure. Capers knows what he's doing, and notwithstanding the bandwagon cry of wrong players, that IS NOT the problem. Most teams would kill for that talent. Capers has been slo to take advantage of certain talents however. It wasnt until two game ago that Kampman was allowed to go into a three point stance. Against the Vikings, when they did go man to man, there was NO bump and run. Sinful error considering Woodson and Harris. But Caper's does adjust, abeit slowly. Bigby was a huge missing piece at safety, but he's only been back a few games. Geez fella, rome took more then a day.

Packer Backer, you need to chill. I know it's a game, but when I'm paying extra taxes for this team and the stadium, I expect better than the garbage on Sundays. I need a valuim? No son, I need a winner on the field.

When did I blame the defense for Benson's breakout year? All I was implying was that the defense is having the same issues as last year, can't stop the run, can't tackle, and blown coverage. By the way, a hundred yards from any so called top 5 back is NOT average or below. Especially against a "top ten defense".

You say my comment about Nolan is stupid. Explain to me why the Bronc-girls , who also switched to a 3-4 from a 4-3, are out performing and playing better then the Pack? Seems to me coaching has a lot to do with the talent performance. The Bronc-girls are playing like the Ravens west, while the Pack beat up on bottom feeders and can't even hang with elite teams.

You've named one guy that has talent behind the starters in the secondary. What else you got? The linebackers are top notch? Please! Are you watching the games? Hawk is average at best. Chillar is one dimensional, Popinga is terrible, Barnett misses too many tackles, Kampman can't cover, and Mathews is the ony bright spot. That is an average lb corp.

Doesn't it make more sense to plug Raji in at nt for the long haul? He gets playing time at the position. Pickett is leaving next year, so what is the point of starting him.

I can't believe you are defending Tightwad Ted. He has not improved this team since he gotten to Green Bay. The talent brought in is average at best, via the draft. Tightwad has drafted 2 studs thus far: Rodgers and Jennings. Other than Collins, the rest of the draft class(excluding this years) has been average to below. This bum is not a GM. I question his so called superior talent evaluating skills. He does not utilize all avenues to build a championship caliber team.

I will just say it like this. The defense that went 13-3 was basically the same one that went 6-10 the following year. The only real change was the loss of C. Williams. Yes, guys got hurt. Injuries are a part of the game. Where was all this wealth of depth behind the starters? Let me tell you, there was none. That's why the defense couldn't stop anyone last year and why the special teams play is horrendous.

Look at the remaining schedule. There are only 3 winnable games left. The Bucs, Lions, and Seahawks would be them 3 games. The 3 toss up games that would not favor the Pack are the Bums, 49ers, and Cards. The Pack are not going to beat the Cowgirls, Ravens, or Steelers. At best the Pack can finish 10-6 and at worst 7-9. With any of those records, they will not even maek the playoffs and be drafing in the middle of the 1st round. Very sad for a once proud and winning franchise.

Rogue, I'm frustrated, like every Packer fan, but you fell off the edge. You would throw out the baby with the bathwater amigo. The Packers do have, at least, a good talent base, that most NFL teams would kill for. If you read my above-blogs, I'm less than happy, but "three winnable games"???? They are all winnable. The games with the Vikings were "winnable", so what are you talking about? Talent is spread pretty thin these days, if you hadn't noticed. But the defense has improved and is improving, as those talentless, useless players are getting the hang of it. What has killed them is big plays caused by sporadic blown assignment, penalties. But they have shown they can stop teams. We've played Peterson 2x, Benson, and Jackson. Do I have to take you down memory lane to last year?

Rogue, I'm frustrated, like every Packer fan, but you fell off the edge. You would throw out the baby with the bathwater amigo. The Packers do have, at least, a good talent base, that most NFL teams would kill for. If you read my above-blogs, I'm less than happy, but "three winnable games"???? They are all winnable. The games with the Vikings were "winnable", so what are you talking about? Talent is spread pretty thin these days, if you hadn't noticed. But the defense has improved and is improving, as those talentless, useless players are getting the hang of it. What has killed them is big plays caused by sporadic blown assignment, penalties. But they have shown they can stop teams. We've played Peterson 2x, Benson, and Jackson. Do I have to take you down memory lane to last year?

Marcopo, I am a realist. If you truly think all the remaining games are winnable, you have already fallen off the edge or are one the many Thompson cult members. I am done with the would of and could of excuses. Excuses are like buttholes, everyone has one and they stink, BAD. The defense still cannot stop the run. There are great rushing teams left on the schedule. The secondary, like you're saying, is missing assignments. Just like last year. Same problems, different scheme and coaches. The stats are padded by playing bottom feeders. Improvement will come, but not this year.

You say the talent is there. Why is the Bronc-girls defense outperforming the Packers? The Packers secondary is more talented than theirs. I will even give the lbs and d-line, to a man, to the Packers. Explain the dramatic difference? I can tell you this much, there is no swagger to that defense or leadership.

I truly want the Packers to win the rest of their games, make a playoff run to the big game and win the big game. It's not happening though. The only ones to blame are Tightwad and Pig Mac.