RealGM

Sunday night game vs. Rodgers. So we'll be dealing with all the Rodgers b.s. all week.

As I mentioned in the Cardinals game thread, the turf in Pittsburgh was terrible their last night game, both teams complained. It's since been replaced. But the Pitt college team plays there Saturday so hopefully it can hold up in back to back games.

Watson has to be activated by the day AFTER the Pitt game. Signs point to him playing, maybe the turf condition factors in.

Rodgers will likely eat up our poor DB. Lots of dinks and dunks.

Our offense looked really good down the stretch in AZ, let's keep it going.

Our defense on the other hand, specifically our DB......

DK and Darnell Washington are licking their chops at the size of our DBs. Gonna have to get pressure on Rodgers.

Their TE's are going to be a huge pain in the ass

Rodgers can't move for ****, so if we can get pressure we can make this a very long game for them.

Pretty bummed with how Hobbs has been playing. He was looking the part all summer. Maybe the injury he sustained that caused him to miss some time is hampering him, but I'd like to see Valentine get some reps on the outside and let Hobbs rotate inside with Bullard.

I have never stopped being a Rodgers fan, and I'm thoroughly enjoying his run in Pit. That said, as a Rodgers Stan, this is the type of game if we get to him early, he absolutely will snowball in pissy attitude and be prone to un-Rodgers like decision making. Micah, SNF, we need you to do what you did today, again, especially with Hobbs.

Also - game highlighted even with Micah beasting and a few lesser heralded dlinemen stepping up, we MISSED Van Ness. Hope he's back.

Do you think LaFleur game plans anticipating 2 horrible special teams plays per week?

Matches Malone wrote:Pretty bummed with how Hobbs has been playing. He was looking the part all summer. Maybe the injury he sustained that caused him to miss some time is hampering him, but I'd like to see Valentine get some reps on the outside and let Hobbs rotate inside with Bullard.

Eric Stokes is tied for first in lowest in completion rate amongst CBs.

187 snaps, 19 targets, 10 receptions, 146 yards, 1 TD, three pass break ups. Would much rather him at 1/4 over Hobbs at 4/48.

Rodgers is immobile but still has a strong arm and is smart. Good pass rush is important of course but the pass coverage really needs to step up.

And our DL is going to fall for the hard count 10+ times.

Freiermuth hadn't done much his first 4 games but had a big game this week, 5/111 and 2TDs. We might want to figure something out for this game.

Game opens GB -3. I think that goes down all the way down close to Pick Em.

Mags FTW wrote:Game opens GB -3. I think that goes down all the way down close to Pick Em.

Agreed. Pitt is a tough place to play. They are on extra rest. Back to back road games. It would be beneficial to get Wyatt, LVN and Watson back.

MickeyDavis wrote:

Read on Twitter

I can't even really remember a play where Quay was even targeted. All the big plays were down the sideline on CB's or just Mcbride wide open due to poor zone coverage and it wasn't directly Quay as the nearest guy.

Even if Watson is "ready" this week, I think I'd rather sit him out than have him play on Pittsburgh's field

MVP2110 wrote:Even if Watson is "ready" this week, I think I'd rather sit him out than have him play on Pittsburgh's field

Agreed. Let him debut the following week at Lambeau

BUCKnation wrote:

MickeyDavis wrote:

Read on Twitter

I can't even really remember a play where Quay was even targeted. All the big plays were down the sideline on CB's or just Mcbride wide open due to poor zone coverage and it wasn't directly Quay as the nearest guy.

I am a bit horrified that there is a possibility Quay was just that far off in his zone coverage?

Horrified 2.0 - The zone scheme that had us rolling Weeks 1 and 2 is largely figured out, and we need to start rocking a greater blend of man/zone. I get we're on a two game winning streak, but all of a sudden it feels like Evan Williams and Cooper have taken a step back (*all per my wildly untrained eye). Alternatively, we have a D that responds well to running QBs and the YOLO guys, but our scheme is weak for quick-read QBs who know what they are doing, which is probably true for most schemes (i.e., Flacco to Chase - sometimes a guy is just great and makes grabs even with nixon in his pocket).

Quay sucks in coverage but McDuffie is way worse.

MickeyDavis wrote:

Read on Twitter

?s=46

Quay can’t cover his own shadow.