Packers @ Vikes - Postgame
Moderators: MickeyDavis, paulpressey25, humanrefutation
Packers @ Vikes - Postgame
- ReasonablySober
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 107,852
- And1: 42,153
- Joined: Dec 02, 2001
- Location: Cheap dinner. Watch basketball. Bone down.
- Contact:
Packers @ Vikes - Postgame
This one hurts. It isn't the loss. It isn't because I thought this one could have necessarily been ours. It's not even because we stopped AD cold. It's because Favre won it and he didn't even have to work for it.
I would have to watch the game again, but it appeared as if the Packers were able to stop Peterson with their front seven, sometimes six. Give the line and the linebackers credit, they stayed true to their gaps and didn't make many mistakes tackling.
But my god...the defensive playcalling on obvious passing downs. How, in the name of everything holy, can you only rush three against a guy that's been in the league for nearly two decades. Give this guy time to throw and of course he's going to pick you apart.
Yes, the DBs had some mental errors. But any defense is gonna give up big passing plays when the QB has time to bake a cake in the pocket. Favre never once in looked uncomfortable. It was rare that he was forced to give up the ball early. For **** sake, if he's picking you apart when you're dropping eight, could it really hurt to rush five or six? Whatever happened to the exotic schemes we saw against Cutler? What we saw tonight was the Bob Sanders defense all over again, and it just leaves me feeling disgusted.
Second, not all the sacks were on the offensive line. That unit on the left side obviously didn't play well, but Rodgers has got to learn to GET RID OF THE **** BALL. The safety is entirely on him. So were at least three of the other sacks. Against line like that, he's got to have that clock in his head ticking. 1, 2, 3, get rid of the ball or **** run with it. Again, without watching it a second time I don't know how much the play calling had to do with this. But if Rodgers doesn't have an easy checkdown on every throw, namely to the TE, something is seriously wrong.
The Packers offense is obviously at its best when Rodgers can take a couple steps and deliver a quick strike. Make him roll out, maybe. But if he's gotta take a 5 or 7 step drop he's gonna get killed. The line can't block that long and Rodgers holds the ball too often.
This game could have been different. Lee drops a TD that turns out to be a death sentence. Rodgers throws a terrible INT deep in their territory. The fumble.
This is a game that I think looks worse than it really was and it was for the eye popping plays. The sacks, the big strikes by Favre. Lost in the shuffle was the fact that the Packers ran the ball when they attempted it. Rodgers had a good completion percentage and yards per attempt. They stopped AD cold.
Despite the defensive scheme and the sacks, this game was still relatively close.
I would have to watch the game again, but it appeared as if the Packers were able to stop Peterson with their front seven, sometimes six. Give the line and the linebackers credit, they stayed true to their gaps and didn't make many mistakes tackling.
But my god...the defensive playcalling on obvious passing downs. How, in the name of everything holy, can you only rush three against a guy that's been in the league for nearly two decades. Give this guy time to throw and of course he's going to pick you apart.
Yes, the DBs had some mental errors. But any defense is gonna give up big passing plays when the QB has time to bake a cake in the pocket. Favre never once in looked uncomfortable. It was rare that he was forced to give up the ball early. For **** sake, if he's picking you apart when you're dropping eight, could it really hurt to rush five or six? Whatever happened to the exotic schemes we saw against Cutler? What we saw tonight was the Bob Sanders defense all over again, and it just leaves me feeling disgusted.
Second, not all the sacks were on the offensive line. That unit on the left side obviously didn't play well, but Rodgers has got to learn to GET RID OF THE **** BALL. The safety is entirely on him. So were at least three of the other sacks. Against line like that, he's got to have that clock in his head ticking. 1, 2, 3, get rid of the ball or **** run with it. Again, without watching it a second time I don't know how much the play calling had to do with this. But if Rodgers doesn't have an easy checkdown on every throw, namely to the TE, something is seriously wrong.
The Packers offense is obviously at its best when Rodgers can take a couple steps and deliver a quick strike. Make him roll out, maybe. But if he's gotta take a 5 or 7 step drop he's gonna get killed. The line can't block that long and Rodgers holds the ball too often.
This game could have been different. Lee drops a TD that turns out to be a death sentence. Rodgers throws a terrible INT deep in their territory. The fumble.
This is a game that I think looks worse than it really was and it was for the eye popping plays. The sacks, the big strikes by Favre. Lost in the shuffle was the fact that the Packers ran the ball when they attempted it. Rodgers had a good completion percentage and yards per attempt. They stopped AD cold.
Despite the defensive scheme and the sacks, this game was still relatively close.
Re: Packers @ Vikes - Postgame
- MikeIsGood
- RealGM
- Posts: 35,767
- And1: 11,654
- Joined: Jul 10, 2003
- Location: Vamos Rafa
-
Re: Packers @ Vikes - Postgame
What hurts me is that a bunch of the stats are overwhelmingly in their favor, yet it was only a 7 point game. Someone pointed it out in the game thread, which I just scanned, but: INT and fumble in their territory, 7-to-2 in penalties, 8-to-0 in sacks, a dropped TD. Yet we only lost by 7. Cut back in even ONE of those areas and it could be a different game.
Sucks.
Sucks.
Re: Packers @ Vikes - Postgame
- bigkurty
- General Manager
- Posts: 8,212
- And1: 1,511
- Joined: Apr 23, 2005
- Location: Gilbert, AZ
-
Re: Packers @ Vikes - Postgame
Too bad trades are not more prevalent and we can't just trade Kampman to a 4-3 team for a good OT.
Re: Packers @ Vikes - Postgame
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 35,389
- And1: 8,012
- Joined: Feb 16, 2006
- Location: Flickin' It
Re: Packers @ Vikes - Postgame
MikeIsGood wrote:What hurts me is that a bunch of the stats are overwhelmingly in their favor, yet it was only a 7 point game. Someone pointed it out in the game thread, which I just scanned, but: INT and fumble in their territory, 7-to-2 in penalties, 8-to-0 in sacks, a dropped TD. Yet we only lost by 7. Cut back in even ONE of those areas and it could be a different game.
Sucks.
Mags FTW wrote:INT in Viking territory
Fumble in Viking territory
Dropped TD pass
7 Penalties to 2
8 Sacks given up
Zero Pass rush
And it was still a 4th quarter game.

Re: Packers @ Vikes - Postgame
- bigkurty
- General Manager
- Posts: 8,212
- And1: 1,511
- Joined: Apr 23, 2005
- Location: Gilbert, AZ
-
Re: Packers @ Vikes - Postgame
MikeIsGood wrote:What hurts me is that a bunch of the stats are overwhelmingly in their favor, yet it was only a 7 point game. Someone pointed it out in the game thread, which I just scanned, but: INT and fumble in their territory, 7-to-2 in penalties, 8-to-0 in sacks, a dropped TD. Yet we only lost by 7. Cut back in even ONE of those areas and it could be a different game.
Sucks.
Yeah that stuff is true but prevent defense by MN is what allowed us to close it up too.
Re: Packers @ Vikes - Postgame
- Scoops
- General Manager
- Posts: 8,042
- And1: 267
- Joined: Jul 31, 2007
Re: Packers @ Vikes - Postgame
DrugBust wrote:Second, not all the sacks were on the offensive line. That unit on the left side obviously didn't play well, but Rodgers has got to learn to GET RID OF THE **** BALL. The safety is entirely on him. So were at least three of the other sacks. Against line like that, he's got to have that clock in his head ticking. 1, 2, 3, get rid of the ball or **** run with it. Again, without watching it a second time I don't know how much the play calling had to do with this. But if Rodgers doesn't have an easy checkdown on every throw, namely to the TE, something is seriously wrong.
I've never yelled get rid of the damn ball more in a 3 hour stretch in my life. You know you're not going to have time so hit your check down and get positive yardage or throw it away and avoid giving up yardage. On the fumble he had Grant wide open for 4-5 yards and chose to scramble backwards. And that's on 1st down. You can't turn the ball over when you play good teams.
Rest of the team played like crap. WTF is wrong with DD.
Go Bucks!
Re: Packers @ Vikes - Postgame
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 35,389
- And1: 8,012
- Joined: Feb 16, 2006
- Location: Flickin' It
Re: Packers @ Vikes - Postgame
If I didn't have class at 9 I'd be drinking.


Re: Packers @ Vikes - Postgame
-
- Senior
- Posts: 646
- And1: 3
- Joined: Jan 15, 2006
- Contact:
Re: Packers @ Vikes - Postgame
Add in the Woodson interception that was called back due to two penalties (definitely no pass interference, I'm not sure about off sides). Basically, if one of four plays go differently, this is a different game. If Rodgers doesn't throw that pick, or fumble, or Donald Lee catches that TD, or Woodson is able to get that pick this game is different. Any of those and I think the Packers win, especially if they dont have to go for two late in the game and just kick an extra point.
Going into the season, I didnt expect a win but this one really stings.
I agree Rodgers holds the ball too long but thats why he makes less mistakes. You have to expect him to get sacked more than other QB's, like Big Ben.
The last time I was this angry after a loss was that Giants game.
Going into the season, I didnt expect a win but this one really stings.
I agree Rodgers holds the ball too long but thats why he makes less mistakes. You have to expect him to get sacked more than other QB's, like Big Ben.
The last time I was this angry after a loss was that Giants game.
Re: Packers @ Vikes - Postgame
-
- Senior
- Posts: 646
- And1: 3
- Joined: Jan 15, 2006
- Contact:
Re: Packers @ Vikes - Postgame
Mags FTW wrote:If I didn't have class at 9 I'd be drinking.
I completely agree.
Re: Packers @ Vikes - Postgame
- Siefer
- RealGM
- Posts: 16,107
- And1: 6,715
- Joined: Nov 05, 2006
-
Re: Packers @ Vikes - Postgame
The play calling on both sides of the ball sucked. The defensive playcalling was ridiculously conservative, especially given the experience of the QB on the other side. It was like we were game planning against a rookie. We hardly ever blitzed, and if we did, it was Kampman out of 2 point stance, which is near worthless. The scheme was stagnant and never evolved; even when Favre showcased the ability to dissect the secondary, and the front 7 showed they could contain AP. On offense, McCarthy refused to shorten the passing game until it was too late, and he once again abandoned the run early. We got thoroughly out coached by Brad **** Childress and Co.
Re: Packers @ Vikes - Postgame
- ReasonablySober
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 107,852
- And1: 42,153
- Joined: Dec 02, 2001
- Location: Cheap dinner. Watch basketball. Bone down.
- Contact:
Re: Packers @ Vikes - Postgame
Mags FTW wrote:If I didn't have class at 9 I'd be drinking.
Suck it up. I've got to work at 8:00 and I'm still gonna be drunk by the time I get into work.
Re: Packers @ Vikes - Postgame
-
- Senior
- Posts: 646
- And1: 3
- Joined: Jan 15, 2006
- Contact:
Re: Packers @ Vikes - Postgame
I dont think I can watch sports until the NBA starts. Every sports announcer is going to be blowing Brent.
Re: Packers @ Vikes - Postgame
- rilamann
- RealGM
- Posts: 27,700
- And1: 15,232
- Joined: Jun 20, 2003
- Location: Damn that rilamann!!
-
Re: Packers @ Vikes - Postgame
At least Rodgers didn't get hurt.
Clay Matthews is a player.
And holy **** at Woodson pretty much back handing TT with his post game comments regarding cutting Anthony Smith,wow.
Clay Matthews is a player.
And holy **** at Woodson pretty much back handing TT with his post game comments regarding cutting Anthony Smith,wow.
Giannis Antetokounmpo wrote:You're out here reffing like Marc Davis and ****
Re: Packers @ Vikes - Postgame
- PkrsBcksGphsMqt
- RealGM
- Posts: 18,827
- And1: 1,417
- Joined: Oct 27, 2005
- Location: Madison
-
Re: Packers @ Vikes - Postgame
rilamann wrote:At least Rodgers didn't get hurt.
Clay Matthews is a player.
And holy **** at Woodson pretty much back handing TT with his post game comments regarding cutting Anthony Smith,wow.
I was in a bar and didn't hear anything. Can you summarize what he said? Did he blatantly say TT should not have cut Anthony Smith?
BucksRuleAll22 wrote:Calvin Johnson is horrible and not a top WR.
Re: Packers @ Vikes - Postgame
- ReasonablySober
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 107,852
- And1: 42,153
- Joined: Dec 02, 2001
- Location: Cheap dinner. Watch basketball. Bone down.
- Contact:
Re: Packers @ Vikes - Postgame
Capers getting it from players.
Glad to see I'm not the only one.
Where the hell did all the blitz packages go?
Glad to see I'm not the only one.
Where the hell did all the blitz packages go?
Re: Packers @ Vikes - Postgame
- humanrefutation
- Forum Mod
- Posts: 32,909
- And1: 16,588
- Joined: Jun 05, 2006
-
Re: Packers @ Vikes - Postgame
Not to be Herman Edwards here, but we can build on this.
The offense played relatively well between the 20s. Solid gameplan by MM here...short, quick strikes which relied on the athleticism of our WRs and our TEs, something that I've been dying for us to unleash. I would've liked to see a couple PA bombs to keep the safeties honest, but we were ok. It was really the red zone mental mistakes that cost us the game - Rodgers 2 killer TOs, the safety (that was entirely on him), Donald's drop...simply inexcusable.
But honestly, I learned something about Rodgers tonight...the guy is a tough motherf***er. He kept getting up and rallying the troops. He had the eye of the tiger at the beginning of the game, and with the exception of the safety, it never went away.
What bugs me though is that there is something about his play that bugs me...I need a little more recklessness, risk-taking out of him. He tries to be overly efficient...which is to his credit. He's minimized on the INTs that way. But, I need him to stop holding onto the ball...stop looking for the PERFECT pass or play, and take some shots downfield. Trust his great WR core. Make them make plays. I hate Favre with a passion, but you gotta give him credit for one thing - throughout his career, he took chances. Some of those chances turned out to be disastrous decisions...but when the game was on the line, Favre wasn't afraid to take shots downfield and hope his recievers make plays. Rodgers doesn't need to be nearly as reckless as Favre, but he needs to get rid of the ball more quickly and take shots downfield, leading his recievers to plays. When he starts to do that, we'll know he's finally arrived.
The defense played great against the run. Couldn't ask for more. But the pass rush was atrocious, and that falls squarely on Capers shoulders. Such a lack of creativity...they needed to get in Favre's face tonight and knock him on his ass, if only to make him feel slightly more uncomfortable and to pay back some of the punishment his drama inflicted on the psyche of this team last year. I'm not asking for cheap shots, but just send some more complex blitz packages and knock the guy on his ass.
Beyond that, I think this team showed some guts today, and I look forward to seeing Favre try to play as well in front of a raucous Lambeau Field crowd that'll be, hopefully, backing #12. Time to move on. These next 13 days will end up defining this season.
The offense played relatively well between the 20s. Solid gameplan by MM here...short, quick strikes which relied on the athleticism of our WRs and our TEs, something that I've been dying for us to unleash. I would've liked to see a couple PA bombs to keep the safeties honest, but we were ok. It was really the red zone mental mistakes that cost us the game - Rodgers 2 killer TOs, the safety (that was entirely on him), Donald's drop...simply inexcusable.
But honestly, I learned something about Rodgers tonight...the guy is a tough motherf***er. He kept getting up and rallying the troops. He had the eye of the tiger at the beginning of the game, and with the exception of the safety, it never went away.
What bugs me though is that there is something about his play that bugs me...I need a little more recklessness, risk-taking out of him. He tries to be overly efficient...which is to his credit. He's minimized on the INTs that way. But, I need him to stop holding onto the ball...stop looking for the PERFECT pass or play, and take some shots downfield. Trust his great WR core. Make them make plays. I hate Favre with a passion, but you gotta give him credit for one thing - throughout his career, he took chances. Some of those chances turned out to be disastrous decisions...but when the game was on the line, Favre wasn't afraid to take shots downfield and hope his recievers make plays. Rodgers doesn't need to be nearly as reckless as Favre, but he needs to get rid of the ball more quickly and take shots downfield, leading his recievers to plays. When he starts to do that, we'll know he's finally arrived.
The defense played great against the run. Couldn't ask for more. But the pass rush was atrocious, and that falls squarely on Capers shoulders. Such a lack of creativity...they needed to get in Favre's face tonight and knock him on his ass, if only to make him feel slightly more uncomfortable and to pay back some of the punishment his drama inflicted on the psyche of this team last year. I'm not asking for cheap shots, but just send some more complex blitz packages and knock the guy on his ass.
Beyond that, I think this team showed some guts today, and I look forward to seeing Favre try to play as well in front of a raucous Lambeau Field crowd that'll be, hopefully, backing #12. Time to move on. These next 13 days will end up defining this season.
Re: Packers @ Vikes - Postgame
- rilamann
- RealGM
- Posts: 27,700
- And1: 15,232
- Joined: Jun 20, 2003
- Location: Damn that rilamann!!
-
Re: Packers @ Vikes - Postgame
PackBuckGophZag wrote:rilamann wrote:At least Rodgers didn't get hurt.
Clay Matthews is a player.
And holy **** at Woodson pretty much back handing TT with his post game comments regarding cutting Anthony Smith,wow.
I was in a bar and didn't hear anything. Can you summarize what he said? Did he blatantly say TT should not have cut Anthony Smith?
He didn't call out TT by name but Woodson basically said it made no sense to cut a guy like Smith who was familiar with the 3-4 & made plays in pre-season,Woodson sounded pretty frustrated and pissed and then said it would have been nice to have a guy like that (Smith) in tonight's game..
Gotta make Martin feel pretty good.

Giannis Antetokounmpo wrote:You're out here reffing like Marc Davis and ****
Re: Packers @ Vikes - Postgame
- Fort Minor
- Lead Assistant
- Posts: 4,722
- And1: 70
- Joined: Sep 29, 2005
-
Re: Packers @ Vikes - Postgame
It saddens me how Kampman is basically wasting away at this point.
BuckPack wrote:People still listen to Gery?
Re: Packers @ Vikes - Postgame
- Kerb Hohl
- RealGM
- Posts: 35,595
- And1: 4,452
- Joined: Jun 17, 2005
- Location: Hmmmm...how many 1sts would Jason Richardson cost...?
Re: Packers @ Vikes - Postgame
rilamann wrote:PackBuckGophZag wrote:rilamann wrote:At least Rodgers didn't get hurt.
Clay Matthews is a player.
And holy **** at Woodson pretty much back handing TT with his post game comments regarding cutting Anthony Smith,wow.
I was in a bar and didn't hear anything. Can you summarize what he said? Did he blatantly say TT should not have cut Anthony Smith?
He didn't call out TT by name but Woodson basically said it made no sense to cut a guy like Smith who was familiar with the 3-4 & made plays in pre-season,Woodson sounded pretty frustrated and pissed.
Gotta make Martin feel pretty good.
He called out the line a few times as well by saying how great Rodgers would be if he got time to throw (also calling out TT in a way). And yes, Martin was a huge factor in some of those big plays as well. Might have been rust, unfamiliarity, or maybe not being that good, I don't know.
That said, he isn't blatantly doing it and no media outlet is picking up on it so it is something that will be solved (or not solved) internally.
Re: Packers @ Vikes - Postgame
- MikeIsGood
- RealGM
- Posts: 35,767
- And1: 11,654
- Joined: Jul 10, 2003
- Location: Vamos Rafa
-
Re: Packers @ Vikes - Postgame
On one completion to obscure tight end Jeff Dugan, Favre had 7.33 seconds to complete the 25-yard pass. There was no one around Favre when he threw it, either.
Ugh.