ImageImage

Post game thoughts - Week 2 - Giants

Moderators: MickeyDavis, paulpressey25, humanrefutation

User avatar
ReasonablySober
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 106,714
And1: 41,323
Joined: Dec 02, 2001
Location: Cheap dinner. Watch basketball. Bone down.
Contact:

Post game thoughts - Week 2 - Giants 

Post#1 » by ReasonablySober » Sun Sep 16, 2007 8:10 pm

Great win in a tough place to play for a young team.

Best game I've seen Brett play in years. Him and the scheme on offense were the differences today. So long as Brett is willing to throw to the TEs and RBs, the Packers can win a lot of games.

QB: What can ya say? Brett looked like outstanding out there today. He got time to throw the ball, was accurate on those 5-10 yard passes and I didn't count any forced throws. Awesome job.

RB: Not much you can do when there isn't a hole to run through. The DEs lived in the backfield and Pierce was a force. What they did do well was catch the ball out of the backfield and made for safe check downs for Brett. Not a lot of big plays, but enough to keep the defense relatively honest. In terms of running, I'm not a huge fan of Jackson yet. He dances before he gets to the line, whereas Green used hit the hole with everything he has. Wynn should have won the job with today's effort. Looked like another 42, John Brockington. Once he's in full game shape he might be an answer at halfback.

WR: Brett didn't really go up the field much, and if you know me you know how much I appreciated it. Dink and dunk. Maybe it's boring and conservative but I liked it. I thought they should have kept up with it even into late in the fourth. Jones had some nice catches, not just on the 40 yarder. He's got some great hands and when he grabs the ball he looks to get upfield. Driver was his usual sure-handed self and was able to get pretty open when he went underneath the coverage.

TE: Maybe the stars of the game. No drops, made the tough catches in traffic and caught two tough TDs with defenders draped all over them. I think they can be effective in this system. No, they won't ever be deep, explosive threats. But if they can catch the ball underneath the coverage they'll be good for Brett. He needs safe options, not excuses to throw the ball 30 yards up the field.

OL: Well, they gave Brett all day today, not that he needed it. Still didn't get ANY lanes open on the run but it wasn't as horrendous as last week. With a runner that hit the holes harder I think the run blocking is more effective (Wynn). I thought the fact that they kept Brett upright all day was a HUGE story of the game.

DL: Didn't get the pass-rush that they did last week but they still collapsed the packed well. I thought their depth was very apparent. At the end of the game when the Giants were looking tired on their D-Line, ours was looking better than they did in the first half. Whoever said that the Packers would be a 4th quarter team was right. You have to love the depth on that line.

LB: Solid, not spectacular. At time I think they looked more like thugs that didn't know fundamentals rather than technicians that did the little things right. Hawk was sloppy in coverage and Barnett played out of control on occasion. At the end of the game I thought they played more on emotion and tried to intimidate the beaten Giants than finish playing smart football. The trash talking could have stayed in Green Bay.

DBs: Good job all around IMO. Woodson had the ugly fall down and mis-tackle, but considering the explosiveness of Shockey and Burress, they did a nice job containing both. Story of the day with these guys was bend but not break. Had the Giants made a few plays they maybe should have, this could have been a different game. But they didn't and the DB's made them pay for it with a lot of swarming tackles.

Special teams: Not much you can say for Crosby or Ryan. We didn't punt a lot and Mason missed his only attempt. Coverage, again, was excellent though and again, they jarred the ball lose on a return. I LOVE seeing that.

Great win. Congrats Brett on #149! :bowdown:
User avatar
Ill-yasova
RealGM
Posts: 13,361
And1: 2,562
Joined: Jul 13, 2006

 

Post#2 » by Ill-yasova » Sun Sep 16, 2007 8:18 pm

OL gained momentum as they went. Favre had a great game. Recievers are definitely the strength of the offense. Defense was very good against a team that scored 35 last week. Corey Williams as a TE? :lol:
User avatar
rilamann
RealGM
Posts: 27,667
And1: 15,196
Joined: Jun 20, 2003
Location: Damn that rilamann!!
     

 

Post#3 » by rilamann » Sun Sep 16, 2007 8:58 pm

Wow Favre sure looked washed up today hey DB? Im sure Xtitan would agree too.Packers gotta get Rodgers in there right away.

Just messin with ya guys. :P


As for my post game comments all I gotta say is..

The Pack is back and it feels good!! :nod:
goirish2107
Rookie
Posts: 1,237
And1: 0
Joined: Jul 19, 2006
Location: Milwaukee

 

Post#4 » by goirish2107 » Sun Sep 16, 2007 9:24 pm

only watched the highlights, i was at the brewers game today. last week i was thinking how much it sucked that all these other teams have a qb who can make accurate throws, and well, this week we got one too. i gotta agree though, the pack does look to be back, they sure looked good on the few plays i saw. and also agree that wynn should be the guy. now he looked like a good back on that td run. great speed, cuts, vision, i like.
Balls2TheWalls
RealGM
Posts: 20,343
And1: 4,113
Joined: Jun 25, 2005
         

 

Post#5 » by Balls2TheWalls » Sun Sep 16, 2007 9:28 pm

I'll post my post-game thoughts as well..

Quarterback
Favre came out strong. The first drive was hitting on all cylinders until it got beat on 3rd and short. He got punished for throwing a low ball that doinked Driver. I am going to have to put the fault for that one on Driver since it still hit him pretty squarely in the pads. He found a lot of receivers, and didn't look flustered behind our offensive line. Great game for Favre.

Running Back
Wynn was the star of the show as far as running backs go. There weren't many holes, but he was making the most of what was in front of him. His long run showed all of the tools he has regarding his shiftiness, speed, and size. Jackson was unspectacular, but had a solid gain on a screen pass. He needs to decide which hole to hit and nail it. Grant had a flash. His screen pass was spectacular, and had me echoing the Dorsey Levens comparisons from the Journal Sentinel. Overall a mediocre game.

Wide Recevers
Other than Jones and Driver, there was really nothing. Luckily, those two had good games. Jones is probably as sure handed as any receiver I have ever seen. He also doesn't get destroyed by hits. He seems to never go down from the first hit. Driver got his catches as always. I was a little disappointed he didn't come down with the ball that turned into Favre's INT. Good game for those 2 players, but Martin was pretty much invisible, and if anyone else even got play time... I didn't notice.

Tight Ends
Best game I have seen from the tight ends so far. Both guys were making catches. They aren't a great set of YAC tight ends, but they got first downs when they needed to. I would like to see it continue, but I am not sure that it wasn't a product of poor coverage by the Giants' linebackers.

Offensive Line
Solid play. They weren't making holes in the running game, but the Giants linebackers were really keying on the run. The Giants had anywhere from 8 to 10 in the box on any given down. The O-line kept the Giants off of Favre on passing downs, and did just enough in the running game. It was a "good enough" effort.

Defensive Line
They got schemed against. Eli was taking short drops, and didn't give the Packers defensive line time to get into the backfield. It was a smart play by Gilbride. As soon as things started to break down for Eli, he would get flustered and make poor decisions. They didn't close down the running lanes like they needed to, but the Giants really took themselves out of a position to run at the end of the game. Solid game.

Linebackers
Really unspectacular. Shockey ate them alive until he became a basketcase in the 2nd half. Barnett blew contain on Wards longest run of the day. Hawk was missing tackles. I didn't even notice that Poppinga was playing. It might have looked like an okay game, but for a set of linebackers that is billed to be one of the best in the league, I was very unimpressed.

Cornerbacks
Worse than the linebackers. Until the Giants started making mistakes, they could not contain the Giants offense. Woodson couldn't tackle, and Harris was getting frustrated by Burress' size. The Giants do have a strong offense, but we are, again, billed to have one of the best cornerback duos in the league. Unimpressed again.

Safeties
Really invisible. Bigby should have had 2 interceptions, but you cannot always come up with those. I would have been upset at them had Shockey caught that big ball over Collins at the 2 yard line, but he dropped it. Okay game.

Special Teams
The snap on the FG try was bad, and the kick was worse. The kickoffs were weak all day, and so were the punts. I think that the saving grace was the coverage teams. We continue to turn games around with our special teams coverage.

Time to toughen up for the Chargers.[/b]
User avatar
paulpressey25
Senior Mod - Bucks
Senior Mod - Bucks
Posts: 62,507
And1: 29,501
Joined: Oct 27, 2002
     

 

Post#6 » by paulpressey25 » Sun Sep 16, 2007 9:39 pm

rilamann wrote:Wow Favre sure looked washed up today hey DB? Im sure Xtitan would agree too.Packers gotta get Rodgers in there right away.
:


I'll eat some crow on that one. Favre executed flawlessly. Great game.
User avatar
ReasonablySober
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 106,714
And1: 41,323
Joined: Dec 02, 2001
Location: Cheap dinner. Watch basketball. Bone down.
Contact:

 

Post#7 » by ReasonablySober » Sun Sep 16, 2007 9:57 pm

rilamann wrote:Wow Favre sure looked washed up today hey DB? Im sure Xtitan would agree too.Packers gotta get Rodgers in there right away.

Just messin with ya guys. :P


Even if you're just messing, I'd appreciate it if you didn't perpetuate the myth that I ever said Favre was washed up. Yes, I wanted Rodgers to be the QB of this team in '08, but once Favre came back I said he gave the Packers the best chance to win. But if we want to discuss that, lets bump one of the threads from last week.

Anyway, B2TW, it sounds like you think the Giants beat themselves?
User avatar
paulpressey25
Senior Mod - Bucks
Senior Mod - Bucks
Posts: 62,507
And1: 29,501
Joined: Oct 27, 2002
     

 

Post#8 » by paulpressey25 » Sun Sep 16, 2007 10:26 pm

Issues to discuss this week.....

a) Is Mike McCarthy a good coach? Seems to be. Our guys play within themselves and he makes halftime adjustments.

b) Wynn and his possible impact as he learns and grows.

c) James Jones and his impact.
Jollay
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 13,024
And1: 661
Joined: Apr 25, 2003

 

Post#9 » by Jollay » Sun Sep 16, 2007 11:10 pm

paulpressey25 wrote:Issues to discuss this week.....

a) Is Mike McCarthy a good coach? Seems to be. Our guys play within themselves and he makes halftime adjustments.

b) Wynn and his possible impact as he learns and grows.

c) James Jones and his impact.


A) He sure does seem to be. And amazingly he hasn't really been ripped on these boards, which is almost virtually imposssible.

B,C) Well somebody's going to have to emerge by midseason on offense if we are to become a serious threat...since we went with our young guys. Alot more will be known once Jennings is back. I don't know about Wynn, but I think he might be the best we have (sad). I also think Jones could be a lethal weapon once Jennings is back stretching the field a little in three receiver sets.

I will not be able to see many games here on out because of work, so my opinion won't mean much. However, I think Drug Bust has ammended some of his previous questionable thinking and so can resume his role posting everything I am thinking...
User avatar
MickeyDavis
Global Mod
Global Mod
Posts: 101,620
And1: 54,836
Joined: May 02, 2002
Location: The Craps Table
     

 

Post#10 » by MickeyDavis » Mon Sep 17, 2007 12:12 am

MM took over a 4-12 team and is 10-8. I'm sure had this board been here last season he would have been ripped early in the season. I think he's done a find job so far.

Poppinga didn't do anything and got a dumb penalty but he was sticking up for Hawk, who received a cheap shot.

Things get a whole lot tougher next week, let's hope the Bolts get a little banged up tonight.
User avatar
Siefer
RealGM
Posts: 16,056
And1: 6,704
Joined: Nov 05, 2006
     

 

Post#11 » by Siefer » Mon Sep 17, 2007 1:25 am

Driver was his usual sure-handed self


I assume this was said in jest? ;)
User avatar
trwi7
RealGM
Posts: 111,675
And1: 27,265
Joined: Jul 12, 2006
Location: Aussie bias
         

 

Post#12 » by trwi7 » Mon Sep 17, 2007 1:49 am

MickeyDavis wrote:MM took over a 4-12 team and is 10-8. I'm sure had this board been here last season he would have been ripped early in the season. I think he's done a find job so far.


Earlier in the year last year I remember him being ripped (the Buffalo game in particular comes to mind when we were on their 1 yard line and he decided to call a pass play) but he has made great strides as coach and I'm happy to have him here...for now. :wink:
stellation wrote:What's the difference between Gery Woelful and this glass of mineral water? The mineral water actually has a source."


I Hate Manure wrote:We look to be awful next season without Beasley.
User avatar
paulpressey25
Senior Mod - Bucks
Senior Mod - Bucks
Posts: 62,507
And1: 29,501
Joined: Oct 27, 2002
     

 

Post#13 » by paulpressey25 » Mon Sep 17, 2007 2:18 am

At this point, both McCarthy and TT are looking very good.....this team isn't winning on smoke and mirrors....it is solid football on both sides of the ball.
El Duderino
RealGM
Posts: 20,545
And1: 1,328
Joined: May 30, 2005
Location: Working on pad level

 

Post#14 » by El Duderino » Mon Sep 17, 2007 2:44 am

McCarthy called a great game today and Brett seemed to be spot on when he audibled.McCarthy has been around long enough to see his team can't run the ball and really lacks big play talent on offense overall.He exploited to weak areas of the Giants defense all game long by making their poor linebacker core have to cover backs and tight ends.

One mark of any good coach calling plays is to know and accept the talent you have on hand and fashion a game plan to fit that talent vs to often trying to force your talent to fit what you'd prefer to do.I'm sure McCarthy would like to be able to have a more explosive offense,but the talent isn't there to accomplish that so he's getting the most he can from a limited unit.

McCarthy seems a good hire to me from both a smarts and temperament area.
jligon
Sophomore
Posts: 224
And1: 0
Joined: Jul 10, 2007

 

Post#15 » by jligon » Mon Sep 17, 2007 4:00 am

Best all around game I've seen from the Pack in a couple years. Nothing to complain about with the possible exception of a weak ground game about 80% of the time and just a few big plays on defense. Enough to be excited about, however, to let those things go.

Had a weird feeling most of the game like we were going to find a way to lose it in the 4th quarter. Wow, I couldn't have been more wrong. What a great final period. It wasn't until I re-watched the highlights of the game that I realized that we went into that 4th quarter with only a 1 point lead. It felt mike we controlled the second half and by the time the 4th quarter was half over the game was pretty much in hand.

I loved the execution on offense. I get the feeling we could do that against most defenses. I would like to see us run a bit more and perhaps once Morency is back we'll see that. The play calling was great though. I typically know (seems like about 80% to 90% of the time) whether the Pack is going to run or pass on any particular play but today I honestly had no idea on most plays. I'd like to think if the running game can develop we can keep teams honest all year.

It was also amazing to hear how many different times Buck or Aikman said "Packers rookie halfback, fullback, kicker..." Someone deserves some credit for drafting guys that could fit in so quickly to a team playing at this caliber, this early in the year. Coupled with our depth of second year players, there's definitely cause for excitement.

Unfortunately, this upcoming weekend's game is not without cause for an unhealthy amount of worry. But at least the prospect of being 2-1, as a worst case scenario, lessons the stress somewhat. Should be a good test and hopefully an exciting game.
User avatar
paulpressey25
Senior Mod - Bucks
Senior Mod - Bucks
Posts: 62,507
And1: 29,501
Joined: Oct 27, 2002
     

 

Post#16 » by paulpressey25 » Mon Sep 17, 2007 12:44 pm

It was a 20-point + win. Back in 2001 when the Packers started out strong, Homer had some statistic he talked about on his show that said if a team gets at least 3 wins of 20 points+ during a season, they will win at least 12 games or something like that.

I'm off on the statistic, but the point was it is hard in the NFL to squash teams by that large a margin. And that good teams don't win "the close games" rather they win games like this by a large margin.
BuckPack
Starter
Posts: 2,205
And1: 802
Joined: May 05, 2006
Location: NY

 

Post#17 » by BuckPack » Mon Sep 17, 2007 1:51 pm

Great win, although it certainly wasn't flawless. Our o-line still looks pretty vulnerable, even though their pass blocking improved in the second half. Secondary also was up down--poor game by Woodson and Collins, Harris played OK. Didn't think we generated enough of a pass rush on Eli either.

Other than that, good performance and an encouraging one...even for the running game. TE's played great, but the star of the day goes to the guy who's gotten the most heat on this board the last few weeks (well, the guy not named Ted Thompson)....



"Are you kidding me?" said Tim Rooney, a longtime personnel director for the Steelers, Lions and Giants who was in the press box still scouting for New York. "Boy, he was good. Fantastic.

"He just looks very, very quick getting rid of the football. He looks like he's so in tune. He was unbelievable looking people off and completing short passes. He's as good as I've seen him right now."


boy do I wish Rodgers was out there....
User avatar
paulpressey25
Senior Mod - Bucks
Senior Mod - Bucks
Posts: 62,507
And1: 29,501
Joined: Oct 27, 2002
     

 

Post#18 » by paulpressey25 » Mon Sep 17, 2007 4:03 pm

BuckPack wrote:boy do I wish Rodgers was out there....


I can't speak for the others, but I'll gladly eat the crow.....

The only thing is that you then have to acknowledge that TT may have surrounded Favre with good enough offensive weapons.....old man Driver, James Jones, Ryan Grant and Wynn all were outstanding yesterday.....

Next week against a tough D will be a great test.
BuckPack
Starter
Posts: 2,205
And1: 802
Joined: May 05, 2006
Location: NY

 

Post#19 » by BuckPack » Mon Sep 17, 2007 4:21 pm

paulpressey25 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



I can't speak for the others, but I'll gladly eat the crow.....

The only thing is that you then have to acknowledge that TT may have surrounded Favre with good enough offensive weapons.....old man Driver, James Jones, Ryan Grant and Wynn all were outstanding yesterday.....

Next week against a tough D will be a great test.


I like the guys around Favre, but I do think they could have been much better...and if they couldn't light up the Giants terrible secondary and LBs, then they weren't going to do it against anybody in the league.

I still think our running game is in big trouble, even though Wynn looked solid yesterday (although he really only gained all of his yards on 1 carry). Now maybe that may be more of a reflection of our terrible run blocking, but I still don't think Deshawn Wynn is Adrian Peterson out there. Like I said at the draft, we will rue the day that we didn't trade up to get Adrian Peterson at #6. How good would this team look if he had traded our #1, #2, next year's #1 and #4/5? (I would have also traded our #4 for Moss) We'd still have Jones, Hall, Crosby, Wynn, clowney etc. from that draft, and we'd be set for the next decade at RB and WR. You telling me we couldn't win the NFC with that team?

I like James Jones as well, but I still maintain that we'd be far better off if he was our #4 (and Randy Moss was our #2) and could learn the position for another year before having to be counted on as a starter. Ruvell Martin continues to do nothing out there but run some incompleted fly patterns (not all a fault of his own obviously), but he just doesn't get any seperation.

TE's looked good yesterday...hung onto every ball thrown in their direction, specifically Lee's catch in the end zone. But again, if they didn't show somethign this week, then they're never going to show it. The key will be whether they demonstrate this performance consistently throughout the season. I bet not.

So, as much as I like the young guys on our roster, and laud TT for adding them, nobody will convince me that he wasted some signiicant opportunities to improve this team into an NFC contender this past spring. He could have added those guys I mentioned w/out sacrificing Jones, Hall, and Wynn. Since we're probably going to have to pick an RB with our #1 pick next year, doesn't that make Jackson superfluous to Morency and Wynn, particularly VM since their running styles are so similar?

I don't want to get into the Moss debate anymore, but I think he and Adrian Peterson would have put this team as the favorite with the Bears win the NFC.
User avatar
ReasonablySober
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 106,714
And1: 41,323
Joined: Dec 02, 2001
Location: Cheap dinner. Watch basketball. Bone down.
Contact:

 

Post#20 » by ReasonablySober » Mon Sep 17, 2007 4:37 pm

Moss I'll give you. By all accounts it seems like, at least to some degree, TT wanted Moss but underestimated his value and in turn he blew his shot to get him.

But I when you start talking about Peterson you get into hypotheticals. For the most part, nobody knows what TT did on draft day in terms of deals he tried to make or deals he was offered but turned down. He may have been banking on Marshawn Lynch falling to him at #16. Or maybe he did try to move up and snag one of Lynch or Peterson but the teams weren't moving. He also may have made an offer to San Diego but it sounds like they wanted a huge package of picks for Turner.

Personally, I wouldn't have even excepted the proposed deal above for Peterson. I had him ranked #2 in the draft and was extremely disappointed when the Vikings stole him. I can only imagine what their war room looked like when he fell. It would have taken a monster deal to get them to part with that pick.

Return to Green Bay Packers