GB vs NE Defensively

[FCB02062]

Patriots fanboys need to stop worrying about other teams. because the jets "suck" or Sanchez threw four picks, and Green Bay's defense isn't that good, doesn't change the fact that the New England Patriots defense is historically, historically bad right now and the 1991 New England Patriots could move the ball at will on the 2010 version. Sure, it can change, and I really hope it will. But with a clear lack of PLAYMAKERS on the defensive side of the ball, I don't see it changing anytime soon. When the Patriots get PLAYMAKERS like Charles Woodson and Darrelle Revis, let me know....Seriously, do the New England Patriots have any PLAYMAKERS on defense? I'm not buying Wilfork as a playmaker because someone will say he is....anyone else???????

 

[TheComeback]

Patriots fanboys need to stop worrying about other teams. because the jets "suck" or Sanchez threw four picks, and Green Bay's defense isn't that good, doesn't change the fact that the New England Patriots defense is historically, historically bad right now and the 1991 New England Patriots could move the ball at will on the 2010 version. Sure, it can change, and I really hope it will. But with a clear lack of PLAYMAKERS on the defensive side of the ball, I don't see it changing anytime soon. When the Patriots get PLAYMAKERS like Charles Woodson and Darrelle Revis, let me know....Seriously, do the New England Patriots have any PLAYMAKERS on defense? I'm not buying Wilfork as a playmaker because someone will say he is....anyone else???????

I've heard this "historically bad" argument about a million times now, and it completely ignores the fact that every defense around the league is playing historically bad against the pass. It doesn't actually mean anything.

Sorry, but I can't get myself all worked up over giving up a bunch of passes. If we were historically bad at giving up points, which is what matters, then I'd be concerned. But guess what... we're not.

As for the Packers, with that soft schedule they seemingly have a chance to go undefeated. But they won't. They aren't the 2007 Patriots, even though everyone treats them that way. Two weeks ago I saw that team nearly nearly lose to the Christian Ponder-led Vikings, and we're only halfway through the season. They're the best in the league, but right now that isn't saying much.

 

[DarrylS]

Continually advocate for taking the long view of what is going on here..

The records are telling..

Indy 0-7, no Manning no wins..
Miami 0-7 ,Saint Parcells helped craft this team
Saints 4-3, after getting a beat down from St. Louis
Cowboys 3-4, always a preseason favorite by many
Philadelphia 3-4, they had Superbowl T-Shirts already printed

It goes on and on, seems as though a lot of folks have NEPyopia.. the league wants parity, and on any given Sunday..

 

[JJDChE]

And, the last NFC team to win in NE it was the Packers.

in 2002...They'll get their chance again in 2018.

I think the 2010 game is a bit more relevant, although Rodgers was out for that game.

 

[JJDChE]

Continually advocate for taking the long view of what is going on here..

The records are telling..

Indy 0-7, no Manning no wins..
Miami 0-7 ,Saint Parcells helped craft this team
Saints 4-3, after getting a beat down from St. Louis
Cowboys 3-4, always a preseason favorite by many
Philadelphia 3-4, they had Superbowl T-Shirts already printed

It goes on and on, seems as though a lot of folks have NEPyopia.. the league wants parity, and on any given Sunday..

Unfortunately, the great majority of people (not just Patriot fans) don't have the ability to think more than about 15 minutes into the future.

 

[RodThePat]

The Packers have a recent record of success with a very similar defensive personnel. That's enough to put them considerably above the Patriots defense, which hasn't been good since 2006.

 

[mgcolby]

Patriots fanboys need to stop worrying about other teams. because the jets "suck" or Sanchez threw four picks, and Green Bay's defense isn't that good, doesn't change the fact that the New England Patriots defense is historically, historically bad right now and the 1991 New England Patriots could move the ball at will on the 2010 version. Sure, it can change, and I really hope it will. But with a clear lack of PLAYMAKERS on the defensive side of the ball, I don't see it changing anytime soon. When the Patriots get PLAYMAKERS like Charles Woodson and Darrelle Revis, let me know....Seriously, do the New England Patriots have any PLAYMAKERS on defense? I'm not buying Wilfork as a playmaker because someone will say he is....anyone else???????

When did allowing 22.8 PPG become historically bad? And don't bring up passing yards the rules are a joke, not to say our pass D is good. But passing yards around the league are a joke.

And no Hugh Millen wouldn't move the ball against this defense.

 

[folamzz]

I've heard this "historically bad" argument about a million times now, and it completely ignores the fact that every defense around the league is playing historically bad against the pass. It doesn't actually mean anything.

Sorry, but I can't get myself all worked up over giving up a bunch of passes. If we were historically bad at giving up points, which is what matters, then I'd be concerned. But guess what... we're not.

As for the Packers, with that soft schedule they seemingly have a chance to go undefeated. But they won't. They aren't the 2007 Patriots, even though everyone treats them that way. Two weeks ago I saw that team nearly nearly lose to the Christian Ponder-led Vikings, and we're only halfway through the season. They're the best in the league, but right now that isn't saying much.

I don't know if the packers will go undefeated or not, but your reasoning why they can't is flawed. The 2007 pats almost lost to a Jay feely led eagles and a kyle bowler led ravens, yet they went undefeated. The packers led for all of the second half of that vikings game and were never in danger of losing

I think the packers can go undefeated if somebody takes out eagles or saints for them. The eagles have the corners to take out their receivers and the offense to match greenbay's scoring

 

[Ring 6]

Packers have lost Collins and Cullen Jenkins...those guys were big pieces in that last years D.

They are still better than our D though.

Much better based upon what?

 

[Ring 6]

The Packers have some legitimate flaws in that defense. I've said that from day one. Their safety position, while not as bad as ours, is a question mark. With that said, if these two teams were to meet, this game would either be a win for the Packers, or a blowout win for them. For the Packers defense, they can legitimately play man-to-man coverage and have the corners that are physical enough to bump our guys at the line of scrimmage and re-route them, forcing Brady to hold onto the ball longer. Their corners can also run with our receivers. They have a guy in the middle who is capable of creating a one man pass rush right up the A-Gap, something that gives Brady a world of trouble as he isn't exactly fleet of foot. They are also capable of creating a rush around the edge with Clay Matthews. So, with Brady having to hold onto the ball longer because of physical man coverage while staring down B.J. Raji coming up the middle and getting bombarded from the outside by Clay Matthews, the Packers would most definitely be able to force enough stops and three and outs to win the game. On the flip side, Aaron Rodgers would be facing sporadic pressure from the outside and soft, pansy ass, let-everything-happen-in-front-of-you, BBDB, zone coverage on his receivers. Rodgers, Jennings, Nelson, Driver, and Finley would absolutely eat that for breakfast. We'd have to rely on our good red zone D to get the job done. It's either that, or hope that we play Haynesworth for more than 11 snaps to get some pressure up the middle and hope that Devin McCourty suddenly realizes just who the hell he is. But until then, this game would be a decisive victory for the Fudgies.

Just so I am clear.
Your argument is that the Packer defense that has allowed 290 passing yards a game to:
Brees
Newton
Cutler
Orton
Bradford
Ryan
Ponder
Will stiflle that slug Tom Brady with their pass defense.
Want to reconsider that?

 

[FCB02062]

When did allowing 22.8 PPG become historically bad? And don't bring up passing yards the rules are a joke, not to say our pass D is good. But passing yards around the league are a joke.

And no Hugh Millen wouldn't move the ball against this defense.

Hugh Millen would go for 275 AT LEAST against this pass defense...and, you picked apart every statement I made, except for the lack of a playmaker? Am I to take that as you agreeing with me in the fact that they have no playmakers on defense????

 

[mgcolby]

Hugh Millen would go for 275 AT LEAST against this pass defense...and, you picked apart every statement I made, except for the lack of a playmaker? Am I to take that as you agreeing with me in the fact that they have no playmakers on defense????

Nope, Arrington, Chung, Spikes, Wilfork, Mayo, Carter are all "playmakers".....If McCourtey gets over his slump he becomes another playmaker.

 

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

The Packers are going to lose this weekend

I think the Chargers backs are up against the wall and this is the time of year they start to gel

I think Rivers to Jackson is going to be an all day thing - Rivers will throw for 345 yards and 4 TDs...Jackson will have 145 yards receiving and 3 TDs

Chargers 34
Packers 31

 

[Kontradiction]

You know we're the last team to beat the Packers, right?

Yep. And that was without Aaron Rodgers. And it still took an offensive lineman doing his best Devin Hester impression to do it. You make this post as if the Packers' best player was playing.

LOL I love it when people make dumb comments and state them as if they were fact.

Fact: The Patriots offense struggles against opponents who play tight man coverage, re-route their receivers, and get pressure up the middle. The Packers do all of these things and did them in the last meeting, making the game tough on Brady.

Fact: Our defense is on pace to allow over 5,000 yards through the air this year.

Fact: Aaron Rodgers is on pace to set the single season passer rating record.

With all of these facts in mind, I'm not sure how this is a "dumb" comment. So, with that said, here's another fact...

Fact: Unapologetic homers get their panties in a bunch and, instead of debating the facts, go for the personal insults when anything bad about the team is mentioned.

 

[Kontradiction]

Let me put it this way: if this game were to happen, we'd see Brady playing catch on the sidelines just to keep his arm warm because the defense would be on the field for 5+ minute drives. Rodgers would probably have to choose to not take what's open deep with Molden 10 yards behind Jordy Nelson in order to take the intermediate stuff and keep Brady on the sidelines.

 

[ausbacker]

The Packers are going to lose this weekend

I think the Chargers backs are up against the wall and this is the time of year they start to gel

I think Rivers to Jackson is going to be an all day thing - Rivers will throw for 345 yards and 4 TDs...Jackson will have 145 yards receiving and 3 TDs

Chargers 34
Packers 31

Recent history has taught us that the Chargers find new ways to lose winnable games. On a sidenote, geez Eric Weedle would have looked good in the middle of the Patriots D. Oh well.

 

[randomk1]

Much better based upon what?

Based on the players they have and that they have been a top defense for years now and well...basically they haven't been as ****ty as our D even when they aren't playing at their best.

If the playoffs started today would you seriously pick the NE defense over GBs defense?

 

[Sciz]

The Packers have a recent record of success with a very similar defensive personnel. That's enough to put them considerably above the Patriots defense, which hasn't been good since 2006.

...which allowed the 3rd least points over the last 11 games last season, and the least in the league over the last 5.