It's on to Green Bay

I think the key for the Pats on offense is how the Packers want to account for Gronk at the LOS. I would imagine they're going to want to put somebody on him and try to jam his release. By doing so however that pulls somebody out of the box on an already suspect run defense. I look for the Pats to go with a lot of 2 WR, 2 TE and single back formations and look to get GB to commit and then use that to their advantage to get mismatches. I believe they'll have the patience to run the ball as much as GB wants to let them with the double bonus of keeping Rogers off the field. Then use play action once they start cheating up. I would bet they hit a few over the top out of play action. The Packers haven't been great against TEs so both Wright and Gronk could have big games.

On defense I think this is a controlled pocket rush game. They don't want Rogers running out of the pocket and extending plays for big gains. I think going big inside and letting Vince and the boys control the run while freeing up the linebackers to control the underneath passing game will be key.

Most people seem to be of the mind it will be Revis on Cobb with Browner on Nelson with help over the top. It certainly makes some sense but while not world beaters Quarless at 6'4" and Adams at 6'1" do offer a height advantage for the packers against any of our DBs. I think Collins can handle Quarless but it will be an interesting balance having him helping out on the run. If the Packers are smart they might look to flex him out wide in which case it may fall to Chung to cover him. I wonder if this is the game Dennard gets back into the mix with a lot more snaps on Adams. I think he's the best psychical matchup there.

Another option would be Aarington on Cobb with help, Revis on Nelson and then you mix and match Browner, Collins, Chung and Dennard on Quarless and Adams. I think this may also give more flexibility to stop the run.

I think it will probably be a mix of both strategies with which one is used most based on how the Packers try to attack the Pats.

everlong said:

I think the key for the Pats on offense is how the Packers want to account for Gronk at the LOS. I would imagine they're going to want to put somebody on him and try to jam his release. By doing so however that pulls somebody out of the box on an already suspect run defense. I look for the Pats to go with a lot of 2 WR, 2 TE and single back formations and look to get GB to commit and then use that to their advantage to get mismatches. I believe they'll have the patience to run the ball as much as GB wants to let them with the double bonus of keeping Rogers off the field. Then use play action once they start cheating up. I would bet they hit a few over the top out of play action. The Packers haven't been great against TEs so both Wright and Gronk could have big games.

On defense I think this is a controlled pocket rush game. They don't want Rogers running out of the pocket and extending plays for big gains. I think going big inside and letting Vince and the boys control the run while freeing up the linebackers to control the underneath passing game will be key.

Most people seem to be of the mind it will be Revis on Cobb with Browner on Nelson with help over the top. It certainly makes some sense but while not world beaters Quarless at 6'4" and Adams at 6'1" do offer a height advantage for the packers against any of our DBs. I think Collins can handle Quarless but it will be an interesting balance having him helping out on the run. If the Packers are smart they might look to flex him out wide in which case it may fall to Chung to cover him. I wonder if this is the game Dennard gets back into the mix with a lot more snaps on Adams. I think he's the best psychical matchup there.

Another option would be Aarington on Cobb with help, Revis on Nelson and then you mix and match Browner, Collins, Chung and Dennard on Quarless and Adams. I think this may also give more flexibility to stop the run.

I think it will probably be a mix of both strategies with which one is used most based on how the Packers try to attack the Pats.

Click to expand...

Good analysis.

GB has already talked about playing "chess" with Belichick:

“That’s been their MO,” [CB Tramon] Williams said, via the team’s website. “They find different ways to attack different teams. You never know what it’s going to be from week to week. That’s the chess match, and that’s what the great teams do. They play chess. It isn’t a checkers game. Hopefully we can go out and play chess a little bit, too.”

Click to expand...

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...nders-readying-for-chess-match-with-patriots/

GB is not a "chess" team, IMO. They keep things pretty simple. They win off of turnover differential and Aaron Rodgers finding mismatches created by Nelson and Cobb. I don't think "playing chess" is their style, and I don't think they have the personnel to do it.

mayoclinic said:

Good analysis.

GB has already talked about playing "chess" with Belichick:

GB is not a "chess" team, IMO. They keep things pretty simple. They win off of turnover differential and Aaron Rodgers finding mismatches created by Nelson and Cobb. I don't think "playing chess" is their style, and I don't think they have the personnel to do it.

Click to expand...

Thanks.

Agreed. That's why on offense I think they'll have a pick your poison approach and let Brady control it at the LOS and on defense they'll figure out what GB wants to do, adjust and shut it down. I don't see GB then being able to counter and re-counter those adjustments.

everlong said:

Thanks.

Agreed. That's why on offense I think they'll have a pick your poison approach and let Brady control it at the LOS and on defense they'll figure out what GB wants to do, adjust and shut it down. I don't see GB then being able to counter and re-counter those adjustments.

Click to expand...

I agree. And I think BB's #1 focus on offense is going to be avoiding turnovers. The only way I see GB winning this game is if they decisively win the TO battle.

everlong said:

On defense I think this is a controlled pocket rush game. They don't want Rogers running out of the pocket and extending plays for big gains. I think going big inside and letting Vince and the boys control the run while freeing up the linebackers to control the underneath passing game will be key.

Click to expand...

I agree, and I'll add a bit more context. You want to keep most scrambling QBs in the pocket because their heads are their weakest attributes. Force them into being a stationary passer and they don't look nearly as dynamic.

Rodgers is the exception, though. He is equally capable of doing a Brady impression as he is a Wilson one. The reason I expect to see more containment rushing is because I think NE will continue their heavy M2M coverage. QB scrambles when half the defense has their backs to the LOS is the easiest big play a team can have, so it's incumbent on the rushers to keep those opportunities to a minimum.

mayoclinic said:

I agree. And I think BB's #1 focus on offense is going to be avoiding turnovers. The only way I see GB winning this game is if they decisively win the TO battle.

Click to expand...

I would add the red zone battle where NE is better offensively but GB is better defensively.

Oswlek said:

I agree, and I'll add a bit more context. You want to keep most scrambling QBs in the pocket because their heads are their weakest attributes. Force them into being a stationary passer and they don't look nearly as dynamic.

Rodgers is the exception, though. He is equally capable of doing a Brady impression as he is a Wilson one. The reason I expect to see more containment rushing is because I think NE will continue their heavy M2M coverage. QB scrambles when half the defense has their backs to the LOS is the easiest big play a team can have, so it's incumbent on the rushers to keep those opportunities to a minimum.

Click to expand...

Agreed and I'd add if the Pats want to play M2M the Packers love crossing routes and are very good at adjusting and following Rogers across the field. Any blitz has to come with a contain element as well.

everlong said:

Agreed and I'd add if the Pats want to play M2M the Packers love crossing routes and are very good at adjusting and following Rogers across the field. Any blitz has to come with a contain element as well.

Click to expand...

I could see the Pats showing a lot of man and switching into a lot of Cover 3 zone, possibly with a robber, which works well against the crossing routes (see: Seattle vs. Denver in the SB). As I've mentioned elsewhere, I think zone blitzing is much more likely than true blitzing, and I wouldn't be surprised to see a "spy" on Rodgers.

mayoclinic said:

I could see the Pats showing a lot of man and switching into a lot of Cover 3 zone, possibly with a robber, which works well against the crossing routes (see: Seattle vs. Denver in the SB). As I've mentioned elsewhere, I think zone blitzing is much more likely than true blitzing, and I wouldn't be surprised to see a "spy" on Rodgers.

Click to expand...

Agreed. That's what I was getting at but your summary fills it out much better.

chasa said:

at what point are the patriots going to stop having their "toughest test" every week its a new toughest test.

Click to expand...

If you ask Belichick which game will be the toughest, you should know the answer.

chasa said:

at what point are the patriots going to stop having their "toughest test" every week its a new toughest test.

Click to expand...

Hopefully February 2.

mayoclinic said:

I could see the Pats showing a lot of man and switching into a lot of Cover 3 zone, possibly with a robber, which works well against the crossing routes (see: Seattle vs. Denver in the SB). As I've mentioned elsewhere, I think zoe ne blitzing is much more likely than true blitzing, and I wouldn't be surprised to see a "spy" on Rodgers.

Click to expand...

I wonder about the efficacy of using a "spy" with a QB like Rodgers. The problem with a spy is that he's usually a LB, who you are asking to be responsible for a more mobile athlete from sideline to sideline. Not gonna happen. And in the end you end up wasting a man on a fool's errand It doesn't usually work out. It will look great for one play and end up hurting you either in coverage or rush the rest. I fear the best you can do is using mixed zone/man packages that allows SOME of your coverage people to be able to read the field and alert people to a "breakout". If I had a choice of Rodgers passing or Rodgers running, I'd choose the latter......and his coach would agree with me.

BTW- no question that Rodgers is probably most dangerous when he breaks the pocket, much like Rothlessberger, while you can discipline the rush, you can't castrate the coverage.

In some respects, I think everyone is wrong about how we are going to play them, because if I were Patricia, I'd do it ALL. I'd never be in the same coverages for any length of time. I'd have Revis on Nelson one series, on Cobb the next and, and be in a match up zone the next. Imagine the confusion when Rodgers and his receivers keep thinking the are going to get one thing and constantly get another. That's a lot of wasted sideline time trying to figure out a pattern when there is none.

patfanken said:

In some respects, I think everyone is wrong about how we are going to play them, because if I were Patricia, I'd do it ALL. I'd never be in the same coverages for any length of time. I'd have Revis on Nelson one series, on Cobb the next and, and be in a match up zone the next. Imagine the confusion when Rodgers and his receivers keep thinking the are going to get one thing and constantly get another. That's a lot of wasted sideline time trying to figure out a pattern when there is none.

Click to expand...

That's what we were getting at and you saw it in both the Indy and Denver games a lot where what looked like man was really cover 3 or quarters and you saw both Luck and Manning having to hold the ball. Luck is the better comp to Rogers and they were able to both spy and cover. Part of that was decleating receivers who tried to run crossing routes within 5 yards. In nickle you will see some man-zone hybrid coverages where Hightower and Collins are in zone over the middle while the DBs man up on the receivers and McCourty is the single high.

I still think they'll try to press at the LOS to keep Nelson and Cobb from getting clean releases and to throw off Rogers timing regardless of the coverage.

patfanken said:

In some respects, I think everyone is wrong about how we are going to play them, because if I were Patricia, I'd do it ALL. I'd never be in the same coverages for any length of time. I'd have Revis on Nelson one series, on Cobb the next and, and be in a match up zone the next.

Click to expand...

I've said that before:

mayoclinic said:

I don't think it will be that simple. I think that BB will always be aware of all 3 of these guys on every play, but I think he'll change things up to avoid getting predictable. Some (perhaps even most) of the time it may be as you describe. But I would also expect Revis on Nelson with Browner on the TE and Arrington/Ryan on Cobb; some Cover 3 zone; and other variations. Aaron Rodgers is no Matt Stafford and won't be easily confused, but they've got to mix it up and keep him guessing a bit.

Click to expand...

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england...o-take-away-from-aaron-rodgers.1113805/page-2 (post #28)

mayoclinic said:

I've said that before:



http://www.patsfans.com/new-england...o-take-away-from-aaron-rodgers.1113805/page-2 (post #28)

Click to expand...

Good, it's worth repeating. Fans need to get more of this "outside the box" kind of analysis then simplistic one on one match ups we seem to see. So much technology. So much data. So much tape available. SO little content and substance.

We get 3 or 4 Pats specific shows every week, and none of them seem to say much of anything. What a great show we could put on, simply by going just a bit more under the skin. Think about how much we could expand the fan base's knowledge by showing how certain coverages look before the snap, and what they are specifically designed to do. Show their strengths and weaknesses.

Christ I'd settle for someone taking the time to explain why not playing the same base defenses makes it harder for the offense. Matt Chattham should have his own show. The more we see of tape and the less we see of "personalities" is an improvement

Whether we analyze superficial or complex data as fans, it won't help us predict the outcome of any given game. But detailed analysis is much more interesting.

I'm in green Bay (Appleton actually). Looks like this is going to be the game of the year. So excited to be here. Can't wait! First time seeing the boys live since the 2007 afc championship game.

Dan Roche ‏@RochieWBZ 40m40 minutes ago
Brady 33-4 career when game time temp under 40-degrees - For those asking, Aaron Rodgers is 16-5 #Patriots #wbz

Brady_to_Moss said:

Dan Roche ‏@RochieWBZ 40m40 minutes ago
Brady 33-4 career when game time temp under 40-degrees - For those asking, Aaron Rodgers is 16-5 #Patriots #wbz

Click to expand...

Brady has twice the time in the league roughly, and has less losses then Rodgers in this category, that's amazing

patfanken said:

Good, it's worth repeating. Fans need to get more of this "outside the box" kind of analysis then simplistic one on one match ups we seem to see. So much technology. So much data. So much tape available. SO little content and substance.

Click to expand...

I agree, Ken. In fact, I think there's a more general discussion here that deserves it's own thread, so I'll start one.