- Joined
- Dec 22, 2008
- Messages
- 15,911
- Reaction score
- 18,039
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.
I think the 2000 Ravens have the record for run defense at 2.7 ypc for context. For as good as the Packers offense is it isn’t a straight dropback pass 40+ times a game offense.
Some random Tampa thoughts on Tampa's D.
The defense in the playoffs has been pretty damn good. On the surface it doesn't look as great in some ways, but it really has been sensational and the best defense in these playoffs. Some people might point out they gave up 23 to Washington which was a badly rated offense, but I don't see it that way. Washington has a pretty damn good #1 WR, they have a decent OL and a decent RB tandem who together got nearly 1200 yards at around 4.5 YPA. The only reason they weren't a better team was QB play. That was the hole on their team. Then in walks Heinicke and he absolutely lights it up. I checked out parts of that game again recently, and came to the conclusion that no only did Heinicke play well, he played great. I would argue in that one game, he was near all pro level. People will talk down his performance and admonish the Bucs D, but the Bucs D played well.
They got pressure, they got him off his spot, the coverage windows were generally tight. It was just Heinicke making play after play. We need to remember that in any one game it is possible for a HOF QB to play like a JAG and JAG to play like a HOF in the NFL. Heinicke played up to that level in that game. He honestly looked a lot like a mix of Rodgers in Mahomes for that 60 minutes and played up to that kind of level. If he could reproduce that game 16 times with this team Washington would have gone 11-5 or 12-4. I would argue on that Sunday that is the quality of team the Bucs beat. It is also why it is so dangerous to play elite D's in the playoffs. You never know if this game is the game where the opposing QB is going to just put it all together for one great game. It just so happens that the Bucs had more talent overall and Brady was able to match. It also helped that Washington's D while good wasn't quite as good as their rankings suggested. Personally considering the quality of opposing QB play and how little time they had to prepare for his style, this was in my mind a B+ defensive game. It only isn't higher because WFT lacks pass catching weapon's after their #1 WR.
As for the Saints game, half of their 20 points came down to a kickoff return that put them in FG range, which the Bucs held off. And a trick play which caught them by surprise. Besides that they only allowed 10 points. Now you could argue Brees has nothing left, and I would say that is unfair. Brees has pretty much looked like he did that last game for the last game for at least the last half of the season and on and off the past 3 years. It wasn't like Brees suddenly fell off a cliff that day. This is who he was, and the Saints made it work due to having fantastic weapons, a good OL and QB who could place the ball well with a solid scheme behind it. If this was so easy to do the Saints, why did no other team do it this year till the Bucs? The answer is that it isn't that easy. You could argue the Bears did something similar, but not really. The Saints only truly had 8 drives in which they were looking to score and one had a missed FG and the other had a fumble that wasn't on Brees. In the Bucs game the Saints were looking to score on 10 drives and were gifted an easy 3 off the bat that the Bucs did well not to turn into 7, and they had to pull out their ace in the hole trick to play to get another 7. But the Bucs should have been more disciplined. I would say it is more like the Bucs D held this same offense half those points on more drives while generating turnovers. I feel like people are shrugging it off like 'of course they could do that, Brees sucks!' when no other team this year has made Brees and that offense look so bad. Literally it was their lowest point total of the year and the Bucs STs spotted them 3.
When you look at how this D has played in these playoff how can you not feel confident in their ability to in some way limit GB? Not stop, but give their offense a good chance to out score them. Here is a hot take and I will stand by it. Heinicke and the way he played has helped prepare them for Rodgers and he played about as well as Rodgers will this Sunday, probably better. That isn't an insult to Rodgers, it is facing the reality of how good Heinicke was THAT ONE GAME. I think this D has played really sensational these playoffs and they are going to somehow surprise people when they aren't blown off the field on Sunday. by 35 points.
que? can you please rewrite this in English?Haha wtf why would that matter there prior QB that started couldn’t even beat out Tayaok Hill when Brees went down. This is the most useless stat of all time might as well find a bucs/Packer stat from the farve era.
Atleast for this one you can say 0-2 prior points to Peyton out coaching ariens. But the stat his said was meaningless
Yup. I don't know how anyone says Mahomes doesn't have a better offense. Hill is better than any WR Brady has, Kelce is the best TE right now and one of the best ever, Watkins is as good or better than any number 2 and EH is in the same ballpark as any RB on the Bucs. Hardman is one of the best number 3's in the league.
Then if you want to talk about Rodgers, he has far and away the best offensive line in the league that it's not even comparable. Adams is as good or better a receiver than anyone on the Bucs and Rodgers has/had two all pro lineman. And as you said, Jones is in the same ballpark of RB as Brady's feature back and the Chiefs.
They all have stacked offenses. Difference here is Brady played one of the best defenses in the NFL last night on the 2nd seed in the NFC so obviously he's not going to put up monster numbers. He made the big plays when he needed to and got the drives he needed to on the road against a great defensive team that quite frankly was the worst matchup possible for them in the playoffs. Brady will not face a better defense the rest of the playoffs.
que? can you please rewrite this in English?
of course its relevant in conversation. it shows warm weather teams under performs the average in GB. I didnt say that it implies a specific outcome.
Is he still with Lulu though? I heard they really had something.
I gladly admit I may have missed something, but I do not see where is demonstrates that. It says "Of the 108 freezing games played at Lambeau, the Packers are 78-29-2, winning 72% of the time (and 74% if we subtract the ties)."que? can you please rewrite this in English?
of course its relevant in conversation. it shows warm weather teams under performs the average in GB. I didnt say that it implies a specific outcome.
If Arians is smart, he'll pound Fournette and Jones next week. When the Packers have given up 140+ yards on the ground they are 1-3 and 1 of those 3 losses was the Bucs. The 1 win was against the Titans trash defense....
TB’s defense was never as bad as they were made to be. I’d take theirs over ours for sure.
How do you explain that warm weather/dome teams do not have a successful record in playing at cold weather venues, specifically Lambeau Field? I understand the concept that the better team/home team has an advantage, but in this case, you very rarely, if ever see a warm weather or dome team going into a cold weather site and win. Just something to think about and if the wind picks up and it's cold, that will definitely affect any passing game.I always find it funny when people think that every player on the Bucs is a born and bred Floridian. A large number of them are from Northern states and/or played football in snowy cities in college or the NFL. Snow is not going to be the reason why any team wins or loses. Wind/rain...sure. The “low” temperature? Not a chance.
How do you explain that warm weather/dome teams do not have a successful record in playing at cold weather venues, specifically Lambeau Field? I understand the concept that the better team/home team has an advantage, but in this case, you very rarely, if ever see a warm weather or dome team going into a cold weather site and win. Just something to think about and if the wind picks up and it's cold, that will definitely affect any passing game.
In any language, you're still the forum troll, pendejo.He has trouble with the English language. I have no idea if "Tayoak Hill" means "Taysom Hill" or "Tyreek Hill" lol. I'm guessing it's Taysom.
Fair enough....I gladly admit I may have missed something, but I do not see where is demonstrates that. It says "Of the 108 freezing games played at Lambeau, the Packers are 78-29-2, winning 72% of the time (and 74% if we subtract the ties)."
In order to really understand whether or not the cold is a factor, we need to see GB's overall home record during the same time period, and I do not see that stat anywhere in the article. Considering how successful of a franchise they are, I would bet their overall home winning percentage is probably somewhere in the 70% range.
The more and more I see guys in the media picking GB to win, the more and more I am confident that TB will win.
PFR's Game finder is mostly behind a paywall now otherwise it would be much easier to search for this kind of stat.How do you explain that warm weather/dome teams do not have a successful record in playing at cold weather venues, specifically Lambeau Field? I understand the concept that the better team/home team has an advantage, but in this case, you very rarely, if ever see a warm weather or dome team going into a cold weather site and win. Just something to think about and if the wind picks up and it's cold, that will definitely affect any passing game.
From our archive - this week all-time:
April 4 - April 19 (Through 26yrs)











