Agreed.No goats. Played a good NFL team on the road to OT with a rookie third string QB forced into action. Sucks to lose and they left some plays on the field, but no goats for me.
Agreed.No goats. Played a good NFL team on the road to OT with a rookie third string QB forced into action. Sucks to lose and they left some plays on the field, but no goats for me.
Thanks for that. Maybe that's why I feel better about this 1-3 team than last year's. I'm not sure if they'll make the playoffs as they have a tougher schedule overall but I am beginning to like this team, especially the defense.Last season through 4 games (3 home, 1 road): 1-3, scoring 17.8 points, allowing 17.5 points
This season through 4 games (1 home, 3 road): 1-3, scoring 18.5 points, allowing 24.5 points
Record of opponents played in first four games through four games in 2021:
Mia: 1-3
NYJ: 1-3
NO: 2-2
TB: 3-1
TOT: 7-9
Record of opponents played in first four games through four games in 2022:
Mia: 3-1
Pit: 1-3
Bal: 2-2
GB: 3-1
TOT: 9-7
Every time he throws headsets at a referee he adds one more year to his lifespan.Not really anything to do with the goat but I laughed at the sequence of Bill losing his mind about the play lock being reset after the dropped TD by GB only to have them take an intentional delay of game.
That's a 100% YES. How can you NOT be encouraged by the defense today? Sure Bryant was doing his share but overall it was a fantastic performance.Should we be encouraged by the defensive performance today or not?
Can we throw Bryant in there to sweeten the deal?The ”they traded Isaiah Wynn for a 2027 seventh-round pick swap” thread deserves far fewer posts that the Justin Herron thread.
Green Bay is a good team. They're coming off back to back 13-3 seasons, and Rodgers has won the MVP two straight seasons. Obviously they don't have Adams anymore, which is huge, but Rodgers is still awesome, and they have a phenomenal running game.@Eddie Jurak and @BaseballJones (oops @SeoulSoxFan beat me to it) - great posts! I only was able to watch the last part of the game and OT as supposed to be working now. Looks like the officating really was poor today.
Should we be encouraged by the defensive performance today or not? Thought they played pretty gutsy toward the end of the game, but hoped for one more great play from them (fumble, interception, miracle) which never happened.
Eh. It's a new offense for everyone and the entire offense is just getting better. If that keeps happening, we'll be okay. Next 4 games seem winnable.I don’t know, the offense looked better for much of today than it did in several of Mac’s starts.
*ducks*
If you ignore the fact they ran over them all game, even in obvious running situations.Just an awful play call if you want to "win" the game and not have a moral victory.
zone blocking is supposed to have small quick lineman that can move at the point of attick to create 1-cut holes for the rb and it's suppored to have a QB that can move outside the pocket to throw in the middle of the field for how its suppoured to look go to you tube and search denver broncos 1995-2008 or san fran 2017 onI posted this in the game thread but going to post here as well:
Can anyone explain to me how zone blocking is supposed to work? I’m not trying to defend wynns overall level but it struck me on both sacks he let up it was to a guy waaay wide of LOS. And in both cases another player has a chance to chip the guy which would’ve given Wynn more time to move out to that area (I think romo even called out the RB on the first play). It feels like placing all blame on Wynn on those sacks is misguided somewhat. But hence why I posed the question in the first place. I’m willing to be told I’m a moron…and I’ll add he didn’t look good even outside these two plays, I’m just genuinely curious at what I’m looking at.
Zone blocking scheme has nothing to do with those plays. Rusher is out wide and you either chip to help the tackle or trust him to have the quickness to cut off the outside rush. They trusted Wynn and it didn’t work.I posted this in the game thread but going to post here as well:
Can anyone explain to me how zone blocking is supposed to work? I’m not trying to defend wynns overall level but it struck me on both sacks he let up it was to a guy waaay wide of LOS. And in both cases another player has a chance to chip the guy which would’ve given Wynn more time to move out to that area (I think romo even called out the RB on the first play). It feels like placing all blame on Wynn on those sacks is misguided somewhat. But hence why I posed the question in the first place. I’m willing to be told I’m a moron…and I’ll add he didn’t look good even outside these two plays, I’m just genuinely curious at what I’m looking at.
Gotcha, thanks for the explanation! Like I said happy to be told I’m a moron (and I appreciate you not actually calling me one)Zone blocking scheme has nothing to do with those plays. Rusher is out wide and you either chip to help the tackle or trust him to have the quickness to cut off the outside rush. They trusted Wynn and it didn’t work.
If you had his hair stylist, you'd cry too.He always looks like he's about to cry too. Edit: And the looking to the refs for roughing the passer every single time is disgraceful.
Rodgers looks like Steve Gutenberg in The Day AfterIf you had his hair stylist, you'd cry too.
Or that breed of dog which usually wins the ugliest dog contest every year.
I get what you're saying but saying Zappe had a "bad game" considering where he went to college, where he was drafted, and how few repetitions he's received in his very young career I think it's damn harsh to say he had a "bad game." On the contrary, I think he surprised many of us here being able to drive the team to two touchdown scores at GB when he was ushered in suddenly because Hoyer had to leave the game. The bar in this situation would be very low for anyone in his position and lack of experience and who cannot say that he cleared it given all the circumstances? The third string, fourth round drafted, hasn't been activated until this past Mon., QB almost won at GB.Defensive tackle play was garbage. DL overall has had a rough couple of games. Bryant had mistakes. Jack Jones is going to be a good coverage corner but his play strength is sorely lacking. Props for the pick-six but can’t wait until he adds 10-15 pounds. Wynn needs to get his shit together. Zappe unfortunately had a bad game too. It’s not his fault that he isn’t ready but he’s clearly not ready.
I think it can be true that he both had a bad game and that he was better than most if not all of us would have expected if you told us this morning he was going to play most of the game. They likely win today with Hoyer, they almost certainly win with Mac, and if Zappe throws the ball to a wide open Henry over the middle on that 3rd and 5 instead of panicking and spinning around before throwing a pass that had no chance incomplete they probably win with Zappe.I get what you're saying but saying Zappe had a "bad game" considering where he went to college, where he was drafted, and how few repetitions he's received in his very young career I think it's damn harsh to say he had a "bad game." On the contrary, I think he surprised many of us here being able to drive the team to two touchdown scores at GB when he was ushered in suddenly because Hoyer had to leave the game. The bar in this situation would be very low for anyone in his position and lack of experience and who cannot say that he cleared it given all the circumstances? The third string, fourth round drafted, hasn't been activated until this past Mon., QB almost won at GB.
It’s flat out lazy and ignorant to say that they probably win with Hoyer. Really? What’s the evidence to suggest that? That he’s been in the league a long time?Why do people keep saying they likely win with Hoyer? Hoyer is awful, he’s a very bad NFL QB who looked awful in the brief time he was in the game before he got concussed. Zappe was about exactly how I thought he would be, and it’s a testament to the team that they got into OT, but I see no reason to believe the outcome would have been different if Hoyer played the whole game.
They tried the play action on 2nd and 6 from the NE 29 on their penultimate drive in regulation, but that led to a sack of Zappe. I'm guessing BB figured they could get 3 yards and then maybe have two shots to pick up the last 2 yards.
I think one reason people feel this way is that Hoyer showed a little more composure in the pocket. It's not everything but it was clear early on throwing with Zappe that he wasn't comfortable, panicking his reads and looking to move around before rushing his throw and skipping it in the dirt. Not saying they definitely win with Hoyer but I do think you can be confident running your actual offense a bit more.It’s flat out lazy and ignorant to say that they probably win with Hoyer. Really? What’s the evidence to suggest that? That he’s been in the league a long time?
I think that they *could* have won had Hoyer played the whole game, but he also could have turned the ball over three times and lost by two TDs. There's no basis to say that they "probably" would have won. "Could" and "probably" are not synonymous.I think one reason people feel this way is that Hoyer showed a little more composure in the pocket. It's not everything but it was clear early on throwing with Zappe that he wasn't comfortable, panicking his reads and looking to move around before rushing his throw and skipping it in the dirt. Not saying they definitely win with Hoyer but I do think you can be confident running your actual offense a bit more.
Yes, thank you. Maybe Hoyer plays a little better than Zappe, but maybe he throws a pick 6 and they lose by two scores. Plus there's the fact that you can't change one variable in the game and assume everything else plays out exactly the same way. The Pats lose this game probably 75% of the time with either Hoyer or Zappe starting, getting into OT was a miracle in and of itself. If Mac played they have a better chance, but then again if the game plan is very different and they are letting Mac throw the ball all over the field and he throws 2-3 picks like he has been doing maybe they don't even get into OT. Who the fuck knows.I think that they *could* have won had Hoyer played the whole game, but he also could have turned the ball over three times and lost by two TDs. There's no basis to say that they "probably" would have won. "Could" and "probably" are not synonymous.
I feel like I post this every week. Conservative play-calling, particularly against teams who are better than you, is a great way to lose a bunch of one-score games.I hated the conservative play calling in OT. I think that’s where you get aggressive, and try to win the game. That’s on the coaches. Otherwise, I loved the toughness, effort, and compete level today. Hard for me to call out too many game goats.
They definitely don’t suck. But they’re also not good. If Mac returns and limits turnovers they should be pretty good but not exceptional, able to lose to bad teams but also able to surprise some of the better teams in the league.Such a tough team to get a read on 4 games in. I really don't think they suck and yet I have basically no faith in them to beat anyone. I think they might actually be in that couple players away zone, I do think there is a strong core here and thankfully it's not really the old guys at the center of it.
Right now the frustrating thing is that every week they make just enough mistakes to lose. It's easy to see if they clean that up they'll win a bunch of games, but they don't seem able to do that.They definitely don’t suck. But they’re also not good. If Mac returns and limits turnovers they should be pretty good but not exceptional, able to lose to bad teams but also able to surprise some of the better teams in the league.
There is a strong core here, I agree. Lots to build upon.
This is not the Green Bay Packers O of yore. They've struggled badly this year; yesterday was the most points they've scored all season.That's a 100% YES. How can you NOT be encouraged by the defense today? Sure Bryant was doing his share but overall it was a fantastic performance.
Your first sentence is EXTREMELY accurate; the second, while likely accurate, is made moot by the first.Also, the officials were BRUTAL yesterday. The game might have swung differently here:
View: https://twitter.com/BWMcGair03/status/1576728420855136256?s=20&t=BzGTJQauDNQEqoPN0O7Zwg