The Fight For First Place: Round Two
Some are calling it the "Game of the Century". Others are calling it the "Hostile Homecoming". Still others are calling it "Favre-Packers v.2.0".
Me? I call it Week 9 of the NFL season.
Admittedly, our opponent this week is eerily similar to the team that handed Green Bay its second loss of the season. We know this team very well, and the only major change is the injury to their star cornerback. Therefore, the actual matchup preview will be abbreviated. Those of you who hate my lengthy previews: commence rejoycing.
MIN rushing vs. GB defense: Adrian Peterson is still scary-good, as is the offensive line that blocks for him. Phil Loadholt has been somewhat hampered by a few nagging injuries, as had Steve Hutchinson, but both seem to be back to normal now. Peterson's rushing stats have actually been underwhelming in 2009, putting up yardage totals of 85, 55, 63, and 69 in four of the last five weeks.
Green Bay gets a major boost to its rush defense compared to the week 4 version of the team now that Atari Bigby is healthy and playing. The defensive line has also been playing well; B.J. Raji and Cullen Jenkins have managed to get consistent penetration and break up plays as they develop. The linebackers, most notably A.J. Hawk, have been streaky, but I attribute that more to having a surplus of contributors (Hawk, Nick Barnett, Brandon Chillar, Aaron Kampman, and Clay Matthews) and a vast array of sub packages.
Advantage: Still Minnesota, but not as much as before.
MIN passing vs. GB defense: Well, Brett Favre is not playing the same way he did to start the season. He's thrown 79 passes in the last two games, including 50 in last week's incredibly fluky loss to Pittsburgh. He has shown the ability to make any throw at any time, including the deep ball, where he puts it in a place where only his receiver can adjust and catch the football.
Minnesota's receiving corps is somewhat of a question mark. Bernard Berrian is dealing with hamstring problems, Percy Harvin is dealing with illness/shoulder issues (isn't he always?), leaving 2009 breakout Sidney Rice and 2008 Playgirl centerfold Visanthe Shiancoe as the main passing targets. I'd include Chester Taylor on this list, but he nearly got decapitated trying to catch a wildly-overpowered bullet dropped a short screen pass that led to the Vikes' first loss.
Besides Atari Bigby's return, the most important development between Week 4 and now is Dom Capers' realization that Aaron Kampman is effective out of a three-point stance. By shifting him to end on passing downs, Capers has enormous flexibility with his nickel and dime packages. Remember when we saw Kampman in coverage on the play where Favre had 8+ seconds to find a receiver? Don't expect to see that again.
Advantage: Minnesota, if you go by the numbers, but Green Bay has closed the gap.
GB rushing vs. MIN defense: Goodbye 2008 Ryan Grant, hello 2007 Ryan Grant. After seemingly endless questions regarding his ability, his fit in Green Bay, and the deservedness of his contract, Grant had his first breakout game in seemingly forever. This doesn't mean the questions don't still stand, but at least we know he is still capable of what got him his money in the first place. Brandon Jackson takes the place of oft-injured DeShawn Wynn, and might be a better fit as a change-of-pace back.
The offensive line looks much different than it did in the previous meeting, most notably with T.J. Lang likely filling in for Chad Clifton (re-aggravated ankle injury) at LT and Scott Wells possibly taking over for Jason Spitz (back injury). Wells has a huge chip on his shoulder after losing the job to Spitz in pre-season, and Lang has something to prove as a rookie protecting Aaron Rodgers' blind side from The Mullet. Combined with the potential availability of Mark Tauscher, the offensive line is nebulous, to say the least.
Minnesota has regained the notorious run defense that made them famous earlier in the decade, coming in at 5th in the league. Pat Williams' decline has seemed to have stalled for the time being, and the Vikings have avoided major injury to crucial players in their front seven (E.J. Henderson is the only starter listed any lower than questionable).
Advantage: Minnesota by a considerable margin.
GB passing vs. MIN defense: Aaron Rodgers is surpassing more expectations than anyone could have reasonably laid out for him. Every notable stat in the NFL has Rodgers among the leaders. First in yards per attempt (9.3), second in QB rating (110.8), tied for third for fewest interceptions (2), sixth in yards per game (283.7), and eighth in completion percentage (65.8).
Donald Driver has been crucial to Rodgers' success, as the 34-year old receiver leads the team in catches (27) and yards (479), not to mention sick one-handed grabs while his other hand is held by a defender (two). Greg Jennings has been unusually quiet in the first half of the season, and James Jones had to overcome a rough start before he got back on track. The absence of Jordy Nelson and (likely) Jermichael Finley puts more pressure on Donald Lee and Jake Allen, newly-promoted off the practice squad.
Minnesota leads the league in sacks with 25. That statistic is more than enough testament to their talent against the pass. However, with Antoine Winfield dealing with a foot sprain, he may or may not be available for Sunday, and likely won't be 100% if he does play. Karl Paymah and Benny Sapp will team up to replace Winfield's presence, and it's highly likely they won't come close.
Advantage: Green Bay. Aaron Rodgers put up his best statistical game of the season despite getting sacked 8 times. If he gets that number cut by half, it will be a long day for fans of the purple squad.
Preliminary verdict: This game is easily the most important game for Green Bay of the season. I cannot imagine a way for Green Bay to remain relevant in the playoff picture if this game ends up putting the Packers at 4-3. The second tier of NFC teams is too good to risk going for a wild-card berth, especially when the team is only 1.5 games out of first place in the division.
If Green Bay wants to win, they need to do three simple things. They are, in no particular order,
- Run directly at Jared Allen. Pull guards, lead with Quinn Johnson, double team him. As a smaller DE, he is less effective against the run, and if there's any hope of stifling his pass rush, it's making him tired early in the game.
- Test the Minnesota safeties. With Winfield possibly out and definitely limited, Madieu Williams takes the brunt of the coverage duties. That is a weakness worth exploiting.
- Wrap, swarm, and strip AP. Clay Matthews' signature play of his young career is the strip-fumble TD of Adrian Peterson. That might not happen again, but the gang tackling and proper mechanics must if the defense expects to limit Peterson's production.
0 recs |
21 comments
|
Comments
Good Preview
Seems like on paper the Vikes have advantages in a lot more places then the Packers, but thankfully the game isn’t played on paper. In order for the Packers to upset (even though they are 3.5 pt favs) the vikings they need to improve their red zone offfense dramatically. Seems like we can score with home runs but when we get a drive going and get it within the 20 we stall out. We need to score touchdowns not field goals, I know it sounds cliche but there is a reason they say it.
V/R
Ted Thompson, GM
Green Bay Packers
1265 Lombardi Ave.
Green Bay, Wisconsin 54304
Tel: 920-569-7500
by Ted Thompson on Oct 30, 2009 9:02 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I voted for a Minny slim win
Not because I want it, but deep in my heart, I don’t think things are much improved since the last game. I know we can throw out the numbers all we want, but realistically, it was against a hobbled Lions team and an even worse Browns team. If that’s all we have to go by for measuring improvement, that’s a pretty weak measuring stick.
But hey, any given Sunday. I know the Packers can win, I’m just not confident enough to put money on it… or click accordingly on an otherwise meaningless web poll.
by Danwood on Oct 30, 2009 9:32 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
improved
Things aren’t much improved??? Kidding right?
Let start w/ the return of Bigby. He is a plamaker when in the box. A sure and aggressive tackler able to take down Peterson one on one! Was Marting able to do that in game 1? Bigby is also well schooled in the D having been in camp and all OTA meetings. He knows his assignments in coverage! Martin didn’t in game 1! BIG, HUGE improvement which will allow Capers to open up his playbook vs Queens!!!
Matthews, as I’m sure you’re aware is a HUGE improvement over Poppinga. Matthews was a part time player in game 1, he will be playing EVERY down in game 2!! That should equate to more pressure vs the pass and run!!
Starting TJ Lang may prove to be a much better option than moving Colledge and provide a measure of stability as Lang has been practicing and playing LT since college. Colledge has been playing almost entire LG for the past 4 years, not LT… Lang played well enough vs Cleve that he can be expected to fair better than Colledge on short notice. Lang is also a better run blocker than either Clifton or Colledge. Notice that Grant had a really good game running the ball when Lang played the whole game (granted vs Cleve)…
Thats just 3 examples of why the Packers ARE much improved!
by Strohman on Oct 30, 2009 11:45 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, since you asked for it...
“He is a plamaker when in the box. A sure and aggressive tackler able to take down Peterson one on one! Was Marting able to do that in game 1?”
AP had 55 yards rushing and 0 receiving in the first game. He was the least of our worries.
“Matthews was a part time player in game 1, he will be playing EVERY down in game 2!!”
You’re basing that on the Lions and Browns games. As I mentioned, if those two games are your only rationale for that things are massively improved, it’s pretty weak rationale.
“Notice that Grant had a really good game running the ball when Lang played the whole game”
See point 2. I have no doubt that our players know how to do their jobs. That was the one thing you can say they proved in these last two games. The question is if they can do their jobs against opposition of like caliber or better. So far, that hasn’t been the case.
by Danwood on Oct 30, 2009 11:55 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
My Take
I agree with most of what you say usually Danwood, but I’m on Strohman’s side on this one (though not as emphatically). The Packers are improved in a few areas and not just because they played two terrible teams the last two weeks. The Vikings are also down their only good player in their secondary.
The Packers had two huge disadvantages last game that are no longer there. Bigby was out and Colledge was playing LT. Every Packer fan has seen that the Packers defense statistically and on appearance is much better with Bigby on the field. Secondly, Lang has played better than Colledge and Clifton and I would bet everything that the Vikings don’t even come close to 8 sacks this game. Two more advantages that the Packers didn’t have the first go around are Matthews coming into his own and Raji becoming more healthy. Neither of those guys were a full blown factor in the first game and they both should be for this one.
Lastly, the Vikings secondary is horrible and their only good player is Winfield. Winfield had the pick against Rodgers in the first game and he won’t be able to do that on Sunday because he’s not playing. That is a huge disadvantage for the Vikings. If that happened to the Packers they could bring in Williams to start but the Vikings don’t have another good CB so they should be sieve like. The reason the Vikings secondary doesn’t get torn up every game is because their d-line gets to the QB quickly. If the Packers o-line can hold up occasionally, Rodgers will go bananas. Finley and Berrian may or may not play but either way that is a scratch.
So the differences between this game and the first one are the Packers have a better healthier d-lineman in Raji, a full-time impact player in Matthews, an improved LT in Lang, and most importantly Bigby is back and Winfield is out. And I didn’t even mention that this game is at Lambeau instead of the loud crappy dome.
by GGGamer on Oct 30, 2009 2:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed
Again I’m not quite as emphatical about it but we have made clear improvements. Matthews has been great for us so far this year, and has proven to be a good pass rusher. So that bodes well for us, considering we couldn’t get any pressure on Favre (though most teams wouldn’t be able when only rushing 3), and Matthews was only playing part time.
I think the biggest thing is going to be having Raji healthy. He played what was probably his best game of the year last week, and having him healthy will keep our line much more fresh.
What may be the biggest difference though is that the game is at Lambeau. Not many people are talking about this but this will make a difference. Having all that crowd noise in the Dome makes things much more difficult for teams, along with playing on that turf. Playing on grass will neutralize the Vikes speed a bit and will even things out more because they are a faster team then we are.
by packallday555 on Oct 30, 2009 4:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Like I said, I hope we win
I just have trouble rationalizing our improvements being solely (or primarily) not being attributed to playing lower quality teams. I want to believe it, but for me, there were too many variables to realistically say our improvement was solely on us. The sloppy Lions game doesn’t help, either.
by Danwood on Oct 30, 2009 9:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
"He is a plamaker when in the box. A sure and aggressive tackler able to take down Peterson one on one! Was Marting able to do that in game 1?"
AP had 55 yards rushing and 0 receiving in the first game. He was the least of our worries.
Yeah, your pretty much spot on here. Where Bigby will really help us is our pass defense.
"Matthews was a part time player in game 1, he will be playing EVERY down in game 2!!"
You’re basing that on the Lions and Browns games. As I mentioned, if those two games are your only rationale for that things are massively improved, it’s pretty weak rationale.
But he has played very well in every game for us this year, including our first game against the Vikings. It’s not like he has only looked good against the Browns and the Lions.
by packallday555 on Oct 30, 2009 4:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
you may be right, or not
The Packers did win against poor teams. Yet they did what they were supposed to do. That is a good thing. It gives the Packers confidence going into a tough matchup. Besides, no professional team is an easy win, regardless of records. Those are still professional players getting paid to play on the other side. I think GB can build momentum off of that.
Still, the Vikings may win. I do not know. They always seem to be improving each week. No matter how much the Packers may (or may not, in some cases) have improved, the Vikings have stepped up as well. They may be without their top corner, but showed they can play well without him. I don’t think they are concerned about injuries to their WRs. They have talent there and they will play. I see where you are coming from. If not for conservative playcalling on behalf of the Vikings last time, the score would not have have been close. Will it be close this time? Again, I do not know. Only time will provide us the answer. Perhaps the Packers pull it out this time. Maybe the Vikings win big. I am leaning towards a Vikings victory one way or the other. I am just going on history. Right now, Minnesota is simply a better team. The one x-factor is Favre. How will he handle the emotion of the game? History shows he handles times of great emotional stress by playing incredible football.
by starmark on Oct 30, 2009 2:57 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
So
Minnesota is simply a better team? They’ve beaten one team with a winning record, the Packers. The Steelers game was close but the Lions even played the Steelers close. The Vikings have also beat the Lions, Rams, and Browns. Baltimore and the 49ers have both lost three games in a row and the 49ers have proven to be a terrible road team. Why are you so amazed by the Vikings performances? They could be 4-3 right now on an average schedule up until this point.
I know you absolutely love Favre and that is all well and good since you actually didn’t bring up MM or TT, good for you, but history actually shows us that Favre usually plays bad in emotion filled games. He played great when his dad died and that was an absolutely great moment and he played great against the Packers last month but take a look at the playoffs. Take a look at what Troy Aikman had to say. He said Favre would be so hyped up on emotion that he would overthrow receivers by 15 yards when he played the Cowboys. Favre actually has a history of throwing a lot of picks and playing bad more than he does of playing well in games like this. When Holmgren came back with Seattle he was 14 of 35 for 180 yards 1 TD and 4 INT’s. That is a similar game to this one.
by GGGamer on Oct 30, 2009 3:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe, but that's what we heard before the Minneapolis game
It didn’t happen in the last meeting. Favre had a pretty good game that night. I don’t think Favre playing in Green Bay is nearly the issue for the man himself as it is for Packer fans.
by uglyfatpimplynerd on Oct 31, 2009 1:36 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yea because as Favre has shown in the past
He’s great at big pressure games against hostile crowds.
by Charlie Kelly on Oct 31, 2009 8:03 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
key matchup...
Sidney Rice… He is Bretts #1 weapon. These two single handly beat the Ravens late with a few deep balls and man on man coverage.Also only had Frank Walker on him! What were the Ravens thinking? But besides the point I would not even waste my time with alot of zone against him. He can probably beat all but maybe one or two guys in our secondary. I hope they have Chuck following him the whole game. I think where ever Rice lines up you go man on that side and zone on the other. If we stop Rice we have a great shot at winning. Favre doesnt have many more options. Harvey is good but he can not beat us by himself.
Are you guys as worried about Rice as I am?
by bizzle4 on Oct 30, 2009 10:55 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
No
Like you said, Rice had a career game against the horrible Frank Walker mostly in man to man coverage and then had a good game against the overrated Steelers who gave up almost 100 yards to Northcutt with Calvin Johnson hurt at the beginning of that game. The Steelers have been getting burned by a lot of folks and are in close games every week even with the Lions.
I do think that Rice and Schiancoe are Favre’s two primary targets and the Packers need to keep them in check but I don’t fear Sidney Rice going nutz on the Packers healthy secondary. Maybe if Martin was out there but not with Bigby and Collins. I do think you’re right though, if they contain AP first and then have Chuck shadow Rice the Packers have a good shot.
by GGGamer on Oct 30, 2009 2:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
pressure!!!!
GB must pressure Brett Favre if they want to have any chance to win this game. Favre will come home with a TON of emotion. If anyone knows anything about Favre, he kills when he is playing with emotion. He’ll put up 350+ and 4 TDs or more. Capers hates to bring a lot of pressure and plays conservatively, but this time might require a little more aggressive playcalling. I am no expert, but if you want to get to Favre, blitz. The last thing you want to see is Favre getting all day to shred the Packers secondary.
by starmark on Oct 30, 2009 2:41 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Actually
Capers loves to blitz. The reason he didn’t from week 2 to week 4 was because he couldn’t with Martin back there. And I don’t expect to see too many blitzes from our defense this Sunday. I read a few articles which all quoted Capers saying he didn’t think a lot of blitzes be very effective because Favre gets the ball out so quick.
by packallday555 on Oct 30, 2009 3:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
In the movie "The Longest Yard"
and on the first kick return, the prisoners keep taking out the guards and knocking them unconcious to set the tone for the rest of the game
I would not be upset if we had our entire DLine take late hits on Farve on the first play of the game…
not going to happen and shouldn’t, just an awsome day dream I had
commence the farve lovers protection in three, two, one…
Kind of a shame the Rockies aren't around to win it for Balloon Boy
-billyok
by blackoutsox on Oct 30, 2009 4:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I loved Burt Reynolds in that film...
I BELIEVE...
by ArizonaVikingsFan on Oct 30, 2009 5:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
How about a RB chip / screen on Allen?
I liked the breakdown and running directly at Allen was a good idea that made me think that maybe sending an RB his way and do kind of a mini-block/chip on him before separating for a screen could help minimize him a bit as well. Thoughts?
by SilverFng on Oct 30, 2009 9:52 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
They tried that in week 4
with very limited success. The problem with chip blocking is that it takes a receiver out of the QB’s progression, leaving less checkdown options. Another problem, more directly related to your proposal, is that chipping an RB that’s the primary option on a screen play puts him closer to a defender, thus increasing the chance of the play getting disrupted.
A quicker, more agile RB might be able to pull it off. I’d test it out by using a faster RB against a slower DE, like Brandon Jackson against Ray Edwards. Jared Allen is far too fast for this sort of play, IMO.
"Brandon Jennings needs a nickname before he gives himself one. Oh wait, Young Money, he already did."
by Mitchell_M on Oct 31, 2009 4:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

by 














