Beat The Steelers and Packers With Multiple Wide Receivers

by Brandon on Feb 2, 2011 10:00 AM CST in Green Bay Packers Analysis

When I first read this interview with retired QB Kurt Warner, via ESPN's NFC North Blog, I thought he was talking about the beating the Green Bay Packers. But instead he was talking about how to beat the Steelers. You force their linebackers to cover wide receivers down the field.

Warner said "If I had four receivers where I could force those linebackers either to cover, to get out in space, or to force them off the field, that's what I wanted to do. I wanted to take the strength of a team and attack it."

His comments reminded me of this play against the Steelers in December 2009 when the Packers managed to get WR Greg Jennings in the slot against LB Lawrence Timmons, who is a very good linebacker but can't keep up with Jennings in coverage. But there is a downside as Warner said ""It leaves some short edges for guys like James Harrison and LaMarr Woodley coming off the sides...You've got to get the ball out of your hand."

Back to my original point: at first this sounded like a discussion on how to beat the Packers. Warner and the Cardinals used bunched sets during last season's Wild Card game to force LB Nick Barnett into coverage against a wide receiver, and the results were horrible (for the Packers). And it was devastating because Warner can get the ball out of his hand so fast. Maybe that is a sign of the similarities between these two defenses: you can attack them in the same way.

I expect the Packers will use their top four wide receivers on multiple plays and packages during the Super Bowl, but they usually leave one or two blockers in the backfield for pass protection when QB Aaron Rodgers is in the shotgun. It will be something they'll use at times, but they can't go with it exclusively.

Tweet Comment 35 comments | 1 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

The best part about this

is that if the o-line holds up and is able to stop the blitz, and A-Rod doesn’t see anything good downfield, we all know he has the ability to tuck it and run for 7 or 8 yards. Meanwhile, on the other side, if Rothelisberger manages to attempt this stunt, he will be lucky to pick up 4 yards before Clay chases him and brings him down.

by LambeauLeap12 on Feb 2, 2011 10:24 AM CST reply actions

If the Oline holds... thats a big if...

by Flanyboy on Feb 2, 2011 1:11 PM CST up reply actions

very true

but they’ve played decent down the stretch and haven’t had a completely awful game since the Lions game I believe. I mean, they’re bound to give up at least a couple sacks, but if all of them stay healthy and with their heads in the game, I think they’ll be fine.

by LambeauLeap12 on Feb 2, 2011 4:22 PM CST up reply actions

Good article

The point I disagree with is saying the pack will be beat by multiple receiver sets. The Packers have a very good top 3 CB and correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t remember the Steelers having more then 3 good WR. What I’m worried about is the TE and the running game. That seems to be GB’s weaknesses this year. Rodgers should dominate the Steelers when GB run’s multiple WR sets.

by Kuhl on Feb 2, 2011 10:38 AM CST reply actions

Losing Santonio Holmes

The guy was a problem (and about to be a free agent anyway) but when they lost him, they haven’t replaced him yet. Maybe Sanders is the answer, but he’s not there yet. It was tough trying to cover Ward, Holmes, Wallace, and Miller in 2009. Now they’ve lost Holmes, and the Packers have Starks.

You are right about Miller. I haven’t written enough about him, but he’ll be a problem. And Mendenhall will get yards, but I don’t expect he’ll be a problem when it counts in short yardage and goal line situations.

by Brandon on Feb 2, 2011 12:40 PM CST up reply actions

Yeah

My concern with Mendenhall is that he’ll break a couple decent runs and open up the playaction. The two teams have combined for 5 100 yd rushing performances over 37 games so I don’t think the running game will be a huge factor other than to set up the pass.

by Kuhl on Feb 2, 2011 2:29 PM CST up reply actions

Wallace

He has more than made everyone around the Steelers – players and fans – forget Holmes…has already shown he is probably better than Holmes. Already putting up better numbers. If you are going to point to his lack of production during the AFCCG, it is because the Jets purposely set out to shut him down figuring he was the one who would beat them.

But you keep pulling out your "refs-threw-the-game" card if that’s what you need for catharsis. You can use that card after every loss. It is a lifetime pass. Get it laminated. -Maryrose

by Twell on Feb 2, 2011 3:01 PM CST up reply actions

I’m sure the Packers will do the same by sticking Tramon Williams on him, who has the speed to keep up with him. That will definitely give more opportunities for Sanders and Brown to hurt us though.

Fire Slocum

by packallday555 on Feb 2, 2011 3:25 PM CST up reply actions

Those two rookies

have been a pleasant surprise, but we’ll see if the big stage gets in their heads. Because they only came on in the second half of the season, its hard to assess them as far as how good they can be. I wanted to write “the steelers have 4 good WRs” in response to comments above, but the jurys still out. I got a feeling though, they are the real deal.

Looking forward to good game against a good opponent, too bad there’s only one winner.

But you keep pulling out your "refs-threw-the-game" card if that’s what you need for catharsis. You can use that card after every loss. It is a lifetime pass. Get it laminated. -Maryrose

by Twell on Feb 2, 2011 4:07 PM CST up reply actions

They kind of both seem like a poor man’s Mike Wallace at this point. Lots of speed, but haven’t shown the consistency, and haven’t really gotten the opportunities to do so either. I think Shields will shut whichever one he’s on down but Bush covering one worries me. Maybe we’ll come up with a wrinkle — like Collins coming down and covering one — and then bringing Bigby on the field to hang back deep.

Fire Slocum

by packallday555 on Feb 2, 2011 6:25 PM CST up reply actions

I was more optimistic

but that is cool.

"I don't mind being a symbol but I don't want to become a monument. There are monuments all over the Parliament Buildings and I've seen what the pigeons do to them."

"Canada is like an old cow. The West feeds it. Ontario and Quebec milk it. And you can well imagine what it's doing in the Maritimes."

Tommy Douglas

by Cold_Old_Steelers_Fan on Feb 2, 2011 10:57 PM CST up reply actions

Yeah,

I think the Pack will have Williams on him as well. Though Shields may cover him a few times, he’s proven he can cover speed receivers too.

by Kuhl on Feb 2, 2011 5:31 PM CST up reply actions

4 receivers

The Steelers two rookies (Sanders and Brown) are both good. Sanders plays like a young version of Hines Ward and Brown is no slouch. Ward is the cagey vet and Wallace is the real deal (he does it all now including blocking).

Having said that, I expect you will see a lot of TEs.

"I don't mind being a symbol but I don't want to become a monument. There are monuments all over the Parliament Buildings and I've seen what the pigeons do to them."

"Canada is like an old cow. The West feeds it. Ontario and Quebec milk it. And you can well imagine what it's doing in the Maritimes."

Tommy Douglas

by Cold_Old_Steelers_Fan on Feb 2, 2011 10:56 PM CST up reply actions

Desmond Bishop

He’s gonna be a key in stopping the Steelers O. Raji will have an amazing day against whoever is going to be at center, which takes away the perimeter running game of Rashard Mendenhall. So far Bishop has been amazing in coverage, way better than Nick Barnett was, and we don’t have Jarret Bush in the backfield. Shields is the main difference from last year’s defense, and Bishop is gonna be the wildcard factor.

On offense, Kurt Warner is right. If you look at who the Steelers have faced, they really are pretty terrible against multiple wide-receiver sets and big time quarter-backs, who the haven’t actually played many games against. The strength of the Steelers defense is that they do what they do well. The weakness is that they are not good outside of their comfort zone and do not change their game-plan even when it’s not working, such as evidenced in the Patriots game from this season.

by Nojus on Feb 2, 2011 10:49 AM CST reply actions

Also...

When you get Nick Barnett and Jarret Bush in the same area, that’s a soft area. That was a huge glaring weakness, and when you combine that with stupid penalties and passive game-planning you get a defense that looks bewildered and lost on the field. Desmond Bishop and Sam Shields have been the difference makers from last year’s defense to this year’s.

by Nojus on Feb 2, 2011 10:54 AM CST up reply actions

correct, but...

we have to slow down the pressure on AR or spreading them out won’t matter.

I believe Starks will only have 15-20 carries (maybe even 10-15), you will see a lot of BJax because he is great at picking up the blitz/pressure.

Re: our defense, we play 2-4-5 now, don’t really play the 3-4 like we did last year.

by Acme on Feb 2, 2011 11:08 AM CST up reply actions

We do of course have to be aware of the pressure, but the only times teams have gotten consistent pressure on AR is because of good coverage. AR gets rid of the ball so quick, and is the best quarterback against the blitz. What do the Steelers do and not stop doing? Blitz. The Jets, Bears and Lions have all strayed from blitzing and just operating on a 4 man front. If the Steelers can’t get pressure with a standard 4 man front, the match-up looks really good at least on paper. We just need the receivers to catch the ball, which they have been doing in the play-offs.

And on our defense, yes we play a very versatile nickle defense that Capers has employed. (more like 2-5-4 using Woodson as a LB) This is due to the play of Shields. If Jarret Bush was out there, we would have a hard time playing our nickle.

by Nojus on Feb 2, 2011 11:41 AM CST up reply actions

steelers Defense

just read that Steelers defense against 3+ WR’s and even 4+ WRs is actually very good.

my confidence for this game keeps dropping.

seeing highlights of Big Ben isn’t helping either. Dude can play.

by Acme on Feb 3, 2011 4:57 PM CST up reply actions

It’s good against crappy teams with terrible No. 2, 3, and 4 recievers and bad quarterbacks like Mark Sanchez. It’s terrible against good recievers and good quarterbacks.

by Nojus on Feb 3, 2011 6:02 PM CST up reply actions

I bet there will be a lot of 4-wide shotgun

To spread out the Steelers’ defense. The draw could be a huge portion of the game plan. I don’t see the wishbone or inverted bone working against the Steelers defense, except maybe in short-yardage. Any big runs from the Packers side will probably be out of a shotgun formation.

I dispense B.S. and facts. It is up to you to figure out which is which.

by GMan83201 on Feb 2, 2011 11:35 AM CST reply actions

We may have given up a lot of points to the Steelers last year

but we put some points on them too. Not quite enough, obviously, but if we can put 30+ on them this time around we should be able to hold them off. I hope and pray.

53 Bears, 1 Cup

by I voted for Kodos on Feb 2, 2011 11:38 AM CST reply actions

bjax

he’ll be a HUGE asset in pass protection. could be huge on screen passes too. a few good screens may slow down that great pass rush of theirs. if starks can gain a few yards it will help a TON. doesn’t have to be much, but a 4-5 yard gain now and again would be nice. they key for our offense (of course) is big plays from our passing game and limiting those plays from them. Simple right? Ha….wish it were that simple.

by Jeigh AK on Feb 2, 2011 12:09 PM CST reply actions

Will they screen?

I don’t think so. I would expect the Steelers d-lineman to be very well prepared for screen passes. Jackson might have a big gain on a little dump off pass, like he did when he dodged Urlacher for a big gain in the NFC Championship game.

by Brandon on Feb 2, 2011 12:45 PM CST up reply actions

We need to dump the ball off to Jackson like that more. Mainly because it’ll force the LB’s from taking deep drops, and partially because Jackson is actually very good after the catch.

Fire Slocum

by packallday555 on Feb 2, 2011 3:27 PM CST up reply actions

GB doesn't screen as much as we used to

I do expect a couple dump off passes to Kuhn and Bjack but I think they’ll end up running a lot of quick outs and play action to slow down the blitz

by Kuhl on Feb 2, 2011 2:36 PM CST up reply actions

Great pt!

Spreading them out voids their zone blitz scheme. Against the Steelers since 2001, Pats have usually gone pass crazy w. a Pass-Run ratio of 3:1.

Go Packers!!!

Non Sibi Sed Patriae ;I bleed Scarlet and Grey...A Buckeye for Life
Cameron Heyward-Future 3-4 RDE for the New England Patriots
Jets org and fans-bunch of trash talking & snitching inbreds trollops!!!!

by NinjaZX6R on Feb 2, 2011 1:42 PM CST reply actions

O-Line is GB's strength

The Packers O-Line has been it’s offensive strength down the stretch. I remember the pundits heaping praises on the Giants pass rush right before the Packers lit the giants up for 45 points. GB has had very tough LB’s and DE’s to contend with down the stretch, the Eagles, John Abrahams against Atlanta, both Peppers and Adonajei from Chicago, etc. GB’s blocking schemes and O-line play, RB/TE blocking protection have been one of the main reasons that the Packers are in the SB. GB has been has been very good, very consistent down the stretch with only one more game to go.

I actually believe that the Packers are going to handle Pittsburghs defense just fine.

by Hutsons Best on Feb 2, 2011 3:26 PM CST reply actions

+1

Very good points. All those teams have really good pass rushes, and Green Bay handled pretty much all of those teams with ease. Though, Rodgers deserves a lot of credit to because of how well he has moved around in the pocket this year. I think our blitz pick-up might be one of the best in the league as well. Jackson certainly isn’t a good runner but he can pick up a blitz with the best of them.

As long as we can give Rodgers time, he should be able to shred them up pretty good. Though, I think we’ll probably give up some sacks just because of how good Pittsburg’s pass rush is. Not enough to prevent us from putting a few drives together though imo.

Fire Slocum

by packallday555 on Feb 2, 2011 3:31 PM CST up reply actions

+2

A sack or several will be a given for both QB’s given the strength of both Defenses. Atlanta sacked Rodgers several times, and it didn’t affect the outcome at all, in fact, after Abrahams sacked Rodgers, and did the “championship belt” routine in front of Aaron, A-Rod took them down the field to paydirt. I also love the fact that the last time the Packers played on turf, they lit it up, against the #1 seed who was like 22-2 in their house over the last three seasons to that point. That game is Green Bay’s signature game, and I expect another like it this Sunday. GB’s fans will make this one seem like a home game.

by Hutsons Best on Feb 2, 2011 3:49 PM CST up reply actions

Kurt Warner = QB coach?

Sounds like he knows what’s up. I’d like to have him, we already got one retired star coaching linebackers (Hall of Famer Kevin Greene)

by mladwig0 on Feb 2, 2011 3:38 PM CST reply actions

It's probably just coincidence that we have one of the best LB corps in the game

I dispense B.S. and facts. It is up to you to figure out which is which.

by GMan83201 on Feb 2, 2011 3:50 PM CST up reply actions

lol

by Kuhl on Feb 2, 2011 5:32 PM CST up reply actions

Starks As The Wild Card

I think Starks gives us a wild card on the Steelers. He’s shown he can run and make some great plays, he can catch a pass, there’s very little film available to analyze. Starks presence on the field will keep the Steeler’s D honest, they have to honor the run, that opens up play action. Starks doesn’t have to have anything close to a good game to make a big difference, but I think he will break some good runs simply because the Steelers don’t know enough about him.

by nugnrose82 on Feb 2, 2011 4:47 PM CST reply actions

+1

His emergence has been huge. He creates the threat of a run game, which is really all we need. I’ve been surprised at how well our play action stuff has been working in playoffs. Earlier in the season opposing teams LB’s wouldn’t even do so much as hesitate when they saw that play fake. Now, most are taking a step forward. His presence has really helped us.

Fire Slocum

by packallday555 on Feb 2, 2011 6:29 PM CST up reply actions

My 2 cents..

While the Steeler receivers are good, the Packer secondary is good too. I think the Steeler Defensive line is better at stopping the run than pass rushing. I think the Steeler secondary will have a harder time defending the Packers 4 wideouts than the Packer secondary covering the Steeler wideouts. Jenkins and Raji are as good at rushing the passer as they are at stopping the run.

I love wins. Wins are good for the soul.- Barry Alvarez Sep 25, 2005

by White92 on Feb 2, 2011 7:33 PM CST reply actions