Game 5: Packers @ Cowboys - Sunday, October 6th 3:25PM

[OldHeidelberg]

 

 

But none of those other teams scare you. The Bears...that's a scary team. This may be the most talented defense they've ever had. I realize that's a big statement for a Bears team, but they've got the best defense anyone's had in a decade at least IMO. People focus on Mack and Jackson, but they've Hicks who I'd say is close to Clark in terms of impact, Goldman, Robertson-Harris. And Haha has been a perfect signing for them. With that pass rush, and those swarming LB'ers? I've love Trevathan, much less Smith, a LB'er with CB speed.

 

 

They are good but let's keep it in perspective, they gave up 398 yards and 24 points to the Raiders yesterday and it could have been worse if they didn't punch the ball away from Davis at the goal line. Davis looked pretty good other than that play.

[MrTPlush]

Wasn't the Cowboys O-Line crippled in this game? If not for that I wonder how much pressure we really would have been putting on Dak/Elliott. Our DBs also got torched badly. If not for Dak sucking on multiple throws this game would have been way different. For instance they should have been up 7-0 on a huge pass when Cooper was left wide open on their opening drive. Instead he threw it behind him and it turned into an INT.

 

It was nice to see the offense have a great day, but once again I am left wondering if this defense is actually good.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

Never thought i would feel blah about a ten point win in Dallas.

The 468 yard they gave through the air and 24 points in a half kind of dimmed the enjoyment.

 

It really feels like a gift win.

 

You don't enjoy sports, do you?

[OldSchoolSnapper]

The state of football all but assures your defense isn't going to look that good even if it is good. You can blank the Redskins and Dolphins of the world but any +QB is going to get a lot of yards, which Dak did on 44 passes. He finished with a QBR of 27. Unless your DB gets away with slapping a guy in the head it's just very difficult to contain anything average and above passing the ball.

 

Takeaways are really the name of the game more than ever before. If you can tighten your D in the red zone and take the ball away twice a game that basically suffices for having a good defense. Those of us who are older still have a tendency to hold defenses to the standards of the 80s and 90s and it just isn't the same.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

Feel about the same as I did coming in. Defense has issues and offense needs a receiver not named Adams to step up.

 

Of course you do.

 

 

Yeah, I think you need to just kinda laugh these IGT's off. 4-1 with a brutal schedule to start the season and it really feels like we're just a garbage team.

 

We beat the Cowboys pretty easily on the road. They got a lot of empty yards and a couple of late scores...and the offense is still very clearly a work in progress. It's really just that simple. But if you're not just rolling over teams, these threads are just toxic.

 

Exactly. Yesterday's game was a big win where the Packers came out, got a big lead early and were never really not in control. Yes, the Cowboys got a few late scores, and there was a time in the 4th quarter where there was a scenario in play that, had it happened, the Cowboys could have gotten back into the game, but it would have taken a lot of near crazy happenings to go the Cowboys' way. That's exactly how you want to beat another contending team.

 

The Packers came out with a near perfect game plan, and executed it near flawlessly. I also don't believe that there is a huge need for the Packers to seek out another WR. MVS is a highly skilled receiver that I believe has the talent to be a high end #2/#1 if given the chance to prove it. Allison and Kumerow are both solid role players, and Lazard and Shepard both have upside as well. The game plan yesterday had the WRs taking a backseat, and the Packers executed that game plan to perfection. No one can say that the Packers weren't able to move the ball well against another solid defense.

[CheezWizHed]

Aikman should be barred from calling Dallas games. Just when I think he is tolerable, he calls a came like that. My "favorite" line was (after a roughing the passer call on Dallas), "I hate to say it, but that was roughing the passer". Why exactly does a color commentator hate to agree with a blatant call?

[OldSchoolSnapper]

I don't really get all the Aikman and Buck complaints and never have. They say plenty of rosy things about the Packers. There were more than a few times yesterday he referred to Cowboys penalties as obvious penalties. I just think he hates to say it because those hits used to be routine and nobody thought anything of them.

 

I've never understood where that whole movement comes from. It's always been truly bizarre to me especially because both really lay the love on Rodgers.

 

It's always been kind of annoying to me. I don't think people understand that national TV guys are going to call games differently than Brian and Bill. I can't think of any other reason people get so bothered by them because they seem to call things pretty evenly.

[CheezWizHed]

It was the roughing the passer call where Aaron threw the ball and the Cowboy came in after 1-2 steps and clothesline him across the chest (not the hand to Dak's helment call). Stating "I hate to say it" is how a team's fan responds to a call (like how I would respond to King thumping Gallup before intercepting the ball; I hate to say it, but that was pass interference on King).

 

I'm left scratching my head thinking..."Why do you hate to say it? Because you want the Cowboys to win of course."

 

Buck just says weird and dumb things at times.

 

I thought they did better earlier in the season (Vikings?) when they called a Packer game. But this one had a bunch of fan-boy comments from Aikman. That one was just the worst one.

[Mr Southpaw]

It was the roughing the passer call where Aaron threw the ball and the Cowboy came in after 1-2 steps and clothesline him across the chest (not the hand to Dak's helment call). Stating "I hate to say it" is how a team's fan responds to a call (like how I would respond to King thumping Gallup before intercepting the ball; I hate to say it, but that was pass interference on King).

 

I'm left scratching my head thinking..."Why do you hate to say it? Because you want the Cowboys to win of course."

 

Buck just says weird and dumb things at times.

 

I thought they did better earlier in the season (Vikings?) when they called a Packer game. But this one had a bunch of fan-boy comments from Aikman. That one was just the worst one.

+1 Totally agree. What a homer.

[KeithStone53151]

Just a brutal stretch coming up. I'm not a big believer in Dallas at all but the Packers next five games are teams over .500 with the exception of the Chargers. The schedule will not be the reason the Packers into the playoffs this year.

 

 

The next 5 games of the schedule aren't as tough as the first 5 games.

 

Carolina, Detroit and Oakland are middle of the pack teams. SD is talented, and the Chiefs are obviously very good.

 

Why can't we have a stretch like the Patriots? Where they played Buffalo(4-1, and who they barely beat after knocking out Josh Allen on a cheap shot) and 4 other teams with a combined 1-19 record. Yet somehow 12 of the 16 teams we play this year are currently above 500, and LAC will probably be over 500 by the time this season is over.

[KeithStone53151]

I don't really get all the Aikman and Buck complaints and never have. They say plenty of rosy things about the Packers. There were more than a few times yesterday he referred to Cowboys penalties as obvious penalties. I just think he hates to say it because those hits used to be routine and nobody thought anything of them.

 

I've never understood where that whole movement comes from. It's always been truly bizarre to me especially because both really lay the love on Rodgers.

 

It's always been kind of annoying to me. I don't think people understand that national TV guys are going to call games differently than Brian and Bill. I can't think of any other reason people get so bothered by them because they seem to call things pretty evenly.

 

I got a bit annoyed with all the backhanded comments they'd make towards anything good the packers did, more specifically Aikman. I remember one completion to either Tonyan or Graham for at least 20 yards, where Aikman goes "actually rodgers made a mistake, he had Allison for a touchdown"...something like that. And usually when a team is getting a beat down, the announcers spend all the time talking about the team winning. What they are doing right, etc. In this case, all Aikman could talk about is the corrections Dallas needed to make to get back in the game. Aikman was really bad yesterday. Buck seemed much more neutral yesterday, but both guys have had a tendency to generally be anti-Packers. I've never seen either guy be as bad as Aikman was yesterday though...probably due to him being the old Dallas qb.

[tmwiese55]

IMO his "hate to say it" was in regards to how the current mentality is to rip every roughing penalty (since often many are BS) and general public sentiment is against the over penalizing of it. So in this case to me it was directly at that, not a homer or team type of thing. Generally would agree with poor phrasing on his part, but that's what he meant IMO.

 

I've always thought the Aikman/Bucks obsession by PAck fans has been overboard for years. Well I would agree I generally am just bored with both as announcers I never really picked up on some massive bias. If you think about things from a non GB fan's perspective I'd guess they mostly think all announcers are GB homers due to the gushing over everything Arod and the whole GB history and mystique in general.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

Just a brutal stretch coming up. I'm not a big believer in Dallas at all but the Packers next five games are teams over .500 with the exception of the Chargers. The schedule will not be the reason the Packers into the playoffs this year.

 

 

The next 5 games of the schedule aren't as tough as the first 5 games.

 

Carolina, Detroit and Oakland are middle of the pack teams. SD is talented, and the Chiefs are obviously very good.

 

Why can't we have a stretch like the Patriots? Where they played Buffalo(4-1, and who they barely beat after knocking out Josh Allen on a cheap shot) and 4 other teams with a combined 1-19 record. Yet somehow 12 of the 16 teams we play this year are currently above 500, and LAC will probably be over 500 by the time this season is over.

 

The Patriots are the Patriots and they're incredible, but a very overlooked part of their dynasty has been that consistently awful division. They almost never have to battle it out for the playoffs or a bye.

[thebruce44]

NFL box scores are next to useless determining how a game went/unit performed. Big leads mean lots of cheap yards. That game probably ends 48-10 if King picks off the pass at 24-0.

 

Oddly the offense is still a bigger concern to me. Five weeks in, and you just still feel it's missing something. Adams today, but someone in that WR group needs to get it going. With someone as good as Jones back there it shouldn't be this hard. Still waiting for Rodgers to hit someone in stride down the field. Don't know if it's him, timing, lack of chemistry or what.

 

 

That's really becoming my main concern. I think people are pre-disposed to just assuming we don't have talent at the WR'er/TE positions if we don't get production out of them, but we've seen what MVS is capable of, we've seen Tonyan's pure athletic ability and we've seen how sure handed Allison is. I'm also finally getting on the Shepard bangwagon. The way he can turn Corners around like he did when he ran that corner route in the pre-season and that out and up in the game today....he's obviously an elite route runner and I think he's got good hands.

 

 

The problem as far as I can tell is Rodgers...I guess conservative nature. It's like he's going to make CERTAIN that the defense has zero chance to get their hands on the ball and he seems to be more cognizant of playing it safe as opposed to his MVP years when he just let it rip. He's overthrown guys the last two years now. Maybe he got used to older Jordy, Jones, Allison and the like, but he needs to put a little more air under the ball and let MVS go get it. That throw vs the Bears was great, but it should have been a TD. There was a throw where Allison got behind the D today and Rodgers missed him by several yards.

 

And the most frustrating thing is you can see him make some of those throws if we're losing...but we're not putting teams away like we should.

 

If I had to pick one play to highlight my concern of the passing game, that play against the Bears is it. I think we have just been spoiled over the last couple decades, but here's to hoping Rodgers can get back to making that throw.

[HiAndTight]

I don't really get all the Aikman and Buck complaints and never have. They say plenty of rosy things about the Packers. There were more than a few times yesterday he referred to Cowboys penalties as obvious penalties. I just think he hates to say it because those hits used to be routine and nobody thought anything of them.

 

I've never understood where that whole movement comes from. It's always been truly bizarre to me especially because both really lay the love on Rodgers.

 

It's always been kind of annoying to me. I don't think people understand that national TV guys are going to call games differently than Brian and Bill. I can't think of any other reason people get so bothered by them because they seem to call things pretty evenly.

 

 

I think you're 100 pct spot on. I just think maybe because Aikman killed the Packers so badly, Packers fans still have ill wills? I think when you're calling a game at any level and you're a well known former member of that team, you tend to over compensate and I think Aikman does that.

 

And him saying, "I hate to say it," is just him saying, 'I know fans think these calls are soft, but this is just how the game is now.'

 

I just can't imagine how much he wishes those rules were in place when he played. He and Steve Young were two really greats had their careers cut shot and who took brutal beatings at the position. Hits that were as bad as the Mason Rudolph hit or the Burflict hit.

[HiAndTight]

 

If I had to pick one play to highlight my concern of the passing game, that play against the Bears is it. I think we have just been spoiled over the last couple decades, but here's to hoping Rodgers can get back to making that throw.

 

 

I really don't think it's a matter of him being capable. Like I said, that throw he made to Kumerow during the family night...it's just a practice, I get that, but it shows he's capable. That was 25 yards downfield and from the opposite hash and he put it exactly where he needed to, probably threw it 45-50 yards. But I also am just seeing him miss too many of these throws.

 

 

Anyway, I do think the biggest area of this team that needs to be "fixed," in order to a legitimate contender is for Rodgers to get back to the level of play we've been accustomed to. I get that if you play good defense, get turnovers and then don't turn the ball over, teams have won titles like that, but I don't think this team can. We don't need 2011 Arod, but we need him to make the big play more consistently. That's kinda his thing, or it has been in the past. I don't want to see him throwing it up for grabs all the time, ala Favre, but maybe once in a while? You have big, physical athletes. Throw the ball up and let them go and get it.

 

That throw he made AFTER the MVS throw where he didn't leave him enough, he threw the ball up to Graham in a crowded area. I thought he was going for it there, but found out later in that week that the Beers didn't get a couple guys off the field, so it was basically a free play. But it is an example of why he should throw it up. Of course there was the Eagles game when Graham decided to go up with one hand instead of two, but still.

 

 

I'm not trying to pile on Rodgers here. That throw he made to Tonyan, rolling to his right and putting it right on Tonyan(Great catch as well), the throw he made to Graham when he was going up the field was great and then he threw one that looked like Byung-Hyun Kim with that low side-armed throw right before he got lit up by two defenders. So he's playing well...he just needs to hit those shots downfield. It used to be he'd hit an inordinate pct of them....that'd make all the difference for the Packers.

[HiAndTight]

The Patriots are the Patriots and they're incredible, but a very overlooked part of their dynasty has been that consistently awful division. They almost never have to battle it out for the playoffs or a bye.

 

I kinda feel like the NFC North was a little like that for a while after Favre left. The Bears would have a big season, but they were never really a great team.

 

It is amazing to watch New England though. I really do think they're just smarter than every other team. They had two backup QB's to Brady who are very good starters in the NFL right now at the same times. They don't NEED great players, Belichek just gets the most out of everyone. His arrogance is obnoxious, their conformity is irksome, but damn....he's made Brady's career IMO more than the other way around.

[thebruce44]

 

If I had to pick one play to highlight my concern of the passing game, that play against the Bears is it. I think we have just been spoiled over the last couple decades, but here's to hoping Rodgers can get back to making that throw.

 

 

I really don't think it's a matter of him being capable. Like I said, that throw he made to Kumerow during the family night...it's just a practice, I get that, but it shows he's capable. That was 25 yards downfield and from the opposite hash and he put it exactly where he needed to, probably threw it 45-50 yards. But I also am just seeing him miss too many of these throws.

 

 

Anyway, I do think the biggest area of this team that needs to be "fixed," in order to a legitimate contender is for Rodgers to get back to the level of play we've been accustomed to. I get that if you play good defense, get turnovers and then don't turn the ball over, teams have won titles like that, but I don't think this team can. We don't need 2011 Arod, but we need him to make the big play more consistently. That's kinda his thing, or it has been in the past. I don't want to see him throwing it up for grabs all the time, ala Favre, but maybe once in a while? You have big, physical athletes. Throw the ball up and let them go and get it.

 

That throw he made AFTER the MVS throw where he didn't leave him enough, he threw the ball up to Graham in a crowded area. I thought he was going for it there, but found out later in that week that the Beers didn't get a couple guys off the field, so it was basically a free play. But it is an example of why he should throw it up. Of course there was the Eagles game when Graham decided to go up with one hand instead of two, but still.

 

 

I'm not trying to pile on Rodgers here. That throw he made to Tonyan, rolling to his right and putting it right on Tonyan(Great catch as well), the throw he made to Graham when he was going up the field was great and then he threw one that looked like Byung-Hyun Kim with that low side-armed throw right before he got lit up by two defenders. So he's playing well...he just needs to hit those shots downfield. It used to be he'd hit an inordinate pct of them....that'd make all the difference for the Packers.

 

I agree and in trying not to overthink this, a team that pays one of their players a top contract in the league needs to get top value out of that player or they are at a disadvantage. Looking at Superbowl winning QBs over the last 20 years, you basically have a top 5 QB or a top 5 defensive player (sometimes 2). Its a shockingly consistent formula. In other words, the only way Trent Dilfer wins a Superbowl is when Ray Lewis is on the other side of the line murdering people. That is not this Packers team over their next window.

[HiAndTight]

I agree and in trying not to overthink this, a team that pays one of their players a top contract in the league needs to get top value out of that player or they are at a disadvantage. Looking at Superbowl winning QBs over the last 20 years, you basically have a top 5 QB or a top 5 defensive player (sometimes 2). Its a shockingly consistent formula. In other words, the only way Trent Dilfer wins a Superbowl is when Ray Lewis is on the other side of the line murdering people. That is not this Packers team over their next window.

 

 

No, that sounds like the Bears. I wouldn't be surprised to see the Bears win a SB in the next 4-5 years. To put together a season like they did in 1985. That unit is so talented and so deep. Haha Clinton-Dix is one of the top safeties in the NFL with that group. They lose a guy like Hicks and they don't miss a beat. That's what trading for a guy like Mack does when a couple other young players like Eddie Jackson and Roquan Smith start to emerge at the same time.

 

But for the Packers, no, they're not going to have that type of defensive player. Kenny Clark could become an elite interior defender, Alexander could become one of the best corners, but they don't impact the game like edge rushers and neither Preston or Za'Darius Smith are athletic enough to really be those dominant type players.

 

I think we have enough to win a SB. But like with most teams, things have to fall our way. We need to stay healthy, get home field. I remember in 2010 I thought we were a year away. And we were better the following season, but we got on a roll that year. Maybe that happens this year. Our health is gonna be the biggest factor. We're not a real deep team.