Divisional Round: 49ers @ Packers - Saturday, January 22nd 7:15PM

[HarveysWBs]

I think the thing that worries me most about this matchup is obviously our run D. In theory, you flood the line of scrimmage, clog the middle of the field (Jimmy G doesn’t throw outside the hashes under normal health and weather conditions, so no worries out there) and figure you can disrupt what little they try to do through the air while also having more bodies around the box to play the run.

 

On the injured player front, I think we don’t need to be too worried about Jaire playing or not since San Francisco’s wideouts aren’t super intimidating outside of hybrid Samuel. If Jaire does play, I certainly trust him to be smart enough to handle whatever position they put him in, so I’d play to Rasul and Stokes’ strengths and let Jaire go eat whatever is left, but they don’t pay me the big bucks to figure these things out. Even easier decision with whatever they can get out of Z or Mercillus; situational pass rusher is an ideal role for both of those guys at this point and not too complicated to ease back into that job.

 

What is sneakily starting to worry me a little more than I thought at first is dinking around with the O-line. Now, yeah, the offensive coaches and players have done yeomen’s work making a patchwork line play like gangbusters all year, so I may be nitpicking a bit to find anything more to worry about. And Nijman held up fine vs San Fran last time, so if he has to spell Bakh, I can live with that, even though it’s not ideal. But the right side of the line may be where this thing is won or lost. They’ve struggled with interior stunts a lot, and I bet San Fran is creative enough to give them some unscouted looks on plays like that. Patrick is certainly better than Newman, but he’s kind of just a guy. I don’t think I want Turner in there at RG (he was bad his first year here playing a lot of RG, and has been a revelation at tackle), but they might have liked what they’re getting from Kelly so much they decide to bump Turner inside just to get their “five best” out there. The uncertainty there is starting to nag at me.

 

Here’s hoping Bosa sits and it’s all a non-issue.

Edited January 19, 2022 by Harvey'sWBs

[nate82]

 

Here’s hoping Bosa sits and it’s all a non-issue.

 

So you are saying you don't want to see this again?

 

[roadcrew3]

I think there's to much talk on the mismatches the 49ers present to the Packers and not enough on the mismatches the Packers give them. 49ers secondary is pretty questionable, Adams should have a huge day again and with that, have a hard time seeing how the 49ers slow down this offense.

 

49ers may experience some success running the ball but they are going to have to score at least 4 touchdowns to win the game. Settling for FGs won't get the job done like it did against Dallas and I have a hard time seeing Jimmy G consistently finishing their drives, especially if they are playing from behind. The 49ers are good and there is a path for them to win, but that path also includes some self inflicted wounds from GB i.e. turnovers, poor special teams etc. Packers are the better team and even a B performance from them should be enough

[homer]

Yes, Packers should win but there are plenty of reasons SF could win. oblong shaped objects take funny bounces and SF could get enough luck at the margins to pull it off.

[OldHeidelberg]

I am probably reading too much into this but MLF says Bakh will practice today and they will see how he responds. Not exactly a “he’s good to go”endorsement.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

I am probably reading too much into this but MLF says Bakh will practice today and they will see how he responds. Not exactly a “he’s good to go”endorsement.

 

Gamesmanship. He'll be out there unless his knee looks and feels like a water balloon.

[thebruce44]

If the photo is the game I think it was ('95 Divisional) I remember it like it was yesterday. I was 8 years old and my family watched it from a hotel in GB. We went to the HOF the day before. I think we were a 10-point underdog and went up 21-0. That play pictured was one of the first ones of the game on a screen to #27. Think it ended up 27-17 but really was a beat down. It was a bit of a changing of the guard in the NFC; Dallas won the SB but after that season neither DAL or SF got back for a while. We knocked SF out 3 straight seasons before the fumble game.

 

I was pretty young for that game, but my memory is that the defense put most of the receivers on the ground right at the line of scrimmage for the first series or two. They just made their lives hell to start the game and SF was completely unprepared for the level of physicality. I think we also range Brent Jones bell a couple times.

[rickh150]

If the photo is the game I think it was ('95 Divisional) I remember it like it was yesterday. I was 8 years old and my family watched it from a hotel in GB. We went to the HOF the day before. I think we were a 10-point underdog and went up 21-0. That play pictured was one of the first ones of the game on a screen to #27. Think it ended up 27-17 but really was a beat down. It was a bit of a changing of the guard in the NFC; Dallas won the SB but after that season neither DAL or SF got back for a while. We knocked SF out 3 straight seasons before the fumble game.

 

I was pretty young for that game, but my memory is that the defense put most of the receivers on the ground right at the line of scrimmage for the first series or two. They just made their lives hell to start the game and SF was completely unprepared for the level of physicality. I think we also range Brent Jones bell a couple times.

 

Huge fumble by 49ers for TD early..... I remember listening to it on my walk man before a high school game. Everyone was so pumped and even surprised we were doing so well. Big high in SF; huge letdown in Dallas.

[OldHeidelberg]

I am probably reading too much into this but MLF says Bakh will practice today and they will see how he responds. Not exactly a “he’s good to go”endorsement.

 

Gamesmanship. He'll be out there unless his knee looks and feels like a water balloon.

 

You are probably right. Someone just texted me that Jimmy G might not play, everything I have seen says he should be OK but Niners fans seem fine with going with Lance. Maybe some gamesmanship going on there too and we maybe get a surprise on Saturday.

[OldHeidelberg]

MVS out of practice today, not a good sign that his return yesterday went well. Sort of thinking he might be out, we have been surviving a lot of games without him but feel like his deep threat opens up things for us.

[logan82]

On the injured player front, I think we don’t need to be too worried about Jaire playing or not since San Francisco’s wideouts aren’t super intimidating outside of hybrid Samuel.

The wideouts are fine and Kittle is a mismatch for anyone. The problem for the 49ers is that Garopo can't throw to the sides of the field or down the field at all. He is a game manager which works well. Don't turn the ball over and you win more often than not. Might be worse for the Packers if Lance has to start.

Edited January 20, 2022 by logan82

[nodakfan17]

On the off chance Trey Lance starts on Saturday for an injured Jimmy G, you might think ‘Oh, he played college football in North Dakota, so he’s probably pretty comfortable in the cold’ - NDSU plays in a dome.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

On the injured player front, I think we don’t need to be too worried about Jaire playing or not since San Francisco’s wideouts aren’t super intimidating outside of hybrid Samuel.

The wideouts are fine and Kittle is a mismatch for anyone. The problem for the 49ers is that Garopo can't throw to the sides of the field or down the field at all. He is a game manager which works well. Don't turn the ball over and you win more often than not. Might be worse for the Packers if Lance has to start.

 

If Trey Lance has to play a significant role in this game, I'd pick the Packers to win by 30. He's basically in the same boat as Jordan Love right now – there is certainly some intriguing raw material there to work with, but he's far from ready.

[adambr2]

On the injured player front, I think we don’t need to be too worried about Jaire playing or not since San Francisco’s wideouts aren’t super intimidating outside of hybrid Samuel.

The wideouts are fine and Kittle is a mismatch for anyone. The problem for the 49ers is that Garopo can't throw to the sides of the field or down the field at all. He is a game manager which works well. Don't turn the ball over and you win more often than not. Might be worse for the Packers if Lance has to start.

 

If Trey Lance has to play a significant role in this game, I'd pick the Packers to win by 30. He's basically in the same boat as Jordan Love right now – there is certainly some intriguing raw material there to work with, but he's far from ready.

 

If Lance were to start, they're going to gameplan for a Lance start, they're not going to have Lance try to sling it 40 times and get into a track meet with Aaron Rodgers. Lance's arm isn't NFL starter ready, but his legs offer immense upside.

 

The last time the 49ers played the Packers in the playoffs, they essentially gave up on passing entirely -- and it worked.

 

They have the runners to try to do it again, and if Lance starts, I'd expect a heavy dose of Lance and Deebo out in space and at least 25 carries out of Eli Mitchell.

[MrTPlush]

I am not that worried about this game. The Packers should win and I expect them to kinda control the game and probably have a comfortable lead most of the game.

 

My concern is really the offensive line. If the 49ers get their pass rushers back and they get to Rodgers they can really ruin and/or stall a lot of drives. If we lose this game I imagine them sacking us to force field goals or sacking us out of field goal range. If they aren't getting to Rodgers I really don't see the Packers losing this game.

 

Yah, our run defense isn't that great, but the 49ers aren't exactly a powerhouse on the ground.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

If Lance were to start, they're going to gameplan for a Lance start, they're not going to have Lance try to sling it 40 times and get into a track meet with Aaron Rodgers. Lance's arm isn't NFL starter ready, but his legs offer immense upside.

 

The last time the 49ers played the Packers in the playoffs, they essentially gave up on passing entirely -- and it worked.

 

They have the runners to try to do it again, and if Lance starts, I'd expect a heavy dose of Lance and Deebo out in space and at least 25 carries out of Eli Mitchell.

 

Obviously you are correct. The 49ers plan is already likely run heavy. It would be very run heavy should Lance be in there.

 

That said, the Packers defense is in a much better place personnel wise than it was a couple years ago, when Blake Martinez constantly tried in vain to beat Raheem Mostert to the edge. Campbell is so much more athletic than Martinez ever was, and Joe Barry's scheme depends on safeties and CBs providing much more in run support than Pettine's ever did. I would actually worry about the Packers selling out on the run, which would leave them vulnerable to Kittle or Samuel on pop passes off of play action.

[adambr2]

If Lance were to start, they're going to gameplan for a Lance start, they're not going to have Lance try to sling it 40 times and get into a track meet with Aaron Rodgers. Lance's arm isn't NFL starter ready, but his legs offer immense upside.

 

The last time the 49ers played the Packers in the playoffs, they essentially gave up on passing entirely -- and it worked.

 

They have the runners to try to do it again, and if Lance starts, I'd expect a heavy dose of Lance and Deebo out in space and at least 25 carries out of Eli Mitchell.

 

Obviously you are correct. The 49ers plan is already likely run heavy. It would be very run heavy should Lance be in there.

 

That said, the Packers defense is in a much better place personnel wise than it was a couple years ago, when Blake Martinez constantly tried in vain to beat Raheem Mostert to the edge. Campbell is so much more athletic than Martinez ever was, and Joe Barry's scheme depends on safeties and CBs providing much more in run support than Pettine's ever did. I would actually worry about the Packers selling out on the run, which would leave them vulnerable to Kittle or Samuel on pop passes off of play action.

 

Packers 2019 rushing defense: 411 attempts 1921 yards 4.7 YPC

Packers 2021 rushing defense: 398 attempts 1855 yards 4.7 YPC

 

I certainly agree with Campbell being an upgrade, but other than that it looks like the exact same rushing defense to me.

 

I'm not arguing for argument sake, I really would like to be convinced that we clearly don't have the same problem that we did then where we can be run on at will.

 

I think as long as the offense does its thing, we should be fine. It's one of those slow starts where we get down 10-0 that would definitely have me concerned and play into the 49ers gameplan.

[CheezWizHed]

Campbell started off like a rocket, but certainly slowed down as the year progressed. I'm hoping the time off helped him heal up or recover to get back to his first half performance.

[PeaveyFury]

Packers 2019 rushing defense: 411 attempts 1921 yards 4.7 YPC

Packers 2021 rushing defense: 398 attempts 1855 yards 4.7 YPC

 

I think this stat without context is unfair. They ranked 11th in the league in rush defense this year. In 2019, that yardage ranked 23rd. I think you can make an argument that the YPC is misleading due to the time guys like Clark missed with COVID, etc. In addition to the overall performance being better, the run defense DID seem to pass the eye test as being improved as well. But that's just IMO.

[OldHeidelberg]

They were able to shut down Cook a couple of games ago when they didn't have to respect the QB, I expect them to make Jimmy G beat them first but of course that Browns game sticks with me. We should be able to get them to a few 3rd and longs, if we can stop more than we give up I expect a win by 2 scores.

 

The defense is always the worry for us in the playoffs and this year isn't any different. But this is Rodgers' Packer legacy post season run and he knows it, he needs to win a game like this by himself if we need it. He can't lose to Garrapolo again.

[PeaveyFury]

Yeah, I don't specifically recall any RBs going off on us. Where I recall struggles this year is with running QBs. I'd be curious to know how many of the yards given up this year were attributable to mobile QBs?

[DuWayne Steurer]

Yeah, I don't specifically recall any RBs going off on us. Where I recall struggles this year is with running QBs. I'd be curious to know how many of the yards given up this year were attributable to mobile QBs?

 

Nick Chubb blew us up.

[yourout]

Yeah, I don't specifically recall any RBs going off on us. Where I recall struggles this year is with running QBs. I'd be curious to know how many of the yards given up this year were attributable to mobile QBs?

 

Nick Chubb blew us up.

 

And if their coach wouldn't have been an idiot he could have probably ran for another hundred yards in that game.

[Fear The Chorizo]

Yeah, I don't specifically recall any RBs going off on us. Where I recall struggles this year is with running QBs. I'd be curious to know how many of the yards given up this year were attributable to mobile QBs?

 

Nick Chubb blew us up.

 

Green Bay held a 2 score lead for the vast majority of that game, even with GB's offense doing nothing the entire 2nd half. GB also still won the game. Chubb ran for 126 yards on 17 carries, with one of those carries being a 27 yd rush in the 1st half. 16 carries for roughly 100 yards is a poor average for sure, but many of his gash 8-12 yard runs came in the 2nd half when the Packer offense was busy not doing anything and keeping the Packer defense on the field. Part of negating a strong rushing attack is for the Packer offense to control possession and score enough points where their opponent can't just opt to run at will if they want to win the game.

 

Cleveland was also a top 5 rushing team in the NFL, so Chubb blew up more than the Packers' defense this season.

 

If the 49ers wind up winning Saturday while relying heavily on a running attack throughout the game, it's because the Packers didn't do enough offensively to force them out of that gameplan. That would be just as much on the Packers' offense as it would be their defense.

[roadcrew3]

Part of Chubbs success I think was attributable to the Packers trying to prevent the big pass play in the second half. When you're up two scores in the second half and have #12, giving up a touchdown is alright as long as you force the drive to take 7-8 minutes. Really hard for a team to come back when it takes them half a quarter to score then Rodgers gets to respond and often times milk the clock himself before putting up points.