Posts: 34
Threads: 34
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation:
0
I can't really forgive how swisscheesey the D looked in that 1st Quarter from a Coaching perspective. It really looked like Mike decided to trot out his Base D, see what Fleur-de-lis (see what I did there) had cooked up and then adjust. I hate that approach. Come up with your own game plan and make him react.
BUT, no Alexander, Hughes or Hill meant that you had a Safety and the 6th and 7th string CBs trying to cover the Slot. So of course GB counters with lining up Adams there. That's brutal for any Coach to deal with but he managed to stop the bleeding.
If that game doesn't illuminate just how important having a truly deep Secondary is and justify the Hughes pick I don't know what will. The injuries and Hill's stupidity really hurt the team.
I could not agree more. I knew an early matchup would be a challenge for us and Zim. But man did they make adjustments! If Rhodes didnt cover Adams all day they would have had nothing. I dont get why we can’t have TW on Adams, it seems like such a better fit.
The second matchup I would bet would be like most games in Minn with GB. A solid to drubbing of a victory in Minnesota
If there is anything I love about Zim is we are a badass 3rd quarter and mainly 4th quarter defense. We make adjustments well and now with Kubiak, I believe offense will as well.
Execution on the other hand, thats a different story
Quote: @FSUVike said:
I can't really forgive how swisscheesey the D looked in that 1st Quarter from a Coaching perspective. It really looked like Mike decided to trot out his Base D, see what Fleur-de-lis (see what I did there) had cooked up and then adjust. I hate that approach. Come up with your own game plan and make him react.
BUT, no Alexander, Hughes or Hill meant that you had a Safety and the 6th and 7th string CBs trying to cover the Slot. So of course GB counters with lining up Adams there. That's brutal for any Coach to deal with but he managed to stop the bleeding.
If that game doesn't illuminate just how important having a truly deep Secondary is and justify the Hughes pick I don't know what will. The injuries and Hill's stupidity really hurt the team.
Not sure what approach should be taken when there really isn't much film to base a game plan on. Kudos to the D for adjusting. Yes, they got the initial score, but then it was turnovers that lead to short fields.
I would agree that it looks like Zimmer wanted to see the offense and then adjust. But isn't that the smart approach? Rather than spend long hours devising a plan that likely isn't going to matchup anyway?
Kudos for the adjustments when several key players were missing. I think it can be good to see what you are up against and adjust accordingly. I was more pissed at the offense. The defense kept them in it and they couldn't finish. I know the defense gave up some points but I can't be too mad at that all things considered.
Without any film how do you come up with a game plan to make them react ?? I guarentee to the offense they showed against the Bears was completely different thatn what they showed against the Vikings. Every time a team completely overhauls the offense and defense its going to that way until therre is some film on them for defenses across the league to adjust. What I was impressed with is how they adjusted and the Packers has no answer for the adjustments the Vikings made. My guess is that is what the spat between Lafluer and Rogers was all about. I was glad to see it because if Lafluer cant figure it out it may be a long year for the Packers offense. And after listening to Zimmer when he talked about how the Packers defense was basically selling out to stop the passing game and leaving the running game wide open, Im not sold on thier defense either. They admitted after the Bears game that they sold out to stop the run and make Turdbinsky to be a QB, then with the Vikings they sold out to stop the pass. They are going to have to show some balance or its going to pretty easy for teams to scheme against them.
With Rhodes out early, I was scared to see #44 (Meadors) line up man to man vs. the slot receiver on their 2nd drive. And one play later Rodgers took full advantage of it when Meadors fell for Allisons stutter-go and got beat easily for the touchdown.
I am not 100% sure, but I think I didn't see #44 on the field again afterwards...at least not on defense.
So now you are defending the defense?? You blamed them for the loss the other day.
And I stand by that. Way more draft capital and contracts on that side of the ball and Zimmer wants a run-first, clock-chewing Offense, which is not at all what you traditionally need to play when you're in an early, steep hole. Kudos to Stefanski for sticking with the run to try to close the gap.
But this notion you can't game plan for an Offense you've never seen intrigues me. GB would have scored easier and faster if Mike had come out showing some Double A Gap Fake and Actual blitzes? Or unique 5 man looks with Barr on the LOS? Or maybe tried covering Adams with someone besides Rhodes?
Why shouldn't GBs young HC have to adjust to a far more experienced Playcaller instead?
Elite Defenses ala the 85 Bears and Ray's Ravens and Seattle's LOB come out and stay in the same base and beat team after team without ever having to adjust due to superior talent.
This Defense has shown glimpses of greatness that has stemmed as much from being unpredictable as it has really good talent. Against a Rookie Coach, down 3 CBs and with your #1 CB historically struggling with the opponent's #1 WR would seem to me to be the right time to get creative out of the gate. The majority on here disagree and that's fine. But it's a valid point.
Quote: @FSUVike said:
And I stand by that. Way more draft capital and contracts on that side of the ball and Zimmer wants a run-first, clock-chewing Offense, which is not at all what you traditionally need to play when you're in an early, steep hole. Kudos to Stefanski for sticking with the run to try to close the gap.
But this notion you can't game plan for an Offense you've never seen intrigues me. GB would have scored easier and faster if Mike had come out showing some Double A Gap Fake and Actual blitzes? Or unique 5 man looks with Barr on the LOS? Or maybe tried covering Adams with someone besides Rhodes?
Why shouldn't GBs young HC have to adjust to a far more experienced Playcaller instead?
Elite Defenses ala the 85 Bears and Ray's Ravens and Seattle's LOB come out and stay in the same base and beat team after team without ever having to adjust due to superior talent.
This Defense has shown glimpses of greatness that has stemmed as much from being unpredictable as it has really good talent. Against a Rookie Coach, down 3 CBs and with your #1 CB historically struggling with the opponent's #1 WR would seem to me to be the right time to get creative out of the gate. The majority on here disagree and that's fine. But it's a valid point.
Zimmer doesn't want that. Zimmer wants less mistakes, if that come in the passing game, he's happy. But here's what Minnesota realized last year: if you want to win big with Cousins, you have to operate an offense out of play action. Hence Kubiak and Dennison. Its the Viking's only chance and they tweaked the team from a pass first offense to Cousin's strength, a play action zone blocking offense. Here's where I give them credit: they changed all of everything to Cousin's strengths. The organization did everything they could to get there.
Here's what I mean: after Sunday's game, the staff said to Cousins in no uncertain terms: you need to understand. The run game will give you everything you need in this offense in a late game close scenario. Don't need the hero ball, just need the 'we've beat on their asses for 4 quarters in the run game, they are ready to quit".
|
